POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Yevamos 4
YEVAMOS 3 & 4 - dedicated by Dr. Eli Turkel (of Raanana) and
family; may they be blessed with much Nachas from their
children and grandchildren.
1) LEARNING FROM THE ADJACENCY OF LAWS
(a) Answer: "Do not wear Shatnez; make for yourselves
(b) (R. Elazar): "They are forever adjacent, they are made in
truth" - this teaches that we derive laws from the
adjacency of verses.
1. (R. Elazar): "Do not muzzle a threshing ox"; this is
followed by the Parsha of Yibum, to teach that we do
not silence a woman that fell to Yibum to a leper
(she can demand that he do Chalitzah).
(c) (Rav Yosef): Even the opinion that normally doesn't
derive laws from the adjacency of verses, admits that we
do in Sefer Devarim.
1. R. Yehudah normally doesn't derive laws from the
adjacency of verses, but he does in Sefer Devarim.
(d) Question: Why does R. Yehudah interpret (this) adjacency
in Sefer Devarim?
2. Question: How do we know that he normally doesn't?
3. Answer (Beraisa - Ben Azai): "Do not allow a witch
to live"; "One who sleeps with an animal will surely
die". These are written together to teach that just
as bestiality is punished by stoning, so too
4. R. Yehudah: Because they are written together, we
say that a witch is stoned?! Rather, Ov and Yidoni
(conjuring up the dead) were in the category of
witchcraft. They were singled out to say that they
are punishable by stoning, and from them we learn to
5. Question: How do we know that R. Yehudah does learn
from the adjacency of laws in Sefer Devarim?
6. Answer (Mishnah): A man may marry a woman enticed or
raped by his father or son; R. Yehudah says he may
not marry a woman enticed or raped by his father.
i. (Rav Gidal): R. Yehudah learns from "A man may
not reveal the wing of his father".
ii. He knows that this refers to a girl that was
raped, since the previous verse speaks of a
iii. Chachamim argue, because the prohibition of
marrying one's father's wife is in between.
They say that "the wing of his father" refers
to a woman awaiting Yibum from his father; this
is a second prohibition on her (she is already
forbidden, since she was his uncle's wife).
(e) Answer #1: It is clear that they were written adjacently
to teach something.
1. Otherwise, "do not reveal" should have been written
with the other prohibitions of incest.
(f) Answer #2: "He may not reveal the wing of his father" is
extra; therefore, we interpret the adjacency.
2) THE PROHIBITION OF SHATNEZ
(a) These same answers apply to Tzitzis.
3) SHATNEZ IS ALLOWED IN TZITZIS
1. If not to interpret the adjacency, "Make fringes"
should have been taught by the Parsha of Tzitzis.
2. It already says, "A garment of Shatnez will not
come upon you" - "Do not wear Shatnez" is extra, so
we interpret the adjacency.
3. Objection: It is not extra, both verses are needed!
i. If it only said, "It will not come upon you" -
one would think, one may not put the garment
on, even a clothing vender!
4. Question: Why did the verse have to specify, "wool
ii. The Torah said, "Do not wear" to teach that it
is only prohibited to wear as clothing, i.e.
when he benefits from it.
iii. If it only said, "Do not wear" - one would
think, only wearing is prohibited, since there
is great benefit!
iv. The Torah said, "It will not come upon you" to
teach that it is prohibited even if a small
benefit is derived.
5. Answer: (Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): The Torah speaks
about unspecified garments. In one case (leprous
garments), it specified wool and linen. We learn
that all garments mentioned are of wool or linen.
6. Question: If so, it was not needed to mention wool
and linen by Shatnez!
7. Answer: Correct! They are mentioned superfluously to
show that we derive a law from the adjacency to
8. Question: They are not superfluous! One might have
thought that having Shatnez on oneself, which is a
small pleasure, only applies to wool and linen; but
wearing, which is a big pleasure, applies to any 2
i. Therefore, it was needed to write wool and
9. Answer: The Torah could have omitted the words;
since the word Shatnez is used in both cases, we
would have known that it is the same in both places.
(a) Observation: Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael only knows that
Shatnez may be worn to fulfill the Mitzvah of Tzitzis
because of the extra words "wool and linen"; otherwise,
it would be prohibited.
(b) Question: But it says, "They will make Tzitzis on the
corners of their garments" - and Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael
taught that all unspecified garments are wool or linen!
1. And the Torah said to put Techeles, which is wool,
(c) Answer: "Wool and linen" had to be said so we would not
learn as Rava.
i. Question: How do we know that Techeles is wool?
ii. Answer: Since Shesh is linen, Techeles must be
wool. (We know that the Kohanim's garments
1. Contradiction (Rava): "The corner" - make fringes of
the same material as the garment; "Wool and linen
... make fringes"!
(d) Question: But Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael does not hold as
Rava (he says that we only make Tzitzis for garments of
wool or linen)!
2. Answer (Rava): Wool and linen are acceptable as
Tzitzis for any garment; Tzitzis of any other
material are only valid for a garment of that
(e) Answer: We would have thought to learn as Rava regarding
a garment of wool or linen.
1. We would make wool Tzitzis for a wool garment, and
linen for linen.
2. When the garment is wool, we would die a thread
3. We could not make wool Tzitzis for a linen garment,
4. "Wool and linen" teaches that either may be used for