BACKGROUND ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Yevamos 88
YEVAMOS 86-90 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
1) [line 8] LO ISCHAZEK ISURA - it was never established that the meat was
2) [line 9] EIN DAVAR SHEB'ERVAH PACHOS MI'SHENAYIM - that is, this is the
*second* objection raised by the Gemara to the comparison of our Mishnah
with the case of the piece of fat in which there is a doubt whether it is
permitted fat or Chelev (forbidden fat). The RAMBAN DH Mi Dami states that
the Gemara never answers this question. TOSFOS DH Midi writes that the
Gemara has an answer for this question but does not discuss it here
3) [line 15] KONAMOS - items that have been forbidden by a Neder
The laws of Nedarim (vows) are described in the Torah in Bamidbar 30:2-17.
If a person makes a vow not to eat a certain food and he eats from that food
after being warned by two witnesses not to, he gets Malkos.
4) [line 19] KEDUSHAS DAMIM / KEDUSHAS HA'GUF
(a) KEDUSHAS DAMIM - an object the *value* of which is consecrated to
Hekdesh; e.g. an animal that a person consecrated to be sold in order to buy
another animal as a Korban with its value (even *before* the first one
develops a Mum).
(b) KEDUSHAS HA'GUF - an object with intrinsic Kedushah, such as the
utensils used in the Beis ha'Mikdash (RAMBAM Hilchos Me'ilah 6:5) or a live
Korban that is used in the Beis ha'Mikdash "as is." An animal that has
Kedushas ha'Guf cannot be redeemed without a Mum.
5) [line 20] L'ITSHULEI ALEI (HETER NEDARIM)
When a person makes a Neder (or designates Chalah, Terumah or Kodshim) or
Nezirus, he may have it revoked by a Beis Din of three (if they are not
outstanding authorities) or a Yachid Mumcheh (an outstanding authority). The
general method used is that Beis Din investigates whether the person would
not have made the Neder in the first place had he been aware of a particular
6) [line 21] YESH ME'ILAH B'KONAMOS
(a) It is forbidden to derive personal benefit from anything that is
Hekdesh, as the Torah states, "Lo Suchal le'Echol b'Sha'arecha...u'Nedarecha
Asher Tidor" - "You may not eat in your settlements...and your pledges [to
Hekdesh] that you will pledge" (Devarim 12:17) (RAMBAM Hilchos Me'ilah
1:1-3). The minimum amount for which one transgresses this prohibition is a
Perutah's worth of benefit.
(b) If someone benefited from Hekdesh intentionally, he receives Malkos and
must pay to Hekdesh the amount that he benefited. However, the object from
which he benefited remains Hekdesh.
(c) If someone benefited from Hekdesh unintentionally, the object loses its
Kedushah. He must bring a Korban Me'ilah and repay Hekdesh the value of his
benefit plus an additional *fifth* (of the ensuing total, or a *quarter* of
the original value). This is true of any object that has Kedushas Damim
(i.e. it's value is consecrated to Hekdesh). An object that has Kedushas
ha'Guf (i.e. an object with intrinsic Kedushah, such as the utensils used in
the Beis ha'Mikdash or a live Korban that is used in the Beis ha'Mikdash "as
is") does not lose its Kedushah under any circumstances (Rosh Hashanah 28a).
(d) There is a Machlokes Tana'im (Nedarim 35a) as to whether a person who
makes a vow not to eat a certain food and he eats from that food
transgresses the prohibition of Me'ilah or not.
7) [line 23] D'RACHIV ALEI B'CHASPEI - (lit. that is riding on his shoulder)
that is associated [with the transgression of one's Konam]
8) [line 26] IGUNA - the state of a woman who cannot get married (because it
is not known if her husband is still alive)
9) [line 28] MECHACHU ALEI B'MA'ARAVA - In Eretz Yisrael they laughed at
10) [line 30] MI'KI NAFAK V'AD HASHTA - from the time he left (lit. went
out) until now
11) [line 30] V'ATUN - and you (the two witnesses who testified that the
husband was dead, who do not recognize him upon his return)
12) [last line] CHASIMAS ZAKAN - the full development of the beard
13) [line 1] ASHAM TALUY
The Korban Asham Taluy is a ram worth two Sela'im that is offered when a
person is in doubt as to whether he committed a transgression for which he
must bring a Korban Chatas. If he later discovers that he did indeed sin, he
must offer a Korban Chatas; the Asham Taluy only provides temporary
atonement during the period of doubt.
14) [line 18] DAFNO - smite him (the Kohen) [and force him to behave
according to the standards that the Torah requires of Kohanim]
15) [line 29] KOL MAKOM SHE'HE'EMINAH TORAH ED ECHAD HAREI KAN SHENAYIM
(a) Although the Torah requires two witnesses to prove a fact in Beis Din,
there are three places where a single witness suffices to provide evidence:
1. to prove that a Safek Sotah was unfaithful to her husband after the steps
of Kinuy and Stirah have taken place (Sotah 31a, see Background to Yevamos
85b); 2. to prove the identity of a killer in order to exempt the city
closest to a disclosed corpse from bringing an Eglah Arufah (Sotah 47a, see
Background to Megilah 20b). It is not clear whether the latter case is
mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan - see Insights); 3. in order to testify that a
woman's husband died so that she may be able to remarry (Yevamos 117b).
(b) In all of these places the witness does not have to be a male who is fit
to testify; a woman or a slave who are Pesulim l'Edus may also testify.
(c) If one witness testifies and is contradicted by another single witness,
we do not consider the case a Safek. Rather, the first witness is believed,
because "any place where one witness is believed he had the authority of two
witnesses" with regard to refuting the testimony of the witness who follows
(d) If the single witness is contradicted by more than a single witness,
sometimes we decide in favor of those who contradict him because they are
the majority. See Chart #26.
*16*) [line 31] HALECH ACHAR ROV DE'OS - (According to the Lishna Kama of
the Gemara, this principle either is in disagreement with Ula's principle,
(Ula said that a single witness is believed like two), or else Ula's
principle was only said when the single witness was contradicted by another
single witness -- ME'IRI)
17) [line 37] K'FALGA U'FALGA DAMI - According to Rashi, this means that
b'Di'eved, if she already married based on the testimony of the first
witness, she does not need to separate from her new husband based on the new
testimony. (RASHI DH k'Palga u'Palga Dami; according to the RAMBAM [Hilchos
Gerushin 12:20] this is only true if she married one of the witnesses, see
18) [line 42] MACHZIR GERUSHASO MISHE'NISAS
(a) It is forbidden for any Jew to remarry his wife after divorcing her, if
she married someone else in the interim (who subsequently divorced her or
died), as the Torah states, "Lo Yuchal Ba'alah ha'Rishon Asher Shilechah,
Lashuv l'Kachtah..." (Devarim 24:4). This Isur applies only if she was
married after the initial divorce; if she was raped, her ex-husband may
(b) The Tana'im argue as to whether the ex-husband is prohibited from
remarrying her if she became engaged (but not married) to someone else after
the initial divorce (Yevamos 11b).