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


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Yevamos 46

YEVAMOS 46-50 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.



(a) Rav Chama bar Guri'ah Amar Rav says that if someone buys an Eved Kena'ani from a Nochri and the Eved has in mind to convert as he Tovels, he goes free - because he only buys from the Nochri a Kinyan Peiros, but not a Kinyan ha'Guf (since a Nochri cannot acquire a Kinyan ha'Guf in an Eved Kena'ani - and the purchaser can only acquire what the seller owns, and no more). That being the case, the Nochri, who owns his Guf, can acquire himself, if the purchaser lets him (as we shall soon see).

(b) Rava holds that Hekdesh, Chametz and Shichrur remove the Shibud (right to claim). When he says ...

1. ... Hekdesh - he means that if the owner designated an animal as collateral for a loan, and then he declares it Hekdesh Mizbei'ach (which is Kedushas ha'Guf, but not Bedek ha'Bayis), the Hekdesh takes effect, removing the Shibud.

2. ... Chametz - he means that if the owner designated Chametz as collateral for a loan (for a creditor who is a Nochri), and then the sixth hour of Erev Pesach arrives, he is obligated to burn it (seeing as it does not really belong to the Nochri).

3. ... Shichrur - he means that if he makes his Eved collateral for a loan, and then sets him free, he goes free, depriving the creditor of the right to claim him.

(c) We infer from the story cited by the Beraisa, where B'luria'h the Giyores' slaves Toveled before she did, and the Chachamim ruled that they were free - that had *she* Toveled first, they would not have gone free.

(d) Rava explains that the Beraisa speaks in a case of S'tam (where the Avadim did not say anything), and that is where they would not have gone free had she Toveled first - whereas Rav Chama bar Guri'ah Amar Rav speaks when the Eved said specifically that he was Toveling for Geirus (in which case the Tevilah is effective even if the owner is a Jew).

(a) Rav Ivya learns from the Pasuk in Behar "ve'Gam mi'B'nei ha'Toshavim ha'Garim Imachem *Meihem Tiknu* Eved ve'Amah" - that, on the one hand, a Jew can buy a Nochri as an Eved (and acquire him with a Kinyan ha'Guf). Consequently, the Eved cannot, during the Tevilas Avdus, override his master's intentions, by having in mind to Tovel for Geirus; on the other hand, a Nochri cannot buy a Jew, nor can he buy another Nochri, to acquire him with a Kinyan ha'Guf. That explains why, when one buys an Eved from a Nochri, he does not acquire his Guf (and that is why his intention to Tovel for Geirus overrides the intentions of his master to Tovel him as an Eved).

(b) And from the Pasuk "O le'Eiker Mishpachas Ger" - we learn that a Nochri can acquire a Jew.

(c) But only with a Kinyan Peiros (for his work), explains Rav Ivya, so as not to clash with the previous Derashah ('O Heim Mikem').

(d) Rav Acha asks on Rav Ivya - that who is to say that, when the Torah permits a Jew to acquire a Nochri, it does not mean specifically by means of money and Tevilah, and that, should he Tovel for Geirus, he will go free?

(a) Shmuel says that when Toveling an Eved - one must hold him down in the water, meaning that one must do something that demonstrates one's ownership over him as he is Toveling, to prevent him from saying that he Toveled for Geirus.

(b) When Rav Ashi handed Menimin his slave to Ravina and Rav Acha B'rei de'Rava to Tovel on his behalf - he told them that, should Menimin free himself in the process of the Tevilah, he would hold them responsible.

(c) During the Tevilah, they tied a rope around his neck, which they tightened and loosened. They needed ...

1. ... to tighten the rope - to prevent him from coming up (without their consent) and proclaiming himself free.
2. ... to loosen it - because otherwise, the rope would be a Chatzitzah.
(d) As Menimin's head emerged from the water - they placed a vessel with cement on it (as a sign that he was a slave) and instructed him to carry it to Rav Ashi's house.
(a) When certain members of Papa bar Aba's household found Nochrim who had not paid their head-tax - they would pay on their behalf, and then force them to work for them.

(b) Rav Papa asked Rava - whether, when they finally let them go, they needed to give them a Get Shichrur.

(c) In his answer, Rava quoted Rev Sheishes - who said that the king kept records of the names of all those people who had not payed their taxes; and that he had announced that they would be slaves to whoever payed on their behalf. Consequently, concluded Rava, they were indeed their slaves, and required a Get Shichrur before they could go free.

(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba arrived in Gavla. He was silent when he saw that some of the women were pregnant from Geirim who had circumcised but not Toveled; that they used wine that had been poured out by Nochrim and that they ate Turmus-beans that had been cooked by Nochrim. Rebbi Chiya bar Aba believed ...
1. ... that their children were not Mamzeirim - because a Ger requires Milah but not Tevilah.
2. ... that their wine was not Yayin Nesech - because the Nochrim had not actually touched it.
(b) Rebbi Yochanan instructed him to go back and tell the people of Gavla that ...
1. ... their children were Mamzeirim - because, in his opinion, a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah.
2. ... that their wine was Yayin Nesech - because wine that has been shaken by a Nochri is also considered Yayin Nesech (because of the principle 'Lech Lech Amrin le'Nezira S'chor S'chor'), even though it was not actually touched by them.
3. ... that their Turmus-beans were forbidden - because they were not B'nei Torah, and would abuse this leniency to permit Bishul Akum (even though strictly speaking, the beans were permitted).
(c) Despite the fact that Turmus-beans are inedible when they are raw, he forbade them only because they were not B'nei-Torah, and not intrinsically - because Turmus-beans is not a food that one tends to serve at a royal table to eat with bread (like the second opinion of Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak Amar Rav).
(a) The basis of the contention of ...
1. ... Rebbi Eliezer, that a Ger requires Milah but not Tevilah - is the fact that Yisrael (who 'converted' at Har Sinai) had performed Milah before leaving Egypt, but there is no mention of their having Toveled.
2. ... Rebbi Yehoshua, that a Ger requires Tevilah and not Milah - is the fact that the women there converted too, and they can only have performed Tevilah but not Milah.
(b) According to the Rabbanan - a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah.

(c) We ask why Rebbi Eliezer does not want to learn from the Imahos (that Tevilah alone will suffice by a Ger). It is not possible to answer that Rebbi Eliezer declines to learn what *is* possible from what is *not* - because he explicitly says otherwise, when he learns that Pesach Doros must come from Chulin money (and not from money of Ma'aser-Sheini) from Pesach Mitzrayim (which can only have come from Chulin - even though that was only because it was not possible, because there *was* no Ma'aser Sheini at that stage).




(a) We therefore conclude that Rebbi Eliezer agrees with Rebbi Yehoshua, that Tevilah alone will suffice for Geirus - and their Machlokes concerns Milah without Tevilah: Rebbi Eliezer permits Geirus without Tevilah; Rebbi Yehoshua forbids it.

(b) According to Rebbi Yehoshua there is no proof from the Avos who left Egypt, that Milah without Tevilah is sufficient for Geirus - because, in his opinion, Yisrael at Har Sinai did in fact, Tovel.

(c) Initially, we present Rebbi Yehoshua's source as being the Pasuk in Yisro "Lech el ha'Am ve'Kidashtam ha'Yom u'Machar, ve'Chibsu Simlosam" - implying that there must have been Tevilah, because if Tevilah is required even when Kibus Begadim is *not* required (such as a Ba'al Keri), then how much more so when it *is*.

(d) We refute this proof however - by suggestiong that the Kibus Begadim was merely for the purpose of cleanliness (so that they should wear nice clean clothes for Kabalas ha'Torah), and not because of Tum'ah.

(a) We prove conclusively (according to Rebbi Yehoshua) that there must have been Tevilah, from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "va'Yikach Moshe es ha'Dam va'Yizrok al ha'Am" - because this refers to Haza'ah, and we have a tradition (one with which Rebbi Eliezer apparently does not concur) that there is no Haza'ah without Tevilah.

(b) Rebbi Yehoshua knows that the Imahos Toveled before Matan Torah - because otherwise, how did they become B'nos Yisrael?

9) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan rules that a Ger requires Milah and Tevilah. This is not obvious (in spite of the principle 'Yachid ve'Rabim, Halachah ke'Rabim') - because the Chachamim here is really the opinion of Rebbi Yossi in a Beraisa (as we shall now see).


(a) When Rebbi Yehudah says in a Beraisa ...
1. ... that someone who claims that he made Milah (for Geirus) but not Tevilah, 'Matbilin Oso u'Mah be'Kach' - he means that one may as well perform Tevilah and convert him, and who cares if his Milah was not done properly? because he holds that Tevilah alone will suffice for Geirus.
2. ... 'Lefichach, Matbilin Ger be'Shabbos' - that he may go ahead and Tovel on Shabbos (even if he already made Milah previously) - because although in his opinion, a Ger does not require both Milah and Tevilah, we may have thought that Rebbi Yehudah requires specifically Tevilah, in which case it would be forbidden to Tovel on Shabbos. Therefore, he needs to inform us that he permits either Milah or Tevilah.
(b) Rebbi Yossi, commenting on Rebbi Yehudah's first ruling, says 'Ein Matbilin' - because, in his opinion, a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah (and he is the Chachamim that we quoted above).

(c) And when he says 'Ein Matbilin (Ger be'Shabbos) - he is informing us that after Milah, one still requires Tevilah (which completes the Geirus process, and is therefore forbidden on Shabbos), because we might otherwise have thought that even though Tevilah alone will not suffice, Milah will (in which case, there would be nothing wrong with performing Tevilah on Shabbos).

(a) According to Rav Safra, Rebbi Chiya bar Rebbi, Rebbi Oshaya b'Rivi and Rebbi Oshaya b'Rebbi Chiya were all present when a Ger who had had Milah but not Tevilah appeared before them one night. They instructed him - to wait until the following day when they would Tovel him.

(b) Besides the fact that Tevilas Ger cannot be performed by night - we learn from this episode - that it requires three people, and that Geirus requires Milah and Tevilah.

(c) We cannot also learn from from here that Geirus requires expert Dayanim - because it may have been only by chance that those three Dayanim happened to be there at the time.

(d) Rebbi Yochanan learns that Geirus requires three - from the fact that the Torah writes "Mishpat" next to Geirus (in Parshas Sh'lach Lecha), and Mishpat automatically implies three.

Next daf


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