Commentary for Kiddushin 103:9
כי סליק ר' זירא אמרה להא שמעתא קמיה דר' יוחנן אמר ליה מי אמר רב הכי והוא לא אמר והאמר ר' יוחנן גזל ולא נתייאשו הבעלים שניהם אינם יכולים להקדיש זה לפי שאינו שלו וזה לפי שאינו ברשותו הכי קא"ל מי אמר רב כוותי
even when she thereby becomes her rival.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zarah, q.v. Glos.');"><sup>13</sup></span> And what is the fourth? - Kiddushin which cannot be followed by intercourse.
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Yohanan is surprised that Rav would have said that one cannot betroth with a stolen object.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Yohanan also holds that stolen property is not the possession of the thief, as long as the owner does not despair of recovery. The thief cannot consecrate it, and therefore he cannot use it for betrothal. So why would R. Yohanan have been surprised by Rav’s ruling?
The answer is that he was not surprised by the ruling, he just didn’t realize that Rav ruled in the same way he did.
The answer is that he was not surprised by the ruling, he just didn’t realize that Rav ruled in the same way he did.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy