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


Prepared by P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Yevamos 68


(a) A Bas Yisrael engaged to a Kohen does not eat - because of Ula (lest she share Terumah with her siblings).
(b) A Bas Kohen engaged to a deaf Yisrael is disqualified from eating, since he acquired her by Rabbinical enactment;
(c) A Bas Yisrael married to a deaf Kohen does not eat - the Torah said, "The acquisition of his money", and a deaf man cannot acquire.
(d) (Mishnah): A 9-year old ... (we are thinking, this refers to a Shomeres Yavam, when the Yavam is 9 years old).
(e) Question: What does this case teach?
1. Suggestion #1: If to disqualify her - a Yavam less than 9 also disqualifies!
2. Suggestion #2: If that he does not permit her to eat - even an adult Yavam does not permit her!
(f) Answer #1 (Abaye): The case is, the 9-year old did Yibum. mid'Oraisa, he acquires her.
1. One would think, since he acquires her mid'Oraisa, and his relations are considered relations, he permits her to eat - the Mishnah teaches, this is not so.
i. Chachamim made relations of a 9-year old Yavam as a Ma'amar.
2. Objection (Rava): If so, how do we understand the end of the Mishnah - if we are unsure if he is 9 years old ...
i. If a boy known to be 9 does not permit, we need not teach a doubtful 9-year old!
(g) Answer #2 (Rava): Rather, the Mishnah says that any man forbidden to her that disqualifies her by having relations with her, such a 9-year old also disqualifies her.
1. (Beraisa): A 9-year old converted Amoni, Moavi, Mitrzi or Edomi; a Kusi, Nasin, Chalal or Mamzer that had relations with a Bas Kohen, Bas Levi or Bas Yisrael disqualified her.
(h) Objection: But the end of our Mishnah (69A) says, 'If they are not fitting to have relations in Yisrael, they disqualify - implying, the beginning of the Mishnah does not deal with such people!
(i) The beginning of the Mishnah deals with men that cannot marry anyone in Yisrael; the end, with men that cannot marry a Bas Kohen.
(a) (Beraisa): A 9-year old converted Amoni, Moavi, Mitrzi or Edomi; a Kusi, Nasin, Chalal or Mamzer that had relations with a Bas Kohen, Bas Levi or Bas Yisrael disqualified her;
(b) R. Yosi says, anyone whose seed is unfit disqualifies; anyone whose seed is fit does not disqualifies;
(c) R. Shimon Ben Gamliel says, any man whose daughter can marry a Kohen, his widow can marry a Kohen; if his daughter cannot marry a Kohen, neither can his widow (i.e. he disqualified her through relations).
(d) Question: From where do we learn this?
(e) Answer (Rav Yehudah): "A Bas Kohen that will be to a Zar" - once she has relations with a man that is unsuitable to her, he disqualifies her.
1. Objection: But that verse is needed to teach that when she marries a non-Kohen, she does not eat!
2. Answer: That is learned from "She will return ... the bread of her father's house".
i. "Return" implies that before (being widowed or divorced from the Yisrael) she could not eat.
3. Objection: If from the verse "She will return", one would think that the prohibition is only a Lav derived from a Mitzvas Aseh, which is an Aseh!
i. Therefore, the Torah wrote "A Bas Kohen ..." to teach that she is forbidden with a Lav.
4. Answer: No, we learn a Lav from "And any Zar will not eat Kodesh"!

5. Question: But that verse only teaches about a non-Kohen, not a Bas Kohen married to a Yisrael!
6. Answer: There are 2 verses "And any Zar".
7. Question: But the 2nd verse "And any Zar" is needed to teach R. Yosi Bar Chanina's law!
i. (R. Yosi Bar Chanina): "And any Zar" - a Zar is forbidden to eat Terumah, not an Onen.
8. Answer: That is learned from the extra wording "And any" (had the Torah said "A Zar", as opposed to "And any Zar", we would only learn that forbidden relations disqualify).
9. Question: Still, we need "A Bas Kohen" to teach that she returns to eat Terumah, but not the chest and leg (parts of a Shelamim sacrifice given to a Kohen).
i. (Rav Chisda): "A Bas Kohen ... mi'Trumas ha'Kadashim she will not eat" - mi'Rumam (from what is lifted) from Kadshim she will not eat.
10. Answer: If the verse only came to teach about Terumah, it would only have said "b'Kadashim"; by saying "mi'Trumas ha'Kadashim", it teaches both.
(a) Question: This teaches that such men disqualify a Bas Kohen. How do we learn that they disqualify a Bas Levi and Bas Yisrael?
(b) Answer: As R. Aba taught (elsewhere), since the Torah said "And a Bas" (as opposed to "A Bas").
(c) Suggestion: This is only as R. Akiva, who expounds extra occurrences of the letter Vav!
(d) Rejection: No, even Chachamim could agree here, since the entire verse (And a Bas Kohen...) is extra.
(e) Question: This teaches that they become forbidden to eat Terumah. Where do we learn that they become forbidden to marry a Kohen?
(f) Answer #1: The Torah taught that a Bas Levi and Bas Yisrael become forbidden -this prohibition must be to Kehunah, since they are anyway forbidden to eat Terumah!
1. Objection: Not necessarily! They may eat if they have children from a Kohen!
2. Answer: If so, a Kal v'Chomer teaches that forbidden relations forbid them to eat Terumah.
i. A Bas Kohen eats because of her intrinsic sanctity, forbidden relations forbid her - a Bas Levi or Bas Yisrael that lacks intrinsic sanctity, all the more so!
3. Question: To the contrary! A Bas Kohen eats because of her sanctity - therefore, forbidden relations blemish her sanctity, and disqualify her; but these that are not eating because of their sanctity, are not disqualified!
(g) Answer #2: A Kal v'Chomer from a divorcee teaches that a Bas Levi and Bas Yisrael become forbidden to Kehunah.
1. A divorcee is permitted to eat Terumah, but is forbidden to Kehunah - these that are forbidden to eat Terumah, all the more so, they are forbidden to Kehunah!
(h) Question: Can we really learn a Chayavei Lav (for which one can be lashed) from a Kal v'Chomer?!
(i) Answer: The Kal v'Chomer merely teaches that the prohibition to eat Terumah includes a prohibition to Kehunah.
(j) Question: (How do we learn that all the men in the Beraisa disqualify) - perhaps the only forbidden relations which disqualify are Chayavei Krisus!
(k) Answer: The Torah said, "When she will be", a language of marriage; marriage does not take effect by Chayavei Krisus.
(l) Question: If so, a Nachri or slave should not disqualify through relations!
(m) Answer: R. Yishmael taught why they disqualify.
1. (R. Yishmael): "A Bas Kohen that will be widowed or divorced ... (returns to eat Terumah)" - this applies to men from whom she can be widowed or divorced; but a Nachri or slave permanently disqualifies her.
Next daf


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