(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 113

YEVAMOS 113 (Purim in Yerushalayim) and YEVAMOS 114 - have been generously dedicated by Dick and Beverly Horowitz of Los Angeles. May they be blessed with a life of joy and much Nachas from their very special children and grandchildren.

1) [line 14] SHENIYAH
(a) In addition to the forbidden relationships (Isurei Ervah) prohibited by the Torah and punishable with Kares (Vayikra 18:6-30, 20:10-22, et. al.), the Chachamim decreed to prohibit certain relatives who are permitted mid'Oraisa. This decree of Sheniyos (lit. "secondaries") was meant to distance a person from engaging in relationships that are prohibited by the Torah. Although the Chachamim lent severity to this Isur by showing hidden inferences to Sheniyos from various verses in the Torah (Yevamos 21a), nevertheless the prohibition of Sheniyos is only mid'Rabanan. Therefore, if a man betroths a Sheniyah, his Kidushin is valid, and the resulting child is not a Mamzer as the child of an Ervah mid'Oraisa would be. If a Yevamah is a Sheniyah of the Yavam, she and her Tzarah (co-wife) must do Chalitzah and not Yibum.
(b) In some cases Sheniyos were prohibited only in a single generation, while in other cases they were prohibited in subsequent generations as well. For example, not only is one's mother's mother a Sheniyah, his mother's mother's mother is a Sheniyah as well; not only is one's son's daughter-in-law a Sheniyah, his son's son's daughter-in-law is a Sheniyah as well. The general rule is that if there is an Ervah mid'Oraisa in one generation (in the above example, one's mother or daughter-in-law) the associated Sheniyah was prohibited in all previous generations and subsequent generations as well; that is, the Sheniyah was prohibited "without a Hefsek" (RASHI 21a DH v'Eshes Achi ha'Av -- There are several exceptions to this rule; see Chart #6 to Yevamos 21a-22a and footnotes 2, 3.)
(c) There are those who prohibited Sheniyos based on the principle that "any relative who, as a female, is Asur as an Ervah, as a male his wife is Asur mid'Rabanan (i.e. a Sheniyah)." For example, since a man's daughter's daughter is prohibited to him, the Chachamim decreed that the daughter-in-law of his daughter is prohibited to him as a Sheniyah (GEMARA Yevamos 21b; see TOSFOS ibid. DH Lo Asru)

2) [line 22] LAZUK BI'NECHASAV - (lit. to cause damage to his possessions) to waste his money

3) [line 27] SHIVEVUSEI - his neighborhood
4) [line 27] ANASVEI ITESA - he (Rav Malchiyo) married him off
5) [line 28] ARBA ME'AH ZUZEI MI'NICHSEI - [and Rav Malchiyo wrote a Kesuvah for her worth] four hundred Zuz from his (the Cheresh's) possessions

6) [line 28] CHAKIM - wise
7) [line 29] ILU RATZAH SHIFCHAH L'SHAMSHO MI LO ZAVNINAN LEI? - Had he wanted a maidservant to serve him, would he not buy one for himself?

8) [line 30] 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.

9) [line 35] CHATICHAH MI'SHTEI CHATICHOS (lit. One out of two pieces) Certain Tana'im rule that a person is only obligated to bring an Asham Taluy if there are "two pieces, one of which was eaten." If a person ate one out of two pieces of fat, where one was Shuman (permitted fat) and the other was Chelev (forbidden fat), and he later found out that he may have eaten the forbidden piece, he has to bring an Asham Taluy.

9) [line 36] KOY
There is a Machlokes Tana'im as to which animal Chazal (Mishnah Chulin 83b, etc.) refer to as a "Koy." Some Tana'im say that it is a crossbreed between certain species of goats and deer, while others say that is an independent species (Chulin 80a). The Koy shows signs of being both a domesticated animal (Behemah, of which the Chelev is prohibited) and a wild animal (Chayah, of which the Chelev is not prohibited).

10) [last line] DA'ATA KELISHTA - his understanding is weak, deficient
11) [last line] DA'ATA TZILUSA - his mind is clear


12) [line 4] D'ITIM CHALIM V'ITIM SHOTEH - a person who is at times normal and at times mad or deranged (lit. a fool)

13) [line 19] SHE'MESHALCHAH V'EINAH CHOZERES - he sends her away and she does not come back

14) [line 23] LO LIFKA - [her husband] should not divorce her (lit. send her out)

(a) According to the Torah, a man who sends a Get (bill of divorce) to his wife with a messenger can revoke it before it reaches the hands of his wife by declaring in front of a Beis Din (i.e. two or three men -- Gitin 32b), "The Get that I have sent is hereby nullified." (MISHNAH Gitin 32a). Our Gemara rejects the assumption that calling the Get a Shtar Chov (a note of indebtedness) indicates that the husband has revoked the Get.
(b) The repeal of the Get takes effect even if it is not done in the presence of the woman or the messenger. However, the Chachamim forbade revoking the Get unless it is done in the presence of the messenger or the wife. According to some Amora'im, they feared that if the husband would revoke the Get without the knowledge of the messenger and the wife, his wife may marry another man, relying on the Get, without realizing that the Get was revoked before it was handed to her. In order to prevent this unfortunate situation, the Chachamim decreed that a man may not revoke a Get after sending it to his wife with a messenger unless he (or a second messenger of his) does so in their presence. Other Amora'im maintain that the decree was enacted because men regularly used to cancel Gitin after they dispatched them in order to distress their wives. The Chachamim therefore ruled that the husband (or a second messenger of his) must revoke the Get in the presence of the original messenger or the wife. The husband will not go to such lengths and pursue the original messenger to revoke the Get, just to distress his wife (ibid. 33a and RASHI).
(c) If the husband *does* revoke the Get while not in the presence of the first messenger or the wife (b'Di'eved), the Tana'im argue as to whether his action has any validity (ibid.). The Halachah follows the opinion that the repeal takes effect. However, since with the repeal the husband has transgressed a Rabbinical enactment, he receive Makas Mardus (see Background to Background to Yevamos 52:1) for his action.

16) [line 40] KISUFA - shame, embarrassment
17) [line 40] IRCHESU LEI - he lost

Next daf


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