REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
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
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
(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'.
Rav Mordechai or Rav Acha infer from there that will resolve Rav Sheishes'
(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
(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?
Answers to questions
(b) Will the Bi'ah with his wife's sister forbid him to marry her daughters
(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?
(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
(d) Why, in that case, does the author of our Mishnah not appear to be Rabbi
(a) How does Rav Gidal Amar Rav Chiya bar Yosef Amar Rav establish Rebbi
Akiva's previous ruling?
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.
(b) Why did he do that?
(c) How does that now enable us to establish our Mishnah even like Rebbi
(d) Why, if he was *married* to the first woman, is a Get not required from
the second one?
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?
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?
(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?
Answers to questions