Daf Yomi - Yevamos 74 - Highlights

The Gemora returns to the original inquiry (Can an uncircumcised person eat maaser sheini (one brings one tenth of his produce to Yerushalayim to be eaten there)?): The Gemora attempts to bring a proof from the following braisa: One who had been circumcised, but shreds which render the circumcision invalid remained, is not permitted to eat terumah, nor the Pesach offering, nor any consecrated offerings, nor maaser. What does the braisa mean when it mentioned maaser? Is it not referring to maaser sheini? (This would prove that an uncircumcised person may not eat maaser sheini.)

The Gemora deflects the proof: Perhaps the braisa is referring to the maaser taken from animals; an uncircumcised person will be prohibited from eating it because it is a consecrated offering, but he will be permitted to eat from maaser sheini.

The Gemora asks: How can the braisa be referring to animal tithe? This would have precisely the same halacha as other consecrated offering, and that was already mentioned in the braisa.

The Gemora counters: According to your reasoning, why did the braisa specifically mention the Pesach offering? Shouldn’t the Pesach be included in all consecrated offerings?

The Gemora replies: It is understandable why the braisa mentioned Pesach and other consecrated offerings. If the braisa would have just mentioned Pesach, I might have thought that Pesach is the only offering where an uncircumcised person may not partake of because the Torah explicitly writes the prohibition there; the braisa was compelled to mention that the prohibition is applicable to other offerings as well. If the braisa would have just mentioned consecrated offerings, I might have thought that this is referring to the Pesach offering; it was therefore necessary for the braisa to state consecrated offerings and the Pesach. However, the Gemora concludes its question: There is no need to state animal tithe. (Obviously, the braisa is referring to maaser sheini, and this would prove that an uncircumcised person may not eat maaser sheini.)

The Gemora deflects the proof: Perhaps the braisa is referring to maaser rishon (which is given to a Levi), and the braisa is reflecting the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who maintains that maaser rishon is forbidden to a non-Levi. (74a)

The Gemora attempts to bring a proof from the following braisa: An onein (one whose close relative passed away and has not been buried yet) is prohibited from eating maaser sheini, but he is permitted to eat terumah and to perform the services of the parah adumah (red heifer). A tevul yom (one who has immersed in a mikvah but still has tumah on him until nightfall) is prohibited from eating terumah, but is permitted to perform the services of the parah adumah and to eat maaser. A mechusar kippurim (one who was tamei, but has immersed himself in a mikvah, and has waited until nightfall; he is just lacking atonement until he brings his offerings the next day) is prohibited from performing the services of the parah adumah, but he is permitted to eat terumah and maaser.

The Gemora concludes its proof: If an uncircumcised person may eat maaser sheini, the braisa should state that an uncircumcised person is prohibited from eating terumah, but is permitted to perform the services of the parah adumah and to eat maaser.

The Gemora answers: The Tanna of this braisa is from the academy of Rabbi Akiva, who maintains that an uncircumcised person is like a tamei, as it was taught in a braisa: Rabbi Akiva stated: Since it was stated [Vayikra 22:4]: A man, a man from the offspring of Aaron who is a metzora, or a zav shall not eat of the holies. The extra words, “A man, a man” teaches us that the uncircumcised also is included in the prohibition against eating terumah.

The Gemora asks: Who is the Tanna that disagrees with Rabbi Akiva?

The Gemora answers: It is the Tanna Kamma of Rabbi Yosef the Babylonian, for it was taught in a braisa: If an onein or mechusar kippurim burn the parah adumah, it is valid. (Just as he disagrees with Rabbi Akiva regarding a mechusar kippurim, he would disagree with him regarding an uncircumcised person.) Rabbi Yosef the Babylonian said: If an onein burned the parah adumah, it will be valid; however, if it was performed by one who is a mechusar kippurim, it is invalid. (74a)

Rabbi Yitzchak also holds that an uncircumcised person may not eat maaser sheini. He derives this halacha from a gezeirah shavah (one of the thirteen principles of Biblical hermeneutics; it links two similar words from dissimilar verses in the Torah) from Pesach. Just as an uncircumcised person, cannot partake in the Pesach offering, so too, he cannot eat maaser sheini. (74a)

The Mishna had stated: All those that are tamei may not eat terumah.

The Gemora asks: How do we know this halacha?

The Gemora answers: Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Yishmael: It is written [Vayikra 22:4]: A man, a man from the offspring of Aaron who is a metzora or a zav shall not eat from the holies until he becomes purified. Which food is equally applicable to all the offspring of Aaron (including men and women)? This must be referring to terumah, and the verse states that if one is tamei, he may not eat the terumah.

The Gemora asks: Perhaps the Torah is referring to the breast and thigh from a shelamim (which is given to a Kohen, and it may be eaten by all his family members)?

The Gemora answers: The breast and thigh from a shelamim are not eaten by all the offspring of Aaron because a Kohenes who married a Yisroel, and becomes widowed or divorced, will not be permitted to eat from the shelamim. (She returns to her father’s house only in respect to terumah.)

The Gemora asks: Terumah is also not eaten by all the offspring of Aaron because a chalalah (a female offspring of a Kohen and a woman who is forbidden to him because he is a Kohen) is not permitted in terumah.

The Gemora answers: A chalalah is not classified as an offspring of Aaron. (74a – 74b)

The Gemora states that one who is tamei is permitted to eat terumah after immersing himself in the mikvah, and waiting for nightfall. He is not required to wait until he brings his atonement offering (the next day).

The Gemora cites a Mishna which teaches this halacha. The Mishna states: If a metzora immersed himself on the seventh day of his waiting period, he is permitted to eat maaser sheini. After nightfall, he is permitted to eat terumah. After he brings his atonement offering, he is permitted to eat kodoshim.

The Gemora cites the Scriptural sources for these halachos. (74b)

[END]