(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 113

YEVAMOS 113 (Purim in Yerushalayim) and YEVAMOS 114 - have been generously dedicated by Dick and Beverly Horowitz of Los Angeles. May they be blessed with a life of joy and much Nachas from their very special children and grandchildren.


(a) Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda testified that a Chareshes whose father married her off may later accept her own Get even after she grows-up.
What does he then go on to say about a Ketanah whose mother and brothers married her to a Kohen?

(b) What sort of Terumah is he referring to?

(c) What do we infer from his switch from a Chareshes to a Ketanah?

(a) We ultimately ascribe this prohibition of a Chareshes to eat Terumah to the fear that a Cheresh Kohen might feed his wife who is a Pikachas.
Does this mean that the Pikachas is forbidden to eat Terumah de'Rabbanan?

(b) On what grounds do we reject the initial answer, which ascribes it to the fear that a Cheresh might feed his wife who is a Chareshes?

(c) Why did we initially prefer to ascribe it to a *Cheresh* feeding his wife who is a Chareshes, rather than to a *Pikei'ach* feeding his wife who is a Chareshes (seeing as both are intrinsically permitted, but forbidden on account of a Cheresh feeding a Pikachas)?

(d) Why did the Rabbanan not issue a similar decree forbidding a grown-up Kohen to feed his wife who is a Ketanah Terumah?

(a) Why did Chazal ...
  1. ... not institute a Kesubah for a Chareshes?
  2. ... then institute it for a Ketanah? Why were they not frightened there, too?
(b) What do we infer from the Mishnah in Kesuvos, which teaches that a Mema'enes is not entitled to a Kesubah?

(c) We learn from a Beraisa that the wife of a Cheresh and a Shoteh are not entitled to a Kesubah.
What does the same Beraisa say with regard to a Chareshes and a Shotah who are married to a Pikei'ach, from which we can deduce that they are not entitled to a Kesubah either?

(d) Why are we not afraid that, if a Pikachas to a Cheresh does not receive a Kesubah, she will refrain from marrying?

(a) What did Rav Malkiyo do regarding that Cheresh who lived in his vicinity?

(b) How did Rava explain that act of Chesed?

(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi Amar Shmuel says that one is not Chayav an Asham Taluy for committing adultery with the wife of a Cheresh?
What is the Chidush? Why would we otherwise have thought that he is?

(b) Besides a Cheresh, Shoteh ve'Katan, which other two types of people cannot separate Terumah?

(c) Why can a Cheresh, Shoteh ve'Katan not separate Terumah?

(d) There is no proof from this Mishnah (in Terumos) for Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi Amar Shmuel, because Shmuel holds like Rebbi Yitzchak Amar Rebbi Elazar.
What does Yitzchak Amar Rebbi Elazar say?

(a) If Shmuel holds like Rebbi Elazar, then why is one not Chayav an Asham Taluy for committing adultery with the wife of a Cheresh?

(b) We learn 'Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos' (with regard to an Asham Taluy) from the Pasuk in Vayikra "Achas mi'Kol *Mitzvos* Hashem".
What to examples 'Chatichah Achas mi'Sh'tei Chatichos' does Rashi give?

(c) What does Rebbi Elazar say about someone who eats the Cheilev of a K'vi?

(d) Then how can we say that Shmuel holds like Rebbi Elazar?

7) What does Rebbi Chiya bar Ashi Amar Shmuel say about the wife of a Cheresh in the second Lashon?

Answers to questions



(a) Rav Ashi suggests that Rebbi Elazar (who says that one is Chayav an Asham Taluy for committing adultery with the wife of a Cheresh) may hold that the mind of a Cheresh is not one hundred percent functional like that of a Pikei'ach.
What is ...
  1. ... then the Safek (for which one brings an Asham Taluy)?
  2. ... the other possible way of explaining Rebbi Elazar?
(b) What is the difference between the two reasons?

(c) What do the Rabbanan hold? In which point do they disagree with Rebbi Elazar?

(a) The Torah writes in Ki Seitzei "ve'Nasan be'Yadah ve'Shil'chah mi'Beiso".
What does Tana de'Bei ...
  1. ... Rebbi Yanai learn from "ve'Nasan be'Yadah"?
  2. ... Rebbi Yishmael learn from the words "ve'Shil'chah mi'Beiso"?
(b) In that case, when Rebbi Yitzchak says that min ha'Torah, a Shotah can be divorced, because she is no worse than a Pikachas against her will, what kind of Shotah is he referring to?

(c) What is the reason for the Takanah prohibiting her divorce?

(d) A Shoteh however, even one who does have a limited Da'as, cannot divorce min ha'Torah. Rav Ashi proves this distinction from the Lashon of our Mishnah (which uses a slightly different Lashon with regard to a Chareshes than it does with regard to a Cheresh).
What distinction does the Tana make between the two Leshonos?

(a) What is our quandary regarding Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri's Safek in our Mishnah (as to the difference between a Cheresh and a Chareshes)? What are the two possible ways of explaining his Safek?

(b) We try to resolve the She'eilah from the wording of the Chachamim's response 'Eino Domeh ha'Ish ha'Megaresh la'Ishah ha'Misgareshes ... '. How would that response resolve the She'eilah?

(c) How do we counter that proof from Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri's own response to them 'Af Zu Kayotzei Bah'?

(d) We conclude that Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri asked them to account for *their* opinion.
What does *he* really hold, and what did he ask them to explain to him?

(a) What does Rava extrapolate from Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda, who stressed the fact that we do not need the woman's Da'as at all for divorce?

(b) How would the witnesses know that the Get was authentic?

(c) Why does Rava need to tell us this? Is it not obvious from Rebbi Yochanan ben Gudgoda's words?

(d) How do we know that he did *not* intend to negate the Get? Why did he divorce his wife in such a strange way?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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