(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 90

YEVAMOS 86-90 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.


(a) Question: She is allowed to eat Terumah (we see, Chachamim uprooted a Torah law)!
(b) Answer: Only Terumah mid'Rabanan.
(c) (Beraisa): If a non-Kohen ate Tamei Terumah, he pays Chulin Tehorim;
1. Sumchus says, if he paid Chulin Teme'im - if he did not realize, the payment is valid; if he knew, it is not payment;
2. Chachamim say, in either case it is payment, and he must pay also pay Chulin Tehorim.
(d) Question: If he knew, his payment is not a payment - why not?!
1. He should be blessed! He ate something which a Kohen cannot eat when he is Tamei, and paid something which is fitting for the Kohen when he is Tamei!
(e) Answer (Rava): The Mishnah was abbreviated - it means as follows.
1. If he ate Tamei Terumah, he pays anything; if he ate Tahor Terumah, he pays Chulin Tehorim;
2. Sumchus says, if he paid Chulin Teme'im, if he did not realize, the payment is valid; if he knew, it is not payment;
3. Chachamim say, in either case it is payment, and he must pay also pay Chulin Tehorim.
(f) Question: Here, mid'Oraisa the payment is valid - if the Kohen would engage a woman with it, she is engaged - and Chachamim said, it is not payment, and they permit a married& woman to marry someone else!
(g) Answer: No - 'It is not payment' means, he must also pay Chulin Tehorim.
(h) Question: If so, Sumchus agrees with Chachamim!
(i) Answer (Rav Acha Brei d'Rav Ika): They argue whether we fine unintentional bad payment on account of intentional.
(a) (Beraisa): Blood (of a sacrifice) that became Tamei and was thrown on the altar - if unintentionally, it is accepted; if intentionally, it is not accepted.
1. (Beraisa): The Tzitz (headplate of the Kohen Gadol) makes acceptable blood, meat and Chelev that became Tamei, whether unintentionally or intentionally, whether willingly or unwillingly, whether for an individual or the congregation.
(b) Question: mid'Oraisa, in either case it is accepted - Chachamim said (if intentionally) it is not acceptable - the animal brought as compensation is Chulin in the Mikdash!
(c) Answer (R. Yosi Bar Chanina): 'It was not accepted' just means that the meat cannot be eaten, but the owners got atonement (no other animal is brought).
(d) Question: In any case, the Mitzvah of eating the meat is uprooted!
1. "They will eat ... in which they received atonement" - this teaches, the Kohanim eat and the owners receive atonement!
(e) Answer: Chachamim can command us to refrain from performing a Mitzvah.

(f) Rav Chisda: I was going to ask you othaer cases of Mitzvos that are uprooted - the cases of an Arel, sprinkling, a circumcision knife, Tzitzis on a linen garment, the sheep brought on Shavuous, shofar and lulav - but now that you answered that refraining from a Mitzvah is not considered uprooting a Mitzvah, the same answer applies to all of these.
(g) Question: "You will listen to (a prophet)" - even if he tells you to transgress a Mitzvah, as Eliyahu on Mount Karmel, temporarily, listen to him!
(h) Answer: That is an exception, the Torah said, "Listen to him"!
(i) Question: We should learn from it (that Chachamim may uproot Mitzvos)!
(j) Answer: That is different - it is to correct a problem.
(a) (Beraisa - Rebbi): If he declared the Get void, it is void; R. Shimon Ben Gamliel says, he cannot void the Get, nor add conditions to it - if he could, Beis Din has no power!
(b) Question: mid'Oraisa, the Get is void - and because we are concerned for the power of Beis Din, we permit a married woman to get married?!
(c) Answer: Anyone who gets engaged, does so according to Chachamim, and they uprooted his engagement.
(d) Question (Ravina): This explains one that engages with money; but one that engages through relations, how can we answer?
(e) Answer (Rav Ashi): Chachamim converted his engagement to an act of extramarital relations.
(f) Question (Beraisa - R. Eliezer Ben Yakov): Beis Din can lash and punish not according to Torah - not to transgress Torah, but to make a fence for Torah.
1. There was a case of a man that rode on a horse on Shabbos, in the days of the Yevanim, and Beis Din stoned him - not because he deserved it, but because it was necessary at the time.
2. A man had relations with his wife under a fig tree, and was lashed for it - not because he deserved it, but because it was necessary at the time.
(g) Answer: To correct a problem is different (this is not called uprooting).
(a) (Mishnah): Neither man becomes Tamei to engage in her burial.
(b) Question: What is the source for this?
(c) Answer (Contradiction): "Only Lish'ero (to his close kin)" - "Sh'ero" refers to his wife; and it says, "A husband will not become Tamei...".
1. Resolution: A husband becomes Tamei for a permitted wife, not for a forbidden wife.
(d) (Mishnah): Neither man has rights to objects she finds ...
1. Chachamim said that a man receives what his wife finds, to avoid resentment - here, we are happy that there should be resentment!
(e) (Mishnah): Nor her earnings ...
1. Chachamim said that a man receives his wife's earnings, because he feeds her; here, he does not feed her, he does not get her earnings.
(f) (Mishnah): They cannot annul her vows ...
1. The Torah said, a man can annul his wife's vows so she should not become repulsive to him - here, we are happy that she should be repulsive to him!
(g) (Mishnah): If she is a Bas Yisrael, she is disqualified from Kehunah ...
Next daf


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