(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 92

YEVAMOS 91-95 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.

1) Our Mishnah rules that if a woman married through the testimony of one witness, and her husband returns, she is Patur from bringing a Korban.
Why is that? What is the difference between the Korban Chatas brought by a Beis-Din that erred in its ruling and one brought by an individual?


(a) Ze'iri maintains that the Halachah is in fact, like Tani Bei Medrasha, who consider the ruling of Beis-Din a Ta'us (an error), and not a Hora'ah (a ruling).
What does Tani Bei Medrasha say with regard to Beis-Din mistakenly ruling that it was already nightfall, following which the people broke Shabbos?

(b) On what grounds does Rav Nachman insist that the Halachah is indeed like the Tana of our Mishnah?

(c) And on what grounds does Rava support Ze'iri, who says that it is a Ta'us and not a Hora'ah?

(d) Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa says 'Yikov ha'Din es ha'Har ve'Tavi Chatas Sh'meinah'.
How do we know that this is because he holds 'Ta'us' (like Ze'iri) and not because he holds like those who say that a Yachid (as opposed to a community) who followed the instructions of the Beis-Din is always Chayav to bring his own Korban Chatas?

(a) According to Rebbi Elazar, when the Tana of our Mishnah concluded 'Horuhah Beis-Din Linasei ve'Halchah ve'Kilkelah Chayeves be'Korban ... ', he means that she had illicit relations with another man.
What does Rebbi Yochanan say?

(b) Does Rebbi Elazar disagree with Rebbi Yochanan?

(c) Rebbi Yochanan certainly disagrees with Rebbi Elazar.
Why is that?

(a) In a Beraisa which supports Rebbi Yochanan, Rebbi Elazar obligates a Chatas for each and every Bi'ah.
Why is that? What is the case?

(b) What do the Chachamim say?

(c) Why will the Chachamim concede to Rebbi Elazar that if she went and married five men, that she is Chayav for each one?

(a) If they informed a woman that first her husband and then her son, both of whom were overseas, had died, and, after she remarried, they informed her that they had actually died in the reverse order (in which case, she was really a Yevamah le'Shuk), any children that she has from the second husband are Mamzeirim.
Since when is a child from a Chayvei La'avin a Mamzer?

(b) It goes without saying that if they initially told her that her son had died first and then, after she had performed Yibum, they reversed the order, the same Din will apply. How will the Din differ if, after they informed her that her husband had died, and she had already remarried, they told her that he had actually been alive when she remarried, but that he was now dead?

(c) What does 'ha'V'lad Rishon ve'Acharon' mean throughout our Mishnah?

(d) In the first cases, why did the Tana not just say 've'ha'V'lad Mamzer'?

(a) How will the Din differ if her husband returns after she is *betrothed* to another man, but not yet married?

(b) If the second man then gave her a Get, will she be forbidden to marry a Kohen should her husband subsequently die?

(c) What Derashah did Rebbi Elazar ben Masya make from the Pasuk in Emor "ve'Ishah Gerushah me'Ishah"?

(a) The Tana of the Beraisa establishes the author of our Mishnah, which declares the baby of a Yevamah le'Shuk to be a Mamzer, as Rebbi Akiva. The Tana concludes 'Aval Chachamim Omrim, Ein Mamzer mi'Yevamah'.
Why does he not simply say 'Ein Mamzer mei'Chayvei La'avin'?

(b) What is an example of Chayvei La'avin di'She'er?

Answers to questions



(a) What does Rav learn from the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "*Lo Sihyeh* Eishes ha'Meis ha'Chutzah le'Ish Zar"?

(b) On what grounds does Shmuel say that she requires a get? Does he disagree entirely with Rav?

(c) Like whom does Ameimar rule?

(a) Based on Ameimar's ruling, Rav Ashi said that, if the Yavam was a Kohen, he would have to make Chalitzah and the man who betrothed her be'Isur would be permitted to marry her.
On what grounds do we reject this version of Rav Ashi's statement?

(b) So what did Rav Ashi really say?

(a) How do we initially amend the statement of Rav Gidal Amar Rav Chiya bar Yosef Amar Rav 'Yevamah Kidushin Ein Bah, Nisu'in Yesh Bah'?

(b) Alternatively, we interpret 'Nisu'in Yesh Bah' to mean bi'Z'nus, like Rav Hamnuna.
What does Rav Hamnuna say?

(c) How does this tie up with Rav Ashi, who, we just saw, permits a Yevamah who marries le'Shuk, to return to the Yavam?

(d) We finally reinstate the version of Rav Gidal's ruling.
On what grounds do we justify the statement 'Yevamah ... Nisu'in Yesh Bah'? Why do we nevertheless then say 'Kidushin Ein Bah'? Why should we not issue the same decree there as by Nisu'in?

(a) What did Rebbi Yochanan comment when Rebbi Yanai quoted the ruling that Kidushin does not take effect on a Yevamah (like Rav)?

(b) The Beraisa states 'ha'Omer le'Ishah Harei At Mekudeshes Li le'Achar she'Esgayer' or le'Achar she'Tisgayri ... le'Achar she'Yachlotz Lach Yevamech, Einah Mekudeshes'.
Why is that?

(c) How does Rebbi Yochanan prove Rav's ruling from this Beraisa?

(a) What did Rebbi Yanai reply when Rebbi Yochanan pointed this out to him? How else might we have understood that Beraisa?

(b) On what grounds did Resh Lakish disagree with Rebbi Yochanan's observation altogether? Who might be the author of that Beraisa?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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