(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 37

YEVAMOS 36 & 37 - sponsored by Hagaon Rav Yosef Pearlman of London, a living demonstration of love for and adoration of the Torah.


(a) We just learned that, according to Ravina, even Raba Shimon ben Gamliel will agree that, if a Kohen married a Yevamah whose baby died within thirty days, she does not require Chalitzah. Rav Ashi asked Rav Oshaya Brei de'Rav Idi whether, if a Kohen married a woman who was pregnant or feeding within twenty-four months, we will make the same concession for a Kohen and permit him to remain with her without a Get.
What did Rav Oshaya Brei de'Rav Idi reply?

(b) If someone betrothes a woman within three months of her widowhood or divorce, and runs away, Rav Acha and Rafram argue over whether he needs to write her a Get or not.
Why might writing a Get *not* be necessary?

(c) Which of them takes the lenient view?

(a) Rava asked Rav Nachman why a woman needs to wait three months, because, in case she is pregnant, we will not know whether the baby is a ninth-month baby from her first husband or a seventh-month baby from the second. Why should we not go after the majority of women, who give birth after nine months, he asked him?
What was Rav Nachman's initial reply?

(b) Why did Rava not like his reply?

(c) Rav Nachman then explained that, seeing as the pregnancy of all women who give birth at nine months is discernable, we automatically presume that, this woman, whose pregnancy was not discernable, has lost her 'Rov'.
On what grounds do we reject this explanation?

(d) How do we amend Rav Nachman's words to read?

(a) If a man married a woman immediately after her husband died, and she gave birth at nine months, what does the Tana Kama of the Beraisa say about ...
  1. ... that baby?
  2. ... the next baby that is born to him?
(b) Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov says 'Ein Mamzer mi'Safek'. Abaye explains that, according to the Tana Kama, the second baby is a Safek Mamzer and forbidden to marry a Vaday Mamzer.
What does Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov then hold?

(c) How does Rava explain the Machlokes?

(d) Abaye and Rava, explains the Gemara, argue about Rebbi Elazar.
What does this mean? Whom are we trying to establish (or not to establish) like Rebbi Elazar?

(a) Rebbi Elazar says 'Vada'an be'Vada'an Mutar. Vada'an bi'Sefeikan, vice-versa or S'feikan bi'S'feikan Asur'?
What is the reason for the latter part of the statement?

(b) What are the three cases of S'feikan?

(c) Why is a Kuti a Safeik?

(d) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav rules like Rebbi Elazar.
What did Shmuel remark when Rav Yehudah told him of Rav' ruling?

(a) We just quoted Hillel, who says that all the ten Yuchsin are permitted to each other.
Who must be precluded from the following group ...
  1. ... Kohani, Levi'i, Yisre'eili, Chalali?
  2. ... Kohani, Levi'i, Yisre'eili, Chalali, Geiri, Charuri and Avadim Meshuchrurim?
  3. ... Levi'i, Yisre'eili, Geiri, Charuri, Mamzeiri, Nesini, Shesuki and Asufi?
(b) In the above Machlokes between Abaye and Rava, which of the two follows the opinion of Rav (Rebbi Elazar), and which, the opinion of Shmuel (Hillel)?
Answers to questions



(a) Abaye proves from another statement of Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov, that he considers a Safek Mamzer like a Vadai Mamzer. What does Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov say about a man who had relations with many women or vice-versa?
From which Pasuk in Kedoshim did he derive this?

(b) How does Rava explain the word "Zimah"?

(c) What did Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov say over and above this, regarding marrying two wives in two countries?

(d) How do we reconcile this with Rav and Rav Nachman, who would marry a woman for a short time when they travelled overseas (despite the fact that they had a wife where they lived)?

(a) How do we reconcile what Rav and Rav Nachman used to do with Rava's statement, that if a woman accepts a man's proposal for marriage, she needs to keep seven clean days?

(b) Alternatively, the Rabbanan did not actually marry the women in question, but only designated them, in case they wanted to live with them. What was the point of doing that?

(c) But surely, if they intended to live with them, they would not be able to, because of Nidus, and if they did not, then what they did was pointless (see Tosfos DH 'Yichudi')?

(a) When the Safek (son of the first man or of the second one) and the Yavam both claim the inheritance of the dead man, what is each one's argument?

(b) What is the Din?

(a) What does each side argue in a case where the Safek and the sons of the Yavam both claim the inheritance of the dead man?

(b) The Rabbanan suggested to Rav Mesharshaya that this was similar to the Mishnah in Nos'in al ha'Anusah, which talks about the Safek (seventh-month first husband, ninth-month second one) against the sons of the two husbands. What does the Mishnah rule there?

(c) What would the equivalent Din be here?

(d) Rav Mesharshaya told them that the cases were not even similar.
Why not? What will the Din therefore be in our case?

(a) Rav Mesharshaya therefore compares the Mishnah in Nos'in al ha'Anusah to the Safek and the sons of the Yavam who both claim the inheritance of the *Yavam*.
Having already received a half of the first brother's property, what is the Safek now claiming?

(b) Why should he be interested in doing this?

(c) Rebbi Aba says 'Kam Dina'.
What does 'Kam Dina' mean?

(d) What does Rav Yirmiyah say?

(a) If someone who owned a field that was surrounded by four other fields, goes overseas, and when he returns nobody remembers through whose field his path led, according to Admon, he may take the shortest route (which will be explained shortly).
What do the Rabbanan say?

(b) Why do we initially think that Admon is right?

(c) What does Rav Yehudah Amar Rav say that makes us wonder how Admon could ever have said such a thing?

(d) What does Rava mean when he says that if four came on the strength of four or on the strength of one, even Admon will agree?

(a) The Machlokes is in a case when one man comes on the strength of four. Admon maintains that the owner of the single field can claim a path 'mi'Mah Nafshach' (seeing as the four fields are owned by a sole owner, who cannot deny that, originally, he [the owner of the middle field] had a path leading to his field).
What do the Rabbanan say?

(b) Why do we try to establish Rebbi Aba (in 10b.) like the Rabbanan, and Rav Yirmiyah like Admon?

(c) Why will ...

  1. ... Rebbi Aba nevertheless say that even Admon agrees with him?
  2. ... Rav Yirmiyah say that even the Rabbanan agree with him?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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