Daf Yomi - Yevamos 35 - Highlights

The Gemora cites two versions of Shmuel’s rulings regarding the waiting period of a woman before she gets married after cohabitating with a man.

Shmuel, according to the first version states: All women, whose husband’s died or they got divorced, are required to wait three months prior to getting married again (this is done in order to determine the paternity of the child), except for a girl who converted as a minor or a slave that was freed as a minor.

A Jewish girl who performed a mi’un (refusal) to her husband (she is obviously a minor) is not required to wait three months until getting married again. A minor who got divorced or one that had an illicit relationship is required to wait three months until getting married again. (Although minors cannot conceive, this was a precautionary decree because of adult women in a similar situation.)

Even though the Mishna rules that a minor girl is not required to wait three months before she marries again, Rav Gidel explains in the name of Rav that this was a ruling of the moment because the case was a highly uncommon one and the Rabbis did not issue their decree for this incident.

Shmuel, according to the second version states: All women, whose husband’s died or they got divorced, are required to wait three months prior to getting married again except for a girl who converted as an adult or a slave that was freed as an adult (since Shmuel follows the opinion of Rabbi Yosi who permits them to marry immediately because they utilize certain birth-control methods) and by a Jewish girl who had an illicit relationship as a minor (since it is uncommon, they didn’t decree on this).

Abaye explains the viewpoint of Rabbi Yosi: Women who engage in illicit relations invert themselves after cohabitation in order to avoid becoming pregnant. Rabbi Yehudah disagrees because he is concerned that they will not do so properly. (34b – 35a)

The Mishna had stated regarding the case where the two men inadvertently cohabitated with the wrong women that if they were daughters of Kohanim, they are disqualified from terumah.

The Gemora asks: This halacha should be the same even if they were not daughters of kohanim; they will be forbidden to their husbands if they are married to Kohanim?

The Gemora emends the Mishna to read, “If they were wives of Kohanim.”

The Gemora asks: The halacha is that even a wife of a Yisroel who has been violated and is permitted to her husband will nevertheless be forbidden to marry a Kohen in the future?

Rava answers: The Mishna is actually discussing the daughters of Kohanim. (Normally, a daughter of a Kohen who married a Yisroel, will be permitted to eat terumah after her husband dies and she has no children.) If she has been violated during the marriage, she will be disqualified from eating terumah forever. (35a)

WE SHALL RETURN TO YOU, ARBAAH ACHIN

The Mishna states: One who performed chalitzah with his yevamah and she was found to be pregnant (there is a decree against performing chalitzah with a yevamah within three months since her husband’s death) and later gave birth; if the child is viable, he will be permitted in her relatives, she will be permitted in his relatives and she is not disqualified from marring a Kohen (because the chalitzah was not valid since the brother did not die childless). If, however, the child is not viable, he will be prohibited in her relatives, she will be prohibited in his relatives and she is disqualified from marrying a Kohen.

One who performs yibum with his yevamah and she was found to be pregnant and later gave birth; if the child is viable, he must divorce her and they are required to bring a chatas offering. If, however, the child is not viable, he may keep her as a wife. If the child is viable, but we are uncertain if the child is a nine-month-old baby from the first brother or the seven-month-old child of the second brother; he must divorce her, and the child is deemed to be legitimate, and they are required to bring an asham taluy (a korban that one is required to bring if he is uncertain if he mistakenly committed a transgression). (35b)

The Gemora states: One who performed chalitzah with his pregnant yevamah and subsequently she miscarries; Rabbi Yochanan rules that she is not required to have a chalitzah from the brothers (the chalitzah has been retroactively determined to be valid). Rish Lakish says: She would require chalitzah from the brothers.

The Gemora explains their opinions: Rabbi Yochanan maintains that she is not required to have a chalitzah from the brothers because the chalitzah has been retroactively determined to be valid, and performing a yibum with a pregnant yevamah who subsequently miscarries is retroactively determined to be valid. Rish Lakish disagrees: He maintains that she would require chalitzah from the brothers because a chalitzah performed with a pregnant yevamah is not valid and a yibum performed with a pregnant yevamah is not considered a valid yibum, even if she later miscarries.

The Gemora elaborates further regarding this dispute: It can be explained that they argue based on the understanding of a verse or it can be explained based on logic.

The dispute based on logic can be explained as follows: Rabbi Yochanan holds that if Eliyahu would have informed us that she is going to miscarry, wouldn’t she be regarded as fit for a chalitzah or a yibum, now too, it is retroactively determined to be valid. Rish Lakish disagrees with this logic.

Alternatively, the dispute can be based on the understanding of the verse [Devarim 25:5]: And he has no child (then there is an obligation for yibum). Rabbi Yochanan says: He died without having a child. Rish Lakish says: Expound the verse to mean “Examine him.” (If he died with any type of child, including a fetus, the yibum or chalitzah is not valid.) (35b)

The Mishna had stated: One who performed chalitzah with his yevamah and she was found to be pregnant and later gave birth; if the child is not viable, he will be prohibited in her relatives, she will be prohibited in his relatives and she is disqualified from marrying a Kohen.

Rish Lakish explains the prohibition for her to marry a Kohen as a Rabbinic decree because in truth, the chalitzah was not valid. (35b)

[END]