(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 57

YEVAMOS 46-60 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.



(a) Abaye (to establish Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya - who permits the wife of a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka to eat Terumah according to Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon) says 'Ho'il u'Ma'achilah be'Lo Yad'ah' meaning - that a Kohen who had already been feeding his wife, who became a P'tzu'a Daka, may continue to feed her as long as he does not make Bi'ah with her.

(b) Rava resolves Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya - by pointing out a that a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka too, feeds others Terumah; namely, his slaves.


1. Abaye does not learn like Rava - because, in his opinion, we can only apply the S'vara of 'Ho'il she'K'var Achlah, from Kinyan Ishus on to Kinyan Ishus, but not from Kinyan Avdus on to Ishus.
2. Rava does not learn like Abaye - because it is different when she has already eaten.
(d) Abaye proves that the fact that she has already eaten makes no difference, from a bas Yisrael who was married to a Kohen, and who is not permitted to eat Terumah after his death, in spite of the fact that she already ate in his lifetime. Rava refutes that proof however - because there, the fact that she already ate makes no difference simply because his Kinyan (that permits her to eat in the first place) dissolved when he died (which is not the case by a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka).
(a) When Rebbi Yochanan asked Rebbi Oshaya whether a P'tzu'a Daka Kohen may feed his wife who is a bas Geirim Terumah, he did not answer. When, immediately after that, Resh Lakish asked him a She'eilah which he did answer, Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah queried him - as to whether his refusal to answer Rebbi Yochanan was perhaps because he did not consider him in high esteem.

(b) The real reason that Rebbi Oshaya remained silent is - because he was stymied by the She'eilah.

(c) Assuming that a P'tzu'a Daka Kohen retains his Kedushah, Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah cannot have been according to ...

1. ... Rebbi Yehudah - because he holds 'Bas Ger Zachar ke'Bas Chalal Zachar' (and a Bas Chalal is definitely forbidden to eat Terumah).
2. ... Rebbi Yossi - because he holds 'Af Ger she'Nasa Giyores, Bito Kesheirah li'Kehunah' (in which case, she is obviously permitted).
(d) If, on the other hand, a P'tzu'a Daka Kohen does not retains his Kedushah, the She'eilah cannot have been according to ...
1. ... Rebbi Yehudah - because he holds 'Kehal Geirim Ikri Kahal', in which case she is forbidden to marry a P'tzu'a Daka.
2. ... Rebbi Yossi - 'Kehal Geirim Lo Ikri Kahal' (so she is permitted to him).
(a) So Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah can only have been according to Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov - who says (in a Mishnah in Bikurim) 'Ishah bas Geirim Lo Tinasei li'Kehunah ad she'Tehei Imah mi'Yisrael'.

(b) Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah is - whether this means that she is Kasher (but not Kadosh, to be called a Kahal), and is permitted to a P'tzu'a Daka, or whether it means that she is also Kadosh, and is therefore considered a Kahal, in which case she will be forbidden to marry a P'tzu'a Daka.

(c) We ultimately resolve Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah from a Beraisa quoted by Rav Acha bar Chin'na mi'Daroma, which specifically permits a P'tzu'a Daka to feed his wife who is a bas Geirim, Terumah. The Tana learns it from the Pasuk - "ve'Kohen Ki Yikneh Nefesh Kinyan Kaspo ... Hu Yochal Bo".

(d) The author of that Beraisa cannot be Rebbi Yehudah - because he holds that whether a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka retains his Kedushah or not, she is not permitted to eat; nor can it be Rebbi Yossi - because he holds (from a S'vara) that, whether the Kohen retains his Kedushah or not, she is permitted to eat, so why would he require a Pasuk.




(a) Rav Holds 'Yesh Chupah li'P'sulos' - meaning that, Chupah without Kidushin (see Tosfos DH 'Rav') invalidates a widow who is a bas Kohen who marries a Kohen Gadol, from eating Terumah (like Bi'ah does).

(b) Shmuel says 'Ein Chupah li'P'sulos'.

(c) Shmuel claims that Rav will agree with him - by a young girl of less than three.

(d) Rava proves this from the Beraisa, which says that the Bi'ah of a three-year old girl *is considered a Bi'ah* to invalidate her from Terumah through the Bi'ah of one of the Pesulim - by inferring that, if she is under three, it does *not*. And if the Bi'ah of a girl under three does not invalidate her, it is obvious that Chupah will not invalidate her either.

(a) The Bi'ah of a girl of three and over, is considered valid with regard to Kidushin, Yibum or to render her an Eishes-Ish. When the Tana adds ...
1. ... 'u'Metam'ah es Bo'alah ... ' - he means that a girl of three who is a Nidah renders the Bo'eil Tamei to the extent that he makes the sheets on which he is lying, Tamei too.
2. ... 'le'Tamei Mishkav Tachton ke'Elyon' - he means that it makes them Tamei like the covers on top of a Zav (to render food and drink Tamei, but not people and vessels like the sheets of the Nidah herself).
(b) A bas Yisrael who is under three - may eat Terumah if she marries a Kohen, because her Bi'ah is not considered a Bi'ah, in which case she will not become a Chalalah.
Next daf


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