(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 94

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


(a) In the second Lashon, Rav Sheishes takes for granted that a woman is permitted to perform Yibum on the testimony of one witness testifying that her husband died. He does so on the basis of a Mishnah in Cheresh she'Nasa. What does the Mishnah there say?

(b) According to this Lashon, the She'eilah that one ought to ask, says Rav Sheishes, is whether we can believe one witness to permit her to marry le'Shuk.
What are the two sides of the She'eilah?

(c) What proof does Rav Sheishes bring from our Mishnah 'Meis Ba'alech ve'Achar-Kach Meis B'nech, ve'Achar-Kach Amru Chiluf ha'D'varim, Teitzei ... ', assuming that the Mishnah speaks about two witnesses following one witness?

(d) He declines to establish the Mishnah by two against two witnesses for the same reasons as he gave earlier (on the previous Amud).
How do we know that the Tana is particular about the Lashon he uses? Perhaps he only omits 'Safek' because he is not particular about the Lashon?

(a) We refute this proof and the two problems that we had with that with learning this way, by establishing the Mishnah like Rav Acha bar Minyumi. What does Rav Acha bar Minyumi say?

(b) The Mishnah in ha'Ishah Shalom states 'Ein ha'Ishah Ne'emenes Lomar Meis Yevami she'Enasei ve'Lo Meisah Achosi, she'Ekaneis le'Beisah'.
What does Rav Mordechai or Rav Acha infer from there that will resolve Rav Sheishes' She'eilah?

(c) How does Rav Ashi counter this proof from the Seifa of the Mishnah which makes a similar statement with regard to a man who wants to perform Yibum with his brother's wife or to marry his wife's sister?

(d) So how do we explain the Mishnah without the inference? Why might we have thought that the woman should be believed regarding herself according to Rebbi Akiva?

(a) Having just established that a woman is not believed to testify that her Yavam died, why should she then be believed to testify that her husband died?

(b) What is wrong with the text that attributes believing her when she testifies that her husband died because it is *she* who stands to suffer should her husband return, but not that her Yevamah died, because it is only *her children* who will suffer, according to Rebbi Akiva?

(c) And why would it not be necessary to mention the case at all, if it was not her who stood to suffer?

(a) Rava maintains that one witness is certainly believed to permit a Yevamah le'Shuk from a 'Kal va'Chomer'.
Which 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(b) How did that member of the Rabbanan refute Rava's proof from the case of the woman herself?

(c) Why do we therefore believe neither the woman herself nor one witness, when they testify that the Yavam died?

(d) Rebbi Elazar ben Masya Darshened from "ve'Ishah Gerushah mei'Ishah" that a woman who is divorced by another man other than her husband, is not forbidden to marry a Kohen.
What should he rather have Darshened from this Pasuk according to Rav Yehudah Amar Rav? What is 'Rei'ach ha'Get'?

(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Naso "ve'Shachav Ish *Osah*? How will that affect the case of a woman, about whom two witnesses testified that had died, and who returned after her husband went and married her sister?

(b) Will the Bi'ah with his wife's sister forbid him to marry her daughters or vice-versa?

(c) If initially, they informed him that his wife had died and then, after he married her sister, they told him that she had been alive then but had since died, what does the Tana Kama say about their children?

Answers to questions



(a) What dual Halachah will come into effect in a case where the witness testified that his wife and her sister's husband had both died overseas - and after both he and his sister-in-law remarried, the two appeared?

(b) The Tana Kama of a Beraisa states that the only case of Arayos who requires a Get, is a woman who married through Beis-Din.
Why is that?

(c) Which two cases does Rebbi Akiva add? What do we initially take to be his reason?

(d) Why, in that case, does the author of our Mishnah not appear to be Rabbi Akiva?

(a) How does Rav Gidal Amar Rav Chiya bar Yosef Amar Rav establish Rebbi Akiva's previous ruling?

(b) Why did he do that?

(c) How does that now enable us to establish our Mishnah even like Rebbi Akiva?

(d) Why, if he was *married* to the first woman, is a Get not required from the second one?

8) Having established our Mishnah even according to Rebbi Akiva, Rav Ashi asked Rav Kahana why the Tana did not insert Chamoso in the Mishnah, too.
What does Rebbi Akiva say about Chamoso that prompted this question?


(a) The Pasuk in Kedoshim writes "be'Eish Yisrefu Oso ve'Es'hen" (referring to a mother and daughter).
What problem does this Pasuk present?

(b) So what does Rebbi Yishmael mean when he explains 'Oso ve'Achas Meihen'?

How does he learn this from the word "ve'Es'hen"?

(c) And on what grounds does Rebbi Akiva implicate both women ("Oso" 've'es Sh'teihen') - according to Abaye, who says 'Mashma'os Dorshin Ika Beinayhu'?

(d) What does 'Mashma'os Dorshin Ika Beinayhu' mean?

(a) How does Rava interpret the 'Oso ve'es Sh'teihen' of Rebbi Akiva?

(b) And what does Rebbi Yishmael say?

(c) According to Rava, if the author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Akiva, why does he not insert the case of Chamoso in our Mishnah? In what way did we misunderstand Rebbi Akiva's opinion?

11) Why did Chazal not forbid the husband to return to his wife through the Bi'as Shogeg with her sister, like they forbade his wife to return to him through the Bi'as Shogeg with another man?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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