Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) CHUPAH WHEN RELATIONS ARE FORBIDDEN

(a) According to R. Meir, engagement disqualifies, Chupah also disqualifies.
(b) According to R. Elazar and R. Shimon, engagement does not disqualify, neither does Chupah.
(c) Question: This is not necessarily true!

1. Perhaps R. Meir only said that engagement disqualifies, since it acquires - but Chupah does not acquire!
2. Perhaps R. Elazar and R. Shimon only said that engagement does not disqualify, since it is not close to relations - but Chupah is close to relations, it disqualifies!

(d) Rather, we may say that the following Tana'im argue about this.
(e) (Beraisa): If they were married - whether Kesheros or not, or if they had Chupah without relations, they are fed by the husband and may eat Terumah.

1. Question: The end of the Beraisa says 'they had Chupah' - the beginning says, 'They were married' - can this mean with relations?!
2. Answer: Rather, the Beraisa explains - 'They were married' means, Chupah without relations - and it says, they eat Terumah;

(f) R. Yishmael, the son of R. Yochanan Ben Brokah says, any girl that eats Terumah through relations, eats Terumah through Chupah; if she may not eat Terumah through relations, she may not eat through Chupah.
(g) Question: There is no need to say they argue on Chupah of forbidden relations!

1. Suggestion: Perhaps R. Yishmael, the son of R. Yochanan Ben Brokah holds as R. Meir, that she does not eat from engagement.
2. Rejection: If so, why does he say, any girl that may not eat Terumah through relations, may not eat through Chupah - he should say, any girl that may not eat Terumah through relations, she may not eat through money (of engagement)!
3. Suggestion: Perhaps since the first Tana spoke of Chupah, R. Yishmael also did.

(a) (Rav Amram): Rav Sheshes taught, Chupah takes effect by forbidden relations, and a Mishnah supports this.

1. (Mishnah): (A Sotah answers) "Amen" - that I did not have adultery when engaged, married, Shomeres Yavam (when awaiting Yibum), or after Yibum.
2. Question: What is the case of engaged?

i. Suggestion #1: If he warned her when she was engaged, and takes her to drink when she is engaged - does an engaged wife drink?!

A. (Mishnah): A woman that is engaged or awaiting Yibum does not drink or receive her Kesuvah.

ii. Suggestion #2: Rather, he warned her when she was engaged, she was secluded during engagement, and he takes her to drink after Nisu'in - does the water test her?!

A. (Beraisa): "The man will be clean from iniquity" - when the man is clean from iniquity, the water test his wife; if not, not! (In our case, it was forbidden to have Nisu'in with her after seclusion.)

3. Answer: Rather, he warned her when she was engaged, she was secluded during engagement, he had Chupah with her without relations - we hear from this, Chupah takes effect on women forbidden to their husbands.
4. Objection (Rava): Do you really think that the Mishnah is correct?

i. (Beraisa): "Other than your husband" - the water only tests her if her husband had relations with her before the adulterer.

5. Answer #1 (Rami Bar Chama): We can find such a case - her husband had relations with her during engagement.
6. Question: The corresponding case of a Shomeres Yavam - the Yavam had relations with her in her father's house (i.e. while awaiting Yibum) - is she called Shomeres Yavam - she is a full wife!

i. Rav said, relations (without intent for Yibum) acquire in all respects; Shmuel said, only for what is written in the Parsha.
ii. This Mishnah was brought to support Rav - he cannot explain why it calls her Shomeres Yavam!

7. Answer #2: The case is, he gave her a Ma'amar, and the Mishnah is as Beis Shamai, who say that a Ma'amar fully acquires.

i. Question: If so, that is the same as being engaged (and the Mishnah listed them as separate cases)!
ii. Counter-question: You must admit, married and 'after Yibum' are the same!
iii. You must answer, 'married' refers to his own wife; 'after Yibum' - to his brother's wife.
iv. Similarly, 'engaged' refers to his own wife; 'Shomeres Yavam' - to his brother's wife.

8. Answer #3 (Rav Papa): The Tana of our Mishnah is the Tana of the following Beraisa.

i. (Beraisa): We do not warn an engaged woman, in order to make her drink while engaged, but we warn her to make her drink after Nisu'in.

9. Answer #4 (Rav Nachman Bar Yitzchak): The oath includes the period of engagement through Gilgul (once an oath must be taken, other things may be added into the oath).

(a) (R. Chanina): One who gives a Ma'amar to his Yevamah, and he has a brother - even if he and she are Kohanim, he disqualifies her from Terumah.
(b) Question: According to whom?

1. Suggestion #1: If according to R. Meir - we have only heard that R. Meir disqualifies a woman engaged to a man that is forbidden to her mi'Dioraisa - can we say he even disqualifies for a Rabbinical prohibition?
2. Suggestion #2: If according to R. Elazar and R. Shimon - they permit a woman engaged to a man that is forbidden to her mi'Dioraisa - all the more so, if she is only forbidden mi'Derabanan!

(c) Correction (Ravin): If he gives her a Ma'amar - all agree, she may eat; if he has a brother that is a Chalal (disqualified Kohen), all agree that she may not eat.

1. They argue when he gives her a Get: R. Yochanan says that she eats, Reish Lakish says that she does not eat.
2. R. Yochanan says that she eats - even R. Meir only said that she does not eat when she is forbidden mi'Dioraisa - by a Rabbinical prohibition, he admits that she eats!
3. Reish Lakish says she does not eat - even R. Elazar and R. Shimon only said that she eats when he can permit others to eat - here, he cannot permit others to eat!

i. .If you will say, giving a Get permits a Bas Kohen to return to eat Terumah by her father - that is because she is detached from her husband, and close to her father - but a Yevamah is still tied to the Yavam!

(d) (Mishnah): If they were widowed or divorced ...
(e) Question (R. Chiya Bar Yosef): A Kohen Gadol that engaged a minor, and she became a Bogeres - may he marry her?