ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Yevamos 64
YEVAMOS 46-65 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
(a) A man is obligated to wait ten years to have children from his wife -
before divorcing her or marrying a second wife.
(b) Should he divorce her, she is permitted to marry someone else.
(c) The Din of ten years still applies if she has a miscarriage - but he
then counts ten years from the time of the miscarriage.
(d) A man who divorces his wife because she bore him no children, must
nevertheless pay her Kesubah - because we assume that she was able to have
children, and ascribe the fault to her husband's bad Mazel.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk (with regard to Avram's marriage to Hagar)
"mi'Keitz Eser Shanim la'Sheves Avram be'Eretz Cana'an" - that the years
that one lived in Chutz la'Aretz are not included in the ten years of
childlessnes, once one moves to Eretz Yisrael.
(b) If either the man or the woman falls ill during that time - or if they
were in prison, the period of illness is not included in the ten years.
(a) Despite the fact that Avraham was sterile too (as we shall soon see), we
cite him as an example of the ten year waiting period - because otherwise,
what is the Pasuk in Lech-Lecha (quoted in 2a.) coming to teach us?
(b) Yitzchak and Rifkah were childless for twenty years.
(c) Despite the fact that Yitzchak too, was sterile, the Torah nevertheless
finds it necessary to inform us that he was sixty years old when he fathered
Ya'akov and Eisav - because it helps us to prove that Ya'akov must have
spent fourteen years in the Yeshivah of Shem and Eiver.
(d) It is important for us to know that Ya'akov spent fourteen years in the
Yeshivah of Shem and Eiver before going to Charan - so that we should know
that Torah over-rides the honoring of one's parents (since although Ya'akov
was punished for the twenty-two years that he spent with Lavan away from his
parents [by losing Yosef for twenty-two years], he was not taken to task for
the fourteen years that he spent learning Torah in Yeshivah.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk in Toldos "va'Ye'tar Yitzchak la'Hashem
*le'Nochach Ishto* ki Akarah Hi" - that Yitzchak was sterile too.
(b) The Torah stresses "va'Ye'aser *Lo* Hashem, teaching us that Hashem
answered *his* prayers and not hers - because the Tefilah of a Tzadik ben
Tzadik is greater than that of a Tzadik ben Rasha (which Rifkah was) [not
because the former is greater, but because his Tefilah is].
(c) The Avos (and the Imahos) were sterile - in order to induce them to
pray, and Hashem loves the Tefilos of Tzadikim.
(d) The Torah uses the Lashon "va'Ye'tar" and "ve'Ye'asar" (whose root is
'Asar' - a pitch-fork) by the Tefilah of Yitzchak - because the Tefilah of a
Tzadik works like a pitch-fork, turning over Hashem's anger into mercy.
(a) Rebbi Ami learns from the Pasuk "Habitu el *Tzur Chutzavtem* ve'el *Bor
Nukartem"* - that both Avraham and Sarah were Tumtumin (and that their
sexual organs had to be carved out). And we know that that Pasuk refers to
Avraham and Sarah - because the following Pasuk explicitly says so.
(b) Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah disagrees. He learns from the Pasuk
"va'Tehi Sarai Akarah *Ein Lah Valad"* - that she was an Aylanis (who did
not even have a Beis V'lad).
(a) Rav Yehudah Brei de'Rav Shmuel bar Shilas says in the name of Rav that
the ten years waiting period in our Mishnah is not relevant nowadays,
because we do not live as long as they used to live then. According to him -
one needs to wait two and a half years nowadays, corresponding to the three
pregnancies of Sarah, Rifkah and Chanah, plus the one month of Tum'ah and
Taharah that follows each pregnancy (a total of two and a half years).
(b) Rabah (presumably, this should be 'Rava') Amar Rav Nachman says three
P'kidos - meaning the three years of Sarah, Rifkah and Chanan, because
Hashem answered their prayers on Rosh Hashanah (so she needs to wait for
three Rosh Hashanahs to pass and then, the nine months of pregnancy).
(c) Rabah refutes the above theories, due to the Pasuk "Yemei Sh'noseinu
Bahem Shiv'im Shanah", from which we see that already in the time of David,
man's years had diminished, yet Rebbi, who compiled the Mishnah,
nevertheless spoke of a ten-year waiting period. Note: Nowadays, it is
customary not to force a man to divorce his wife who bore him no children,
after ten years.
(a) The Beraisa said earlier that the woman nevertheless receives her
Kesubah, because it is probably the man himself who was not worthy to have
children from her. We know that it is not due to the unworthiness of the
woman - seeing as she is not commanded to have children anyway, and it is
therefore unlikely that Hashem would punish her in this way (Rashi adds that
since she is not commanded, she does not really care either).
The author of our Mishnah, which permits the woman to marry a second man but
not a third, is Rebbi - who is of the opinion that *two* times creates a
(b) In spite of our Mishnah, which advocates that the man should marry a
second wife, in the hope that he merits having children from *her*, Rav Aba
bar Zavda told the Rabbanan that he did not intend to marry again because,
had he merited, he would have had children from his first wife - merely in
order to put them off, since he knew that he could not have children anyway,
because he was sterile.
(c) Rav Aba bar Zavda, Rav Gidel, Rav Chelbo and Rav Sheishes had in
common - the fact that all of them became so engrossed with the Shiur of Rav
Huna, that they all became sterile. Altogether, sixty Chachamim were
affected in this way through Rav Huna's Derashos.
(d) When Rav Acha bar Ya'akov quoted the Pasuk "ha'Chochmah Techayeh
Ba'alehah" - he meant that he was the only one to act wisely. He, alongside
the other Chachamim, contracted the illness that results from holding
oneself back, and which results, in turn, in sterility. He suspended himself
from a cedar-tree, and the matter emerged from him looking like a green
(a) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel says - that if one brother after the other died
as a result of the Milah, it is only the fourth son who becomes forbidden to
circumcise; the third is still permitted (because he holds that a Chazakah
is only created after *three* times).
(b) We have a problem with a Beraisa which inverts the two opinions, and
which we try to resolve by citing Rebbi Chiya bar Aba quoting Rebbi
Yochanan. Rebbi Yochanan relates how, at the end of his life, Raban Shimon
ben Gamliel forbade the circumcision of the son of a *fourth* sister, after
a son from each of the first three sisters had died as a result of the
Milah - implying that the third son, he would have permitted. This proves
our initial version of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel to be correct.
(c) We currently think that, had they asked him earlier, he would not have
forbidden the third son too, to be circumcised - because in that case, what
would Rebbi Chiya bar Aba be coming to testify?
(d) We refute this proof however, (that circumcising the third son must be
permitted) - on the grounds that Rebbi Chiya bar Aba could be coming to
teach us that two or three sisters create a Chazakah (regarding their sons,
and that the babies do not need to be brothers in order to be forbidden).
(a) We can learn from the principle 'Achyos Mechazkos' - that one should
avoid marrying into a family of epileptics or lepers (provided they have a
Chazakah of three cases).
(b) Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef cited an episode when Rebbi Yochanan permitted
the Milah of the son of a third sister, even though the sons of two sisters
had previously died on account of the Milah. When Abaye commented that Rav
Yitzchak bar Yosef was permitting a (Safek) Isur as well as a (Safek)
murder - he was referring to the fact that he had permitted the Milah to be
performed on Yom Kipur which fell on Shabbos.
(c) We know that Abaye nevertheless accepted his ruling - because he married
Chomah, even though she had already lost two husbands (Rachba from Pumbedisa
and Rav Yitzchak, the son of Rabah bar bar Chanah).
(d) Rava expressed surprise at Abaye's acceptance of Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef
's previous testimony of Rebbi Yochanan - because Abaye had himself stated
that Rav Yitzchak bar Yosef was not as reliable as Rav Avin, because he did
not revise his learning (or because he did not sit constantly at Rebbi
Yochanan's feet, like Rav Avin did).
(a) What makes us think that Rebbi and Raban Shimon ben Gamliel confine
their Machlokes to Milah, but do not argue by marriage - is the fact that
whereas by the former, it is logical to ascribe the weakness of the babies
to a family, to say that one particular family is prone to die as a result
of the Milah, and another is not; by the latter, what reason could there
possibly be to ascribe the death of three husbands to the Chazakah of one
(b) We nevertheless know that they argue by marriage as well - because they
argue explicitly with regard to marriage in a Beraisa.
(c) According to Avimi from Hagrunya quoting Rav Huna, the Chazakah
determines that she causes the death of her husbands through intimacy. Rav
Ashi maintains that it is through her Mazel.
(d) The difference between the two explanations would be one of two cases;
one of them, when the first husband died after the engagement - the other,
if he died through an accident (such as falling off a tree), where it is
clear that he did not die through being intimate with his wife.
(a) Rav Yosef the son of Rava asked his father whether, when Rav Yosef
(Rava's Rebbe) once told him that the Halachah was like Rebbi and another
time, like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, he was pulling his leg. Rava replied -
that that was most certainly not the case. but that he ruled like a S'tam
Mishnah is each of the cases (because the S'tam Mishnahs themselves, did not
rule unanimously like either opinion).
(b) Regarding Nisu'in and Malkiyos, he told him, Rav Yosef ruled like S'tam
Mishnahs that followed the opinion of Rebbi; by Vestos and Shor ha'Mu'ad,
like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel. The case of 'Malkiyos' - is when someone who
had committed a La'av that carried with it Malkos, was duly punished and
then repeated the sin (just once). They would place him in an extremely
confined room, and feed him raw barley until his stomach split.
(c) The two aspects of the case of 'Vestos' - are 1. to become a Nidah:
after three consecutive sightings at equal intervals (which make her a Nidah
with regard to not rendering Tamei retroactively, any Taharos that she
touched between one period and the next), and with regard to assuming that
she is Temei'ah when her time to see arrives); 2. to lose her Veses, which
she only does after fixing a new Veses three consecutive times.
(d) The case of Shor ha'Mu'ad - is that of an animal that damages willfully,
which is considered a Tam (to pay only half-damages from the body of the
damager), and which becomes a Mu'ad (to pay full damage from one's own
pocket) after it has damaged three times (see Tosfos DH 've'Shor').