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 95
YEVAMOS 91-95 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
|
1) RELATIONS WITH A WIFE'S SISTER
(a) Intentional relations with a wife's sister do not forbid
one to his wife mid'Oraisa, no decree was made for
unintentional relations.
(b) Question: What is the source that intentional relations
do not forbid her?
(c) Answer (Beraisa): "Her (a Sotah)" - she is forbidden
through her relations, but relations of her sister do not
forbid her.
1. If not for the verse, one might have thought to
learn a Kal v'Chomer.
i. In a place where relations with a light
prohibition (a married woman), the forbidder
(her husband) becomes forbidden - all the more
so, relations with a severe prohibition (a
wife's sister), the forbidder should become
forbidden!
(d) R. Yehudah says, Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel agreed, one
that has relations with his mother-in-law becomes
forbidden to his wife - they only argued by relations
with one's wife's sister.
1. Beis Shamai say, this forbids his wife; Beis Hillel
say, it does not.
(e) R. Yosi says, Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel agreed, one
that has relations with his wife's sister remains
permitted to his wife - they only argued by relations
with his mother-in-law.
1. Beis Shamai say, this forbids his wife; Beis Hillel
say, it does not.
(f) (R. Yosi's explanation, why all agree regarding a wife's
sister): Initially, he is permitted to all women, and she
is permitted to all men. When he engaged his wife, he
forbids her, and she forbids him.
1. He forbids her more than she forbids him - he
forbids her on all men in the world, and she only
forbids him on her relatives.
(g) Is it not a Kal v'Chomer - he forbids her on all men, if
she unintentionally sinned with one forbidden to her, she
is not forbidden to whom she was permitted to - she, who
only forbids him on her relatives, if he unintentionally
sinned with one forbidden to him, all the more so he is
not forbidden to whom he was permitted to!
(h) This Kal v'Chomer only teaches about unintentional sin -
the Torah says "Her", to teach about intentional.
(i) Question (Reish Lakish): What is R. Yehudah's reason?
(j) Answer (Reish Lakish): "You will burn he and them" - do
we burn the whole house (his wife didn't sin!)?!
1. Since the verse cannot come to teach that she is
burned, we use it to teach that she is forbidden.
(k) (Rav Yehudah): The law is not as R. Yehudah.
(l) A man had relations with his mother-in-law; Rav Yehudah
lashed him.
(m) The man: Didn't you teach that the law is not as R.
Yehudah?
(n) Rav Yehudah: If the law was as R. Yehudah, I would
permanently forbid you to your wife.
2) A MARRIED WOMAN IS A LIGHT PROHIBITION
(a) Question: What is the light prohibition referred to in
the Beraisa (c:1:i)?
(b) Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): One who remarries his divorcee
after she remarried.
1. When the 2nd husband had relations with her, this
forbade her to the 1st husband; when the 1st husband
remarried her and had relations with her after the
2nd divorced her, he forbade her to the 2nd.
2. Rejection: One cannot learn a Kal v'Chomer from
remarrying one's divorcee - this is more stringent
(than a wife's sister):
i. Her body was defiled!
ii. The prohibition can come through any man
(Tosfos - Rashi deletes this from the text).
iii. The prohibition is permanent.
(c) Answer #2 (Reish Lakish): A Yevamah.
1. Question: To whom?
2. Answer #1: To a stranger, as Rav Hamnuna.
i. (Rav Hamnuna): A Shomeres Yavam that had
extramarital relations is forbidden to her
Yavam.
3. Rejection: One cannot learn a Kal v'Chomer from a
Yevamah that had extramarital relations - this is
more stringent (than a wife's sister):
i. Her body was defiled!
ii. The prohibition can come through any man.
4. Answer #2: Rather, a Yevamah to the brothers.
i. If 1 brother gave her a Ma'amar, he forbids her
to the other brothers; if another brother had
relations with her, he forbids her to the
brother that gave the Ma'amar.
5. Question: Why must the Beraisa say, relations with
the light prohibition (forbid the one that caused
the prohibition) - even if the 2nd brother gave her
a Ma'amar, he forbids her to the 1st brother!
i. Answer: The Beraisa is as R. Gamliel, who says
that a Ma'amar does not take effect after a
Ma'amar.
6. Rejection: Still - the 2nd brother can forbid her by
giving her a Get, or doing Chalitzah!
(d) Answer #4 (R. Yochanan): A Sotah.
1. Question: To whom?
2. Answer #1: To her husband.
3. Rejection: Why must the Beraisa say, relations with
the light prohibition forbid (the suspected
adulterer, who caused the prohibition to the
husband) - even if the husband divorced her, or said
that he will not give her to drink, she is
(permanently) forbidden to the suspected adulterer!
4. Answer #2: Rather, to the suspected adulterer.
5. Rejection: This is not a light prohibition, rather
the severe prohibition of a married woman!
95b---------------------------------------95b
(e) Answer #5 (Rava): A married woman.
(f) Question: Why is this called a light prohibition?
(g) Answer: The one that forbids her does not forbid her his
entire life.
(h) Support - (Beraisa - Aba Chanan): A married woman is a
light prohibition, the one who forbids her does not
forbid her his entire life - one who has relations with
her forbids her on the one who caused the prohibition -
by a severe prohibition, that the one that forbids her
forbids her his entire life, all the more so, one who has
relations with her should forbids her!
1. "Her" - a married woman's extramarital relations
forbid her, but relations of her sister do not
forbid her.
3) R. YOSI IN THE MISHNAH
(a) (Mishnah): R. Yosi says, anyone who forbids (on others,
forbids on himself; anyone who does not forbid on others,
does not forbid on himself).
(b) Question: What does R. Yosi mean?
1. Suggestion: The 1st Tana said, his wife and Giso
(his wife's brother-in-law) went overseas, his Gis's
wife becomes forbidden, and his wife is permitted -
and R. Yosi says, just as his wife is permitted, his
Gis's wife is permitted.
2. Rejection: If so, he should not say 'Anyone who does
not forbid on others, does not forbid on himself',
rather, 'Anyone who does not forbid on himself, does
not forbid on others'!
(c) Answer: Rather, just as his Gis's wife is forbidden, also
his own wife is forbidden.
1. This explains his statement 'anyone who forbids on
others, forbids on himself'.
(d) Question: Why does he teach by saying, 'Anyone who does
not forbid on others, does not forbid on himself'?
(e) Answer #1 (R. Ami): This refers to the beginning of the
Mishnah - A woman married according to Beis Din must
leave her husband, and she is exempt from a sacrifice; if
she was married according to witnesses, she must leave
her husband, and she must bring a sacrifice - great is
the power of Beis Din that exempts her from a sacrifice.
1. The 1st Tana says, whether Reuven married his wife's
sister according to 2 witnesses, and she remains
permitted to her husband; or whether he married his
wife's sister according to Beis Din, and she is
forbidden to her husband, Reuven remains permitted
to his wife;
2. R. Yosi says, according to Beis Din, when his
marriage forbids others, he also forbids his own
wife on himself; according to 2 witnesses, when his
marriage does not forbid others, he does not forbid
on himself.
(f) Answer #2 (R. Yitzchak Nafcha): This refers to the end of
the Mishnah - One case is when he married the wife of his
Gis, the other, when he married the betrothed of his Gis
(alternate text - One case is when his betrothed and Giso
went overseas, the other, when his wife and Giso went
overseas).
1. The 1st Tana says, whether there was engagement or
Nisu'in, the wife of Giso is forbidden, his wife is
permitted;
2. R. Yosi says, if there was Nisu'in, there is no
concern that people will say that there was a
condition in the Nisu'in, he does not forbid on
others (Giso), he does not forbid his wife on
himself; if there was engagement, there is concern
that people will say that the engagement was on
condition, he forbids on others, he even forbids on
himself.
(g) (Rav Yehudah citing Shmuel): The law is as R. Yosi.
(h) Objection (Rav Yosef): Did Shmuel really say that?
1. (Rav): A Yevamah is as a married woman; Shmuel says,
she is not as a married woman.
i. (Rav Huna): The case is, Reuven engaged a woman
and went overseas. Reuven's brother heard that
Reuven died, and married her.
ii. Rav says she is as a married woman, and is
forbidden to Reuven; Shmuel says, she is not as
a married woman, and is permitted to Reuven.
(i) Answer #1 (Abaye): Who says that Shmuel rules as R. Yosi,
understanding the argument as R. Yitzchak Nafcha? Perhaps
he understands as R. Ami!
(j) Answer #2 (Abaye): Even if he understand as R. Yitzchak
Nafcha - perhaps not regarding 'anyone that forbids', but
regarding 'anyone that does not forbid"!
Next daf
|