(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 69


(a) We just learnt from "u'Bas Kohen Ki Sihyeh Almanah u'Gerushah ... " that the Bi'ah of an Akum and Eved invalidate a bas Kohen from eating Terumah. From where do we know that the same will apply to a bas Levi or a bas Yisrael (even if she has a child from a Kohen)?

(b) On what grounds do we refute the suggestion to learn from "Almanah u'Gerushah ve'Zera Ein Lah" that when there is no Almenus ve'Geirushin, they may eat *as long as there is no child*, whereas when there is not, they may eat even when there *is*?

(c) Perhaps we need to include a Levi'ah and Yisre'eilis who has a child from a Kohen, in the prohibition of eating Terumah if she then marries a Yisrael, who dies leaving her with a child from him?

(a) How will Rebbi Akiva (in whose opinion, Kidushin is not effective by Chayvei La'avin), explain "u'Bas Kohen *Ki Sih'yeh* le'Ish Zar"?

(b) According to him, the Torah writes "Almanah u'Gerushah" to be stringent with the former and lenient with the latter.
What does this mean?

(c) Having already taught us that ...

1. ... a Kohenes who is an Almanah is permitted to eat Terumah again, when her husband who is a Yisrael dies leaving her without children, why is it necessary to add a Gerushah?
2. ... a Kohenes who is a Gerushah is forbidden to eat Terumah, when her husband who is a Yisrael dies leaving her with children, why is it necessary to add an Almanah?
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk ...
  1. ... "u'Bas Kohen Ki Sih'yeh *le'Ish Zar*"?
  2. ... "Lo *Yechalel Zar'o* be'Amav"?
(b) And what do we learn from the Pasuk (with regard to a Kohen Gadol who maried an Almanah) "Lo Yechalel *Zar'o*"?

(c) From where do we know that Bi'ah (and not Kidushin) and that Bi'ah alone (even without Kidushin) invalidates a woman from Terumah and from Kehunah?

(a) Rebbi Yossi disagrees with the Tana Kama in the Beraisa currently under discussion. According to him, it is only a Pasul whose child is also Pasul who invalidates a bas Kohen from eating Terumah.
In which case does he argue?

(b) They both derive their ruling from the same source.
Which source?

(c) Raban Shimon ben Gamliel is even more lenient than Rebbi Yossi. According to him, whenever a Kohen is permitted to marry the daughter of someone who is Pasul, he is also permitted to marry his widow.
In which case is he more lenient than Rebbi Yossi?

(d) What will Rebbi Yossi hold by a Ger Amoni and a Ger Mo'avi?

(a) What do O'nes, Mefateh and a Shoteh have in common?

(b) In which case do even O'nes and Mefateh invalidate, too?

(c) We learned above that a fetus invalidates a bas Kohen to a Yisrael from eating Terumah, and does not feed a bas Yisrael to a Kohen Terumah.
What will be the Din if a Yisrael raped a bas Kohen, she became pregnant and the fetus died in her womb?

(d) In which case is the strength of the son greater than that of the father?

Answers to questions



(a) An Eved Kena'ani invalidates a bas Kohen from Terumah through Bi'ah. Does he invalidate his grandmother who is a bas Kohen, if he is her only offspring? What is the case?

(b) If, by the same token, his grandmother is a bas Yisrael who married a Kohen, may she eat Terumah on his account?

(c) If the daughter of a bas Yisrael to a Kohen or of a bas Kohen to a Yisrael 'marries' an Eved or a Nochri (see Tosfos DH 've'Niseis'), and they have a child, what is the status of that child?

(d) Does that Mamzer ...

  1. ... feed his grandmother who is a bas Yisrael to a Kohen?
  2. ... invalidate his grandmother who is a bas Kohen to a Yisrael?
7) A bas Kohen marries a Yisrael and they have a daughter. The daughter then marries a Kohen and they have a son who is fit to be a Kohen Gadol.
What dual function does this 'Kohen Gadol' play? What does his grandmother have to say about him?


(a) Our Mishnah (which includes a Shoteh among the 'Ein Posel u'Ma'achilin') supports the Beraisa, which exempts the wife of a Shoteh from both Yibum and Chalitzah.
What does this prove?

(b) Who else does the Beraisa incorporate together with a Shoteh?

(a) How does Rabah bar Rav Huna explain the fact that, on the one hand, the Tana of our Mishnah holds that an Ubar invalidates his mother from eating Terumah, whilst on the other, he permits her to eat (after being raped by a Yisrael), without requiring her to wait three months in case she is pregnant.

(b) From where does he know that Chazal contended with the pregnancy regarding Yuchsin?

(c) He is forced to retract from this contention however, on account of a Beraisa.
What does the Beraisa say about a man who gives his wife a Get which is valid only an hour before his death? Why does this force us to retract?

(d) What do we mean when we explain that Rabah bar Rav Huna really differentiated between adultery and marriage? What is his reason for this distinction?

(a) How will Rabah bar Rav Huna (who, as we just saw, is concerned about pregnancy, even with regard to Terumah, in the case of a married woman), explain the Beraisa which permits a bas Kohen whose husband (who was a Yisrael) died, to Tovel and eat Terumah that same evening?

(b) And how will he explain the Seifa of the Beraisa, which states that, the moment it becomes recognizable that she is pregnant, she is Pasul retroactively?

(c) In the case under discussion, when did the Yisrael marry the bas Kohen?

(a) Even if both the man and the woman who are betrothed admit that he is the father of the baby to whom she gave birth, Rav maintains that the baby is a Mamzer.
Why is that?

(b) What does Shmuel say?

(a) Rava establishes the Machlokes of Rav and Shmuel when there are rumors of her having had relations with other men too. Why is Rav more strict in this case, than by a married woman, where we simply ignore rumors of this nature.

(b) Rava's source that when there are no rumors, even Rav will agree that the child is not a Mamzer, lies in our Mishnah, which says 'Yaldah, Tochal'. How does he prove his point from there?

(c) Abaye disagrees. According to him, even if there is no reason to suspect her of adultery with other men, Rav declares the child to be a Mamzer. Then how does he establish our Mishnah? Why does the Tana say 'Yaldah, Tochal'?

(a) In the second Lashon, Rava maintains that if we have reason to suspect that she committed adultery both with other men and with her betrothed, we assume that the child is his.
Why is that?

(b) Then in which case does he establish the Machlokes between Rav and Shmuel?

(c) How does Rava prove from 'Yaldah Tochal' in our Mishnah, that Rav will most certainly agree that, when there are rumors that she committed adultery both with other men and with her betrothed, we will assume the child to be his, and that he declares the child a Mamzer only when the rumors are confined to other men exclusively?

(d) Abaye disagrees. According to him, even if the rumors incorporate the betrothed as well as others, Rav will declare the child a Mamzer. Then how will he explain 'Yaldah, Tochal', in our Mishnah?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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