(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 33

YEVAMOS 33 & 34 - sponsored by Hagaon Rav Yosef Pearlman of London, a living demonstration of love for and adoration of the Torah.


(a) We try to establish the Machlokes between Rebbi Chiya and bar Kapara in all three cases by Isur Kolel, according to Rebbi Yossi.
What is the Isur Kolel in ...
  1. ... Zar she'Shimeish be'Shabbos?
  2. ... Ba'al-Mum she'Shimeish be'Tum'ah?
(b) How will bar Kapara then learn the Beraisa where Rebbi Yossi says that he is Chayav both for Achos Ishah and for Eishes Ach?

(c) And how do we reconcile this with the Beraisa where Rebbi Yossi says that he is Chayav two, and which we established when his brother married his wife's sister before he married his wife (making Achos Ishah an Isur Kolel, making Achos Ishah an Isur Kolel (since he now becomes forbidden to all her sisters)?

(d) It is not possible to establish an Isur Kolel by Zar she'Achal Melikah however, only an Isur Bas Achas. How come that the Isur of Zarus and that of Melikah come into effect at the same time? Is it not Asur for a Zar to benefit from Kodshim already *before* the Melikah?

(a) How does Isur Bas Achas apply by 'Zar she'Shimeish be'Shabbos'?

(b) There are two ways to apply Isur Bas Achas by 'Ba'al -Mum she'Shimeish be'Tum'ah'. One is identical to that of 'Zar she'Shimeish be'Shabbos'. What is the other?

(c) How will Rebbi Chiya now explain his own opinion and that of bar Kapara? How will he interpret bar Kaparah's misinterpretation of Rebbi?

(d) It is bar Kapara's view of Rebbi Chiya that puts us in a spot and forces us to retract from the current interpretation of the Machlokes.
What is the problem with bar Kapara's view of Rebbi Chiya?

(a) So we establish their Machlokes, not according to Rebbi Yossi, but according to Rebbi Shimon.
What, in their opinion, does Rebbi Yossi hold?

(b) Why did Rebbi Chiya find it necessary to swear?

(c) What is problematic with the fact that bar Kapara did likewise?

(a) How does bar Kapara now explain (what in his eyes, is) Rebbi Chiya's mistake? What was Rebbi really referring to when he said that one is Chayav two?

(b) And how does Rebbi Chiya now explain (what in his eyes, is) bar Kapara's mistake? When did Rebbi say that one is Chayav two and when did he say one?

(c) According to Rebbi Chiya, which is the more stringent, Isur Kolel or Isur Bas Achas?

Answers to questions



(a) We prove bar Kapara wrong from a Beraisa. What does the Beraisa (which lists the cases where, according to Rebbi Yossi, one is Chayav to, and according to Rebbi Shimon, only one).
What does the Tana list and what does it omit? How does that vindicate Rebbi Chiya?

(b) How do we know that the Tana omits Zar she'Achal bi'Melikah because of Rebbi Shimon, and not because of Rebbi Yossi?

(a) 'Zar she'Shimeish be'Shabbos ... '.
Why can this not be referring to a Zar who performed ...
  1. ... Shechitah on Shabbos?
  2. ... Kabalah or Holachah?
  3. ... Haktarah?
(b) Rav Acha bar Ya'akov establishes that Rebbi is talking about the Shechitah of the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kipur.
Does this go according to all opinions?

(c) Why did Rebbi speak about a Zar, seeing as (according to this opinion) even a Kohen is Pasul?

(a) According to Rav Ashi, Zar she'Shimeish be'Shabbos is referring to a Zar who made Haktarah on Shabbos (see Tosfos Yeshanim).
How does he he resolve the problem we had earlier, that Rebbi Yossi considers making a fire on Shabbos no more than an ordinary La'av?

(b) So how does he explain the two Isurim, according to Rebbi Yossi?

(a) If two people switched their wives on the way to the Chupah, they are Chayav because of Eishes Ish.
What will they be Chayav if the two women are also ...
  1. ... sisters?
  2. ... Nidos?
(b) And what if the two men are also brothers?

(c) Why is it, that before taking their wives back, they must first wait three months?

(d) When do they not need to wait?

(a) It is unusual for Tana'im to speak about blatant Resha'im. In addition, we know from a Beraisa learned by Rebbi Chiya that the Tana of our Mishnah must be speaking about a switch that took place by mistake, and not on purpose.
What does Rebbi Chiya's Beraisa say?

(b) How does Rav Yehudah reconcile the Lashon of our Mishnah 've'Hichlifu' with what we just said, which implies that they did so on purpose?

(c) We try to deduce this from the Seifa of the Mishnah, which precludes a Ketanah from this Din, and a wife who commits adultery (even a Ketanah we presume), is forbidden to remain with her husband.
On what grounds do we refute this proof?

(d) How do we nevertheless prove it from the Seifa 'Mafrishin Osan Sheloshah Chodashim, Shema Me'ubaros Hein'? What can we infer from there that proves our current explanation correct)

Answers to questions

Next daf


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