(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Yevamos 68

(a) A male less than nine years of age is not considered to be capable of having marital relations. When he reaches the age of nine, he is considered able to have relations for all Halachic considerations.
(a) A male less than nine years of age is not considered to be capable of having marital relations. When he reaches the age of nine, he is considered able to have relations for all Halachic considerations. At that stage, the Mishnah (Nidah 45a) tells us that when the child performs Yibum it helps to be "Koneh" the Yevamah to a certain extent, and it is as if he has performed Ma'amar (see Background to Yevamos 58:11)
(b) The Rishonim argue as to why the Yibum of a nine year old is only comparable to Ma'amar. According to some, mid'Oraisa the nine year old minor acquires a Yevamah through Yibum just like a fully mature man (except that the death sentence is not applied if his wife practices adultery -- Kidushin 19a). The Rabanan decreed, though, that Yibum should be performed again when he becomes of age, and the Yibum he performs as a minor is only given the status of Ma'amar (Rashi to Kidushin 19a). According to others (Tosfos ibid.), a nine year old cannot acquire his Yevamah at all, mid'Oraisa. The Rabanan nevertheless decreed that his Yibum should be given the status of Ma'amar. (See Insights to Yevamos 39:2.)

2) [line 20] KUSI
(a) The King of Ashur brought the people of Kusa to Eretz Yisrael and made them settle in the Shomron. They converted to Judaism after they found themselves under attack from lions. The Chachamim disagree as to whether their conversion was honest and valid (Geirei Emes) or not (Geirei Arayos).
(b) After the times of the Mishnah, the Kusim were found worshipping an image of a dove and the Chachamim gave them the status of non-Jews. (According to most Rishonim, this means that they decided to treat them like non-Jews l'Chumra, even if they were Geirei Emes. According to the Rambam (Peirush ha'Mishnayos), however, this means that they decided that their conversion was not sincere and deemed them Nochrim (Geirei Arayos) for all Halachic matters.)

3) [line 20] NESIN
(a) In the times of Yehoshua, the Giv'onim (one of the seven nations whom the Jewish People were commanded to destroy upon entering Eretz Yisrael) came and presented themselves before Yehoshua as if they came from a far-off land. Since they claimed not to be residents of Eretz Yisrael, they requested to be converted and to make peace with the Jewish People. After Yehoshua agreed to accept them, it was discovered that they were one of the seven prohibited nations. Having already accepted them, Yehoshua did not want to break his oath and covenant with them (even though they tricked him and the oath was uttered in error) so as not to cause a Chilul HaSh-m. Yehoshua accepted them and appointed them to be woodchoppers and water drawers to supply the needs for the sacrificial service on the Mizbe'ach (Yehoshua 9:3-27). In the times of Moshe Rabeinu Giv'onim also came to be converted as they did in the times of Yehoshua, and Moshe also made them woodchoppers and water drawers (Yevamos 79a, based on Devarim 29:10). These people became known as "Nesinim," (from the root "Nasan," to give) since they were "given over" by Moshe and Yehoshua ["va'Yitenem..." - "And he appointed them..." (Yehoshua 9:27)] to perform the tasks of chopping wood and drawing water.
(b) The Nesinim are not permitted to marry someone who was born Jewish, just like Mamzerim. RASHI and TOSFOS (Kesuvos 29a and elsewhere) argue as to whether they are prohibited mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan. We find that the Gemara (Yevamos 79a) states that Moshe Rabeinu "decreed" regarding the Nesinim of his generation, and Yehoshua extended the "decree" to last as long as the Mishkan or Beis ha'Mikdash would stand. David ha'Melech later extended the "decree" to include all time, even if the Beis ha'Mikdash would be destroyed (because of the trait of cruelty that the Nesinim exhibited, which showed that they were not worthy of uniting with the descendants of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yakov). According to Rashi (Kesuvos 29a and elsewhere), these decrees were prohibitions against marriage, and as such the prohibition against marrying Nesinim is an Isur mid'Rabanan. According to Tosfos (and Rashi to Yevamos 37a DH Nesinei, unlike his opinion elsewhere), these decrees were appointments of servitude. The prohibition against marrying them, though, is mid'Oraisa, since the Torah commands against marrying the seven prohibited nations even if they convert to Judaism (Yevamos 76a).

4) [line 21] CHALAL
(a) The Torah commands a Kohen Gadol not to marry a widow, divorcee, prostitute or Chalalah (Vayikra 21:14). A Kohen Hedyot is permitted to marry a widow, but not any of the other women listed above. The child from one of the above-mentioned unions is invalidated from the Kehunah, and is called a "Chalal." The prohibited union also renders the woman a Chalalah. Similarly, if a Chalal has relations with a Jewess, she becomes a Chalalah. The Rabanan also prohibited all Kohanim from marrying a Chalutzah, and made the children of a Kohen from a Chalutzah Chalalim mid'Rabanan.
(b) A Chalal may not serve in the Beis ha'Mikdash and according to some sources is Chayav Misah b'Yedei Shamayim if he does (MINCHAS CHINUCH 275:5). A Chalal does not eat Terumah or the Kodshim reserved for Kohanim (Terumos 8:1), and is not restricted with regard to the women that he is allowed to marry. Chalalim are not prohibited from coming into contact with corpses. Chalalim are not considered Kohanim with regard to the other privileges and restrictions pertaining to Kohanim, as well.

5) [line 21] MAMZER
(a) There are prohibited marital relations that invalidate the ensuing offspring and render them Mamazerim. The Tana'im argue as to the nature of these prohibited relations. According to Rebbi Yehoshua, they must be relations that are punishable by Misas Beis Din. Rebbi Shimon ha'Timni rules that all relations that are punishable by Kares, even if they are not punishable by Misas Beis Din, produce a Mamzer. According to Rebbi Akiva, even relations that are prohibited by a Lav produce a Mamzer (Yevamos 49a). Other Tana'im argue regarding the opinion of Rebbi Akiva. There are those who assert that he rules that only relations prohibited by a Lav produce a Mamzer. Others hold that even those prohibited by an Aseh produce a Mamzer (except for a Kohen Gadol who has relations with a non-virgin -- Kesuvos 30a). The Halachah follows the opinion of Rebbi Shimon ha'Timni, that only relations punishable by Kares produce a Mamzer (Yevamos ibid.)
(b) A Mamzer is prohibited to marry into the community of HaSh-m, that is, Jewish people of unsullied lineage. He may, however, marry a Mamzeres and a Giyores (MISHNAH Kidushin 69a). The Tana'im and Amora'im argue as to whether a Safek Mamzer is prohibited mid'Oraisa to marry both a Mamzeres and a Jewess of unsullied lineage, because of the doubt, or whether he is permitted mid'Oraisa to marry either of them, since he is not included in the category of Mamzer that the Torah prohibited (Yevamos 37a, Kidushin 73a, 74a).

(a) A Mitzvas Aseh, a positive commandment, is not as stringent as a Lo Sa'aseh in certain respects. For instance, one only receives Malkos for transgressing a Lo Sa'aseh, not an Aseh.
(b) A Lav ha'Ba mi'Chlal Aseh is a prohibition that is learned by inference from a Mitzvas Aseh. Since the prohibition is not explicit in the Torah but rather is learned from inference from a Mitzvas Aseh, it is only as stringent as a Mitzvas Aseh.
(c) An example of a Lav ha'Ba mi'Chlal Aseh is the prohibition for the Yavam to marry the Tzarah, co-wife, of his Yevamah. The word "Aleha" in the Aseh of "Yevamah Yavo Aleha" ("he should marry *her*") teaches that only the Yevamah is permitted to the Yavam; the Tzarah is forbidden (RASHI Yevamos 11a, RAMBAM Hilchos Yibum 1:12).


7) [line 4] ANINUS - The Halachic status of a mourner immediately after a close relative's death
(a) A person is called an Onen mid'Oraisa on the day of death of one of his seven closest relatives for whom he is required to arrange for burial (i.e. father, mother, brother, sister, son, daughter and wife). Chazal (Zevachim 101a) learn the Halachah of Aninus from the verse, "v'Achalti Chatas ha'Yom, ha'Yitav b'Einei HaSh-m?" (Vayikra 10:19). Aninus does not apply between a man and the woman he betroths.
(b) For a further discussion of Aninus and the difference between Aninus mid'Oraisa and Aninus mid'Rabanan, see Background to Yoma 13:5.

8) [line 6] CHAZEH V'SHOK
The chest and the hind leg of the Shelamim (peace offering) were waved in a prescribed manner and were then given as a gift to the Kohanim, as described in Vayikra (7:28-36)

*9*) [line 16] ASHKECHAN LI'TERUMAH, LI'KEHUNAH MENALAN - (The Gemara could have answered this question simply by stating that once she had relations with a man to whom she is prohibited, she is a Zonah (RASHI 61b DH v'she'Niv'elah), and a Zonah is prohibited from marrying Kohanim (Vayikra 21:7). However, the Gemara wanted a source to prohibit the woman to Kohanim even according to Rebbi Eliezer (61b), who rules that the "Zonah" of the Torah is an adulteress, and not one who had relations with *anybody* to whom she is prohibited (RITVA). According to other Rishonim (TOSFOS 61a DH she'Niv'elah), only relations with a man who is prohibited with an Isur *Kares* make a woman a Zonah, and therefore the woman under discussion in this Gemara is *not* a Zonah.

(a) A person is only liable to Malkos mid'Oraisa if he transgresses a *Lav* ("Azharah") of the Torah that is punishable by Malkos (e.g. that is not a Lav shebi'Chelalos, or a Lav she'Nitak l'Aseh, etc.). A prohibition that is implied by a positive commandment is never punishable by Malkos.
(b) Similarly, a person is only liable to the death penalty for an action that is prohibited by a negative commandment, as stated by Chazal, "Lo Anash Ela Im Ken Hizhir" (Yoma 81a).
(c) Even though a Kal va'Chomer (an a fortiori argument, also known as "Din" in the language of the Gemara) is one of the thirteen methods for extracting the Halachah from the verses of the Torah, the Halachos that are learned from them are not considered Azharos such that they may make a person liable to Malkos or the death penalty. An Azharah must be explicit in the Torah as a negative commandment or must be learned through a Hekesh or Gezerah Shavah. What is learned through these methods is considered as though it were explicitly mentioned (since they cannot be refuted based on logical grounds, like a Kal va'Chomer can.)

11) [line 28] GILUY MILSA B'ALMA HU - [this is not really a Kal va'Chomer at all, but] a mere "Giluy Milsa" (an indication), [because Terumah is one of the essential Mitzvos of the Kehunah, so it stands to reason that any woman who is forbidden to eat Terumah, is forbidden to marry a Kohen]

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,