Presentation in PDF format Today’s daf is sponsored by Peri Rosenfeld in loving memory of their father, Willie Rosenfeld, Yishayah Zev HaKohen’s 12th yahrzeit on the 11th of Iyar.  “A man filled with love and dedication to his family, community and Israel. He is sorely missed.” Today's daf is dedicated in memory of Joe Aminoff. The Gemara makes one last attempt to disprove the opinion that women are really not obligated to have children from a case of a half-slave/half free woman whose owner was forced to free her, presumably because she could not get married and have children. But Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak explained the reason differently - since she was unable to marry, men were taking advantage of her and that was why the owner was forced to free her, which would therefore not prove that women are obligated. If one who cannot marry a kohen marries him anyway, she cannot eat truma. But can slaves of hers eat truma? The Mishna distinguishes between two different types of property that she brings into the marriage - zton barzel and melog. What is the difference between them and why does that affect their ability to eat truma? Since all of the woman's property is considered the possession of the husband for the purposes of eating truma while they are married, why are slaves that are melog not able to eat truma? Three different answers are brought. One holds that it is by Torah law as the rights of the kohen to the truma of melog come from the woman and the woman herself can't eat truma and therefore he possessions as well can't. The other two answers assume that by Torah law the slave can eat truma but the rabbis forbade it. One possibility is because they want to encourage the husband to divorce her (as it is a forbidden marriage) - if her slave can't eat and she can't, it will make the woman lower in the eyes of her husband and he may divorce her. Another is due to concern in the case of a daughter of a kohen who after marrying the kohen, the kohen dies and when she goes back to her father's house the slave will mistakenly think he can continue to eat truma. If a woman brought into the marriage tzon barzel possessions assessed at a particular amount, can she demand them back upon death of the husband or divorce or does she only receive the monetary value? This is a debate between Rav Yehuda and Rabbi Ami. What is the reason behind each opinion and what sources are brought to support each position? How do we rule?