Daf Yomi - Kesuvos 6 - Highlights

Rav’s Ruling Regarding Initial Cohabitation on Saturday Night

The Gemora had inquired: May one cohabit with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbos? The Gemora explains the inquiry: Is the blood (which is produced when the hymen is broken) in the womb stored up (and cohabitation would he permitted, since the blood flows out of its own accord, and not because of any wound), or is it the result of a wound (caused by the tearing of the vaginal walls when they separate from each other), and therefore be prohibited?

In the Beis Medrash of Rav, they said that Rav permitted it and Shmuel prohibited it. In Nehardea (where Shmuel lived), they said: Rav prohibited it and Shmuel permitted it.

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: The mnemonic to remember who said which version is: These make it lenient for themselves, and these make it lenient for themselves.

The Gemora asks: Does Rav actually allow it? But surely Rav Simi bar Chizkiyah said in the name of Rav: One is forbidden to push a cloth into a barrel on Yom Tov, although he does not intend to perform a prohibited act of labor. The issue at hand is that when one presses on the cloth, he will be unintentionally squeezing out beer, which is forbidden to do on Yom Tov. (The prohibition involved is either melaben, whitening the cloth by cleaning it, or a derivative of the melachah of dash, threshing, as taking the wine out of the cloth is akin to removing kernels of grain from their husks. Apparently, Rav follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah, who prohibits unintentional acts, and not Rabbi Shimon, who permits them!?)

The Gemora answers: Since it is inevitable that beer will be removed from the cloth, even Rabbi Shimon, who maintains that one is not liable for an unintentional act, will agree that here one is liable. For Abaye and Rava both said: Rabbi Shimon agrees that when the act performed is a pesik reishei, literally defined as ‘if one cuts of the chicken’s head, is it not certain that it will die?’ i.e. inevitable, that one is forbidden to perform the act even if unintentionally. (Thus, although one does not intend to squeeze the beer out when pushing the cloth into the barrel, it is inevitable that he will squeeze the beer out, and it is forbidden.)

The Gemora asks: But surely Rav Chiya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: The halacha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehudah? And Rav Chanan bar Ami said in the name of Shmuel: The halacha is in accordance with Rabbi Shimon.

The Gemora answers: In truth, Rav follows Rabbi Yehudah’s opinion that unintentional acts are prohibited, but he nevertheless, rules that one may cohabit with his virgin bride on Shabbos. According to the version which stated that the blood in the womb stored up, Rav permits cohabitation because he is doing damage (to the woman) in regard to the opening (because it destroys the commodity of her virginity, and one who acts in a destructive manner on Shabbos, is exempt). According to the version which stated that the blood coming out is the result of a wound (caused by the tearing of the vaginal walls when they separate from each other), Rav permits cohabitation because he is doing damage (to the woman) in making the wound. (6a)

Hymenal Bleeding

Rav Chisda asks on Shmuel (who rules that one may not cohabit with his virgin bride on Shabbos) from a Mishna in Niddah: If a girl, who has not reached the age of menstruation, got married, Beis Shamai say: We give her four nights (where she is permitted to have marital relations) and Beis Hillel say: We give her until the wound is healed up. (The blood that comes out is attributed to the wound and not to menstruation. Ordinarily, after the first cohabitation, further cohabitation is forbidden until the menstruation, is over. But in this case, in which the young bride had never yet had any menstruation, it is assumed that the blood is not due to menstruation, but to the wound caused by cohabitation. According to Beis Shamai, this assumption holds good for four nights, and according to Beis Hillel it holds good until the wound is healed up.) If she has reached the age of menstruation (but she had in fact not yet seen blood; that is, she had the maturity for it, but the maturity had not yet manifested itself; a girl has reached the period of puberty when she is twelve years and one day old) and she married, Beis Shamai say: We give her the first night (even several times during the night is permitted) and Beis Hillel say: We give her until Saturday night, a total of four nights (assuming that they got married on Wednesday).

The Gemora analyzes the Mishna: Does it not mean that if he had not yet cohabited with his wife, he may cohabit with her even on Shabbos? (The question presumes that ‘we give her until Saturday night, a total of four nights’ means any one of the four nights, and thus he may cohabit with her on Shabbos; this indicates that one may cohabit with a virgin on Shabbos, for if her hymen has been ruptured completely by the previous cohabitations, there would be no basis to attribute any subsequent bleeding to hymenal bleeding, and cohabitation would be prohibited.)

Rava answers: The Mishna is discussing a case when he already cohabited with her (fully, and nevertheless, all subsequent bleeding can still be attributed to the hymen, and not due to menstruation).

The Gemora asks: If so, what novelty is the Mishna teaching us?

The Gemora answers: It is stated to show that cohabitation is permitted on Shabbos even if it will result in further bleeding. For Shmuel said: One may enter into a narrow opening on Shabbos even though he will cause pebbles to break loose. (6a – 6b)

Preoccupied

Rav Yosef asked on Shmuel from the following Mishna: The groom is exempt from reciting kerias shema from the first night of his marriage until after Motzoei Shabbos if he did not yet cohabit with his virgin bride. (He is exempt from the mitzvah of shema because he is thinking about the mitzvah of procreation, and one who is engaged in one mitzvah is exempt from performing another mitzvah. This only applies if he is marrying a virgin, when he is worried that he will not be able to rupture the hymen and complete cohabitation.) Isn’t this exemption based on the fact that he wants to cohabit with her, and nevertheless, he is permitted to cohabit with her on Friday night? (We see that he may cohabit with his virgin wife on Shabbos.)

Abaye answers: No! He is preoccupied with the thought that he has failed to cohabit with her.

Rava asks: Is one exempt from performing a mitzvah because he is preoccupied with another matter (that is not a mitzvah)? If someone’s ship sank at the sea, will he be exempt from reciting shema because he is thinking about his loss?

If you will say that he is indeed exempt, but surely Rabbi Abba bar Zavda said in the name of Rav: A mourner is required to observe all mitzvos except for Tefillin which is called pe’er, glory, and a mourner is not allowed to glorify himself. (The source for this ruling is from a verse in Yechezkel, where HaShem instructed Yechezkel regarding the laws of mourning and HaShem told Yechezkel explicitly that he should don his Tefillin. This commandment implies that all other mourners are not permitted to don Tefillin. A mourner, although he is thinking about his sorrow, he is not preoccupied with performing a mitzvah and for this reason he is still obligated to observe mitzvos.)

Rather, Rava says: It is a Tannaic dispute. One braisa states: If he did not cohabit with her the first night, he is exempt from reciting kerias shema even on the second night (Thursday night). If he did not cohabit with her the on the second night, he is exempt from reciting kerias shema even on the third night (Friday night). However, it was taught in another braisa: He is only exempt on the first and second night, but not on the third (Friday night, because this braisa maintains that it is forbidden to cohabit with a virgin on Shabbos).

The Gemora cites another braisa where the Tannaim dispute this point: One who marries a virgin is prohibited from cohabiting with her for the first time on Shabbos. The Chachamim, however, permit him.

The Gemora asks: Who is the Chachamim?

Rabbah answers: It is the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who holds that an unintentional act is permitted on Shabbos.

Abaye asked: But Rabbi Shimon agrees that when the act performed is a pesik reishei, literally defined as ‘if one cuts of the chicken’s head, is it not certain that it will die?’ i.e. inevitable, that one is forbidden to perform the act even if unintentionally?

Rabbah answers: The braisa is not referring to the Babylonians who dare not skilled in cohabiting on an angle (without causing bleeding), but rather, the braisa is referring to people who are skilled regarding the possibility of cohabiting on an angle (and therefore it is not inevitable that bleeding will occur). (6b)

Bursting a Boil

Rabbi Ami asked on Shmuel from the following Mishna: One who bursts a boil on Shabbos; if his intention is to create an opening for the boil so that air can enter and the boil will heal, he is liable for performing a melachah on Shabbos, but if his intention, however, was to remove the pus from the boil, he is exempt and such an act is permissible.

The Gemora answers: There (by the boil) the blood is stored up (in the abscess) and is entirely loose (from the flesh), whereas here (by the virgin), the blood is stored up in the womb, but is not entirely loose. (6b – 7a)

[END]