Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Latest Episodes:

Yevamot 57 - May 3, 2 Iyar May 03, 2022

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by the Cohen, Raye & Maybaum families in loving memory of their mother Elisabeth Maybaum, Elisheva bat Yehuda, on her 3rd yahrzeit. "You inspired us, you supported us, you made us laugh. We miss your wise counsel and insights. We miss you."

Today's daf is sponsored by Abi Yonitzman in loving memory of Albert Kobney ben Adel and health to Serina Kobney bat Rachel.

Is the debate in the Mishnah regarding a man who betroths a bat kohen the same debate as a patzua daka who is a kohen who marries a bat Yisrael? The Gemara tries to distinguish between the cases, but Rava and Abaye prove (each in a different way) that they are similar. Why did each not interpret like the other opinion? Rabbi Yochanan asked Rabbi Oshaya a question he could not answer - a patzua daka who was married to the daughter or converts - could she eat truma? There is a dispute between three tannaim regarding the daughter of a convert - is she disqualified to marry a kohen and is she considered "within the community" and can't marry a patzua daka? According to which opinion did Rabb Yochanan ask his question? What is the answer to the question? Rav and Shmuel disagree in a case where there is a chuppah without a betrothal of a woman forbidden to a kohen with a kohen, will she be disqualified from eating truma?

Yevamot 56 - 2nd Day of Rosh Chodesh - May 2, 1 Iyar May 02, 2022

Show notes

Today's day is sponsored by David and Mitzi Geffen in loving memory of David's father, Dr. Abraham Geffen on his yahrzeit.

Today's daf is sponsored in memory of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein zt"l.

Rav and Shmuel disagree regarding whether yibum that is performed in a weaker manner (for example, if it was unwitting) is fully effective or only partially (meaning she would not be allowed to eat truma). Is their debate in a case where she fell to yibum from an engagement or from marriage? Two different versions of the debate are brought and according to each version a statement of Shmuel is brought to show either that he is consistent or that he contradicts himself and a tannaitic source is brought to raise a difficulty against Shmuel. According to the first version, there is a resolution to the difficulty, but according to the second, there is no resolution. Since the braita brought as a difficulty against Shmuel discussed a case of a kohen who became deaf between engagement and marriage, another braita builds on that case – even though the wife cannot eat truma, if they have a child, then she can. What if the child dies? Rabbi Natan and the rabbis disagree about whether or not she can eat truma still. What is the reasoning behind each approach? Raba and Rav Yosef each explain it differently and Abaye raises questions against each of their positions. Rav Sheshet tries to prove from our Mishna as it says "and likewise… those who are disqualified to kohanim, and that is referring to "whether unwitting or intentional, forced or by her will" that a woman who was married to a Yisrael and was raped cannot marry a kohen. But in the end, this word "and likewise" is understood to be referring to something else in the Mishna and can't be used to prove this. Raba said that if a kohen returns to his wife after she was raped and has relations with her, he receives lashes for having relations with a zona. Why does he not receive lashes for impurity? Or perhaps he does? A different version of Raba's statement is brought – he is liable to impurity and not for a zona, as a woman who is raped is not considered a zona. If a daughter of a kohen is a divorcee and marries a kohen, or any other woman who is forbidden to marry a kohen, she can no longer eat truma. What if she was only betrothed to him? Or was betrothed and then he died or divorced her before they even got married?

Yevamot 55 - First Day of Rosh Chodesh Iyar, May 1, 30 Nissan May 01, 2022

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Rochelle Cheifetz in honor of her mother, Chana Cohen, Chana bat Rav Moshe and Tzipora Mashbaum, on her first yahrzeit. "It is still hard to believe that my wonderful and beautiful mother is no longer here to fill her role as matron of our extended family. She dedicated herself to family and Israel. Her beautiful and warm smile, exuberance and guidance are strongly missed."

Today's daf is sponsored by Adi Levi Eitan for a refuah shleima for Chana Sara bat Esther.

The forbidden relationship of one's wife's sister applies to her sister from either her mother or her father. From where is this derived? After unsuccessfully attempting to learn it from one's sister (both) or one's aunt (only if the father and his brother share the same father), it is successfully derived from one's brother's wife who is forbidden both through the mother and the father. From where do we know that one's brother's wife is a brother from either side? It is derived from extra words in Vayikra 18:16. The Gemara suggests other possible derivations from the extra words in the verse, but in the end, conclude that all those can be learned from other verses and therefore this one is used to teach from the mother and the father. If so, why don't we say that yibum applies also to a brother from the mother? A series of drashot on verses from the section of forbidden relationships are brought. Why is karet mentioned by one's sister (Yayikra 20:17) when it could have been derived from the concluding verse in that section? Rabbi Yochanan holds that it teaches that if you performed several forbidden actions with people who were forbidden to you without realizing that it was forbidden, you would be liable to bring a separate sin offering for each one. Rabbi Yitzchak learns that you get karet but not lashes, even if you were warned that you would receive lashes. He derives separate sin offerings from the verse about nidda. Why does one verse say "you will be childless" and another says "you will die childless"? Each refers to a different situation - where you had children previously or you did not have children. Why are both needed? From where do we derive that for violating negative prohibitions involving forbidden relationships, negative prohibitions regarding relationships with kohanim and for violating positive commandments, if one engaged in the initial stages of intercourse, one would be liable? How do we know that initial stages of intercourse can be effective in performing the mitzva of yibum or kiddushin (some think it is referring to marriage)? Why is the term "shichvat zera," cohabitation with seed, mentioned by a designated maidservant, a married woman, and a sotah? Each one comes to exclude a particular case. What is the definition of haaraah, the initial stages of intercourse? Different opinions are brought.

Yevamot 54 - Shabbat April 30, 29 Nissan Apr 29, 2022

Show notes

Presentation in PDF format

What is the case of yibum that could be forced, as yibum does require a level of intent? Several attempts are made to answer this question, most are rejected. From what verse is it derived that one can fulfill yibum even if the act of intercourse was performed unwittingly or under duress? Once the verse is brought, it is questioned by other drashot that are derived from those same words. In the end, the other laws are extrapolated from different verses. If one only engages in the initial part of intercourse with his yevama or with a woman who is forbidden to him, it is considered a valid act of intercourse. From where is this derived? The Gemara brings several options from which to derive it but has a hard time learning from these specific verses to other cases. Rabbi Yona in the end learns it from a woman who is a nidda, combined with a verse at the end of Vayikra Chapter 18 which teaches that all the cases are compared to each other. The Gemara then has to go back to the rejected answers (about his brother's wife who is compared to a nidda and his father and mother's sister) and explain what those verses are coming to teach.

Yevamot 54 - Shabbat April 30, 29 Nissan Apr 29, 2022

Show notes

Presentation in PDF format

Yevamot 53 - April 29, 28 Nissan Apr 29, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 53

If one performed chalitza and then betrothed her, Rabbi Akiva holds the betrothal is ineffective, the rabbis hold it is effective and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that it depends on whether he betrothed her for the purposes of marriage or yibum, as betrothal for purposes of yibum is effective only because of the zika, which in this case no longer exists. After two explanations were brought for the debate between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and the rabbis at the end of Yevamot 52b, there are another four explanations. Each one explains the case in which they disagree a little bit differently. The Mishna had shown that if chalitza or intercourse was the first action taken, there would be nothing after that. However the language of the concluding sentence there only discussed chalitza, not intercourse. The Gemara questions this point and brings two answers. Several lines in the Mishna are compared to other tannaitic or amoraic positions in an attempt to either say our Mishna is not in accordance with that opinion or to say that it can provide support for a particular opinion. A number of these suggestions are rejected as they were based on a misreading and misunderstanding of the Mishna. Questions are also raised on parts of the Mishna that seem unnecessary. They seem to have been placed in the Mishna for stylistic purposes - to bring cases that are parallel to each other. Regarding the debate in the Mishna about intercourse - whether weakened intercourse (one that comes after maamar or get) is effective completely or not, there is a third opinion on the topic. The reasoning of each of the three opinions is explained. Yibum is effective even if any one of the sides performed it unwittingly or under duress. It is effective whether one engaged in the initial stages of intercourse or completed it. The same holds true for all cases of forbidden relations. The Gemara questions the language of the Mishna "even if he performed it unwittingly and she did it intentionally" - why the language "even"? What does it mean "under duress"?

Yevamot 52 - Yom HaShoah - April 28, 27 Nissan Apr 28, 2022

Show notes

Today's daf is dedicated for Yom HaShoah in memory of all those who died in the Holocaust.

Today's daf is sponsored by Suri (Lenore) Davis-Stern in honor of her parents, Rabbi Ruby Davis ztl and Susan Davis. "They prioritized torah learning in our home. With this daf, I complete Shas!"

Today's daf is sponsored by Caroline Ben-Ari on the 12th yahrzeit of her father, Ivor Rhodes (Yisrael ben Meir ve-Sara). "Dad was the quiet, undemonstrative member of the family. He was hard-working, caring, generous and honest to a fault--a true gentleman... with a wicked sense of humor and a lifelong addiction to puns. Today I pledge to make as many terrible puns as I can in his honor."

The Mishna stated that if one performed maamar and then had intercourse with his yevama, that is the mitzvah. What does it mean "that is the mitzva"? Does it show the Mishna supports Rav Huna's statement that this is the ideal way to perform the mitzvah? If not, how can that sentence be explained? Rav Huna also said that if one had intercourse and then performed maamar, it would also be effective. But doesn't one receive lashes if one skips maamar and goes straight to intercourse with the yevama? Yes, but the lashes are rabbinic so on a Torah level it would be effective. Rav would give lashes to men who betrothed through intercourse or betrothed on the street or without a rearrangement of the families or who canceled a get or gave a get with a declaration that the giving of the get was under duress, or one who acted brazenly to a messenger of the court, or didn't come to the court after 30 days to repeal an ex-communication, or lives in his father-in-law's house (for fear something may transpire between him and his mother-in-law. Nehardea had a different version of when Rav would give lashes. What would the ketuba of a yibum marriage include? If a get is written incorrectly (it says she is divorced from him and not permitted to any other man - which is normally not an effective get), and was given to a yevama, would it be effective to forbid her to his relatives and also forbid him and his brothers from performing yibum with her? A similar question is asked with regard to a case of a get with a stipulation given before marriage "When I marry you, this will be your get." What if a get is given specifically to remove the zika or only the maamar - is it effective or not? Rav establishes that the Mishna goes according to Rabbi Akiva who holds that in negative prohibitions, marriage is not effective. A question is raised against this from a different statement of Rabbi Akiva. That difficulty is resolved and a braita is brought to support Rav. If one performed chalitza and then betrothed her, Rabbi Akiva holds the betrothal is ineffective, the rabbis hold it is effective and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that it depends on whether he betrothed her for the purposes of marriage or yibum, as betrothal for purposes of yibum is effective only because of the zika, which in this case no longer exists. Rav Yosef compares Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi's position to a case of one who hoes the property of a convert who died (ownerless property) thinking it was his own. Abaye rejects the comparison and suggests a comparison to a different case which is actually effective and therefore reinterprets Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi's position.

Yevamot 51 - April 27, 26 Nissan Apr 27, 2022

Show notes

Presentation in PDF format

Today's daf is sponsored by Ellie Gellman, In memory of her husband, Reuven Gellman, Reuven Shimon ben Shraga Dov whose yahrzeit was on Chol HaMoed Pesach. A talmid chacham, research scientist, and teacher, he loved the intersection of science and Torah learning and especially enjoyed the obscure and improbable sugiyot. I know he would have had something fascinating to say about every daf.

Rabban Gamliel and the rabbis debate whether get after get or maamar after maamar is effective. What is the reason behind each opinion? Rava brings an explanation for Rabban Gamliel but Abaye raises a difficulty and therefore provides a different explanation. Abaye explains further that according to Rabban Gamliel, a "weakened" intercourse - meaning, after a get was given to one yevama, the yabam had intercourse with another yevama (the co-wife), is stronger in one sense than maamar but weaker in another. A braita is brought which explains in further detail the opinions of Rabban Gamliel and the rabbis by providing specific cases. How do their opinions fit in with Shmuel and Rav regarding zika and "weakened" chalitza? If Rabban Gamliel holds there is no maamar after maamar, then why couldn't one do yibum with the first yevama? Rabbi Yochanan collected various statements made by various rabbis and showed that all of them hold similarly that maamar has the power to acquire.

Yevamot 50 - April 26, 25 Nissan Apr 26, 2022

Show notes

Presentation in PDF format

Today's daf is dedicated in honor of Jon and Yael Cohen on their 24th wedding anniversary. Mazel tov!

How is the last issue Menashe had with Isaiah resolved? If the Torah said that one has a set amount of years to live and Isaiah said that Chizkiyahu was given fifteen extra years to live, how can that be? The answer is that there is a tanaitic debate on how to answer the question. One opinion is that one has a set amount of years and if one is worthy, one will live to that age, but if one is not, the number of years is reduced. Another opinion is that if one is worthy, one can get more than what was allotted. Rav Yosef comments on the last part of the Mishna which had many different cases of when a sister dies, her husband or ex-husband can marry her sister - by saying that here is an example of where Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi added something that was unnecessary. Is there meaning to a get given to one wife after a get was already given to her co-wife or maamar performed on one wife after maamar was already performed on the other or intercourse to fulfill the mitzva of yibum after it was already done to the other or chalitza after chalitza? The rabbis and Rabban Gamliel disagree. The Mishna brings every possible permutation of get, maamar, intercourse and chalitza that were performed either by two brothers on one yevama or one yabam on two wives waiting for yibum. The main ramifications are - are the woman's relatives forbidden to the yabam? If a betrothal was performed, would it be valid? Does one still need to do chalitza or is the yibum obligation taken care of? How strong are each of these actions in removing the zika (connection) of the yevamot to the yabam? Chalitza or intercourse end the yibum requirement entirely - but is that only true if it was the first action done or it is even if it took place after another action such as maamar or get took place? This is also a subject of debate. Why is giving a get to a yevama effective to prohibit the brothers from performing yibum on her or any of the other wives, if they a get is not effective for someone who isn't married? Why is maamar effective to forbid the yabam from marrying any of the other wives? Why according to the rabbis are intercourse after get or maamar not enough to end the yibum obligation but chalitza after get or maamar would be sufficient?

Yevamot 49 - April 25, 24 Nissan Apr 25, 2022

Show notes

What makes someone a mamzer? There are three different opinions about whether it is a child born from forbidden relationships that are just negative prohibitions (Rabbi Akiva), ones that are punishable by karet (Shimon HaTimni) and ones that are punishable by death by the court (Rabbi Yehoshua). The Mishna rules like Rabbi Shimon HaTimni but also brings a support for Rabbi Yehoshua's opinion from a book recording the lineage of people that mentioned a mamzer from a relationship of a man with a married woman which is punishable by the court. If one's wife or one's yevama dies, one can marry her sister. That is only permitted upon death, but is not permitted upon divorce or chalitza. There are three different ways to understand Rabbi Akiva's opinion. How are these different ways, as well as the opinions of Rabbi Shimon HaTimni and Rabbi Yehoshua derived from the verses in the Torah? All opinions agree that one who sleeps with his wife when she is in nidda or his wife after she has been unfaithful, the child is not a mamzer. The reason is because bethrothal takes effect in these situations. Regarding a woman waiting for yibum who is betrothed by a different man, there is a debate if the betrothal is valid. Therefore, it wasn't mentioned in the list of those whose offspring are not mamzerim. There were three things listed in this scroll with lineages that was mentioned in the Mishna: That a particular person was a mamzer (as mentioned in the Mishna), the Mishna of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov is kav v'naki, and that Menashe the king killed Isaiah. Why did Menashe kill Isaiah? He pronounced him guilty for going against three things that Moshe Rabbeinu said. What were the three things? What could Isaiah have answered to Menashe and why didn't he? How was Isaiah killed?

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Daf Yomi for Women – Hadran

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected