Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Latest Episodes:

Yevamot 28 - April 4, 3 Nissan Apr 04, 2022

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Tina Senders Lamm for a refuah shleima of Fruma Devorah bat Chana.

Rabbi Yochanan had answered the difficulty raised by Rabbi Yosi son of Rabbi Chanina based on the Mishna by rejecting the Mishna. The Gemara suggests all sorts of other possibilities Rabbi Yochanan could have used without having to reject the reading of the Mishna and then explains the weakness of each suggestion. Another question is raised against Rabbi Yochanan from the continuation of our Mishna. To resolve this, the Gemara answers that the case in the Mishna happened in a particular order. There are different versions brought of the debate between Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel mentioned in the Mishna regarding a case where both brothers went ahead (against the law) and married both sisters, do they need to divorce them? A comparison is made between the cases in our Mishna and cases brought in the Mishna on Yevamot 20. Since they are based on the same principle, why are the cases in our Mishna necessary? Why was it necessary for our Mishna to bring a case when two sisters are forbidden to both brothers to whom they fall to yibum, if it already brought a case of one forbidden to one brother? Couldn't we derive one from the other? Why was the second part of the Mishna brought (with two women who are forbidden to two brothers) when that could have been derived from the earlier case in the Mishna of one sister forbidden to one of the brothers? "This is the case of..." What is it coming to exclude and why? The braita of Rabbi Chiya is brought who connected the Mishna to the first Mishna in Yevamot and said that all of those cases of forbidden relationships (15) can have a case of two sisters who are each forbidden to one of the brothers and therefore can each do yibum with the other. There are three interpretations brought as to whether it can really apply to all the cases of the Mishna or not.

Yevamot 27 - April 3, 2 Nissan Apr 03, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 27

Presentation in PDF format.

Today's daf is dedicated by Natasha Shabat in memory of Miriam Chaya bat R'fael, taken from us too soon, on March 24th. "From St. Paul Academy, to Harvard, to my many trips back to Minneapolis over the years, I always looked up to you as a model of yirat shamayim and pure love of HaShem."

Two explanations are brought to explain Shmuel's position of what is done when three sisters fall to yibum to two brothers. The first explanation is that one brother can do chalitza for all three. A question is raised on this as Shmuel does not think that a weak chalitza will work - if so, how does he permit one brother to do chalitza for all the sisters when there is another brother who can do a better chalitza to the second sister. As a result of this difficulty, the first explanation is modified. Once Shmuel's second explanation is brought, the Gemara delves into the statement of Shmuel regarding a weakened chalitza and discusses various statements of Shmuel regarding situations where it is preferable to do chalitza with one wife over the other. Again, there are two different explanations brought to explain one of the cases that Shmuel brings. One assumes Shmuel doesn't hold by zika and the other assumes he does. Another question regarding preferences for chalitza is asked and answered. If two sisters fall to one brother, what is done? What if one of them dies? Does it matter which one? Rav and Rabbi Yochanan disagree on this matter. A question is raised on each opinion.

Yevamot 26 - Shabbat April 2, Rosh Chodesh Nissan, 1 Nissan Apr 01, 2022

Show notes

Presentation in PDF format

If the men mentioned in the previous Mishnayot were married to other women at the time they testified/ruled, etc. and then their wife died, they would be allowed to marry the women mentioned. Is this the case only if they died and are not divorced? On what does it depend? Does this mean that if a woman had two husbands who die (as first he testified that her husband died, then her second husband died) she can still marry a third time, as we don't hold like Rebbi who holds that a chazaka is created by two instances, not three? If the women were married to others in the interim, then also, they could marry. In the cases where they are forbidden to marry them, she is permitted to his son or brother. Why is this the case, when it says in a different case that when the wife is forbidden, her daughter, mother, and sister are forbidden as well? The third chapter starts with a case of four brothers of which two of them marry two sisters, and then die childless. The women must do chalitza and not yibum as each man theoretically has to marry two sisters and that is forbidden. The Gemara explains this in two possible ways. The first, because we hold there is zika (when she falls to yibum to him, it is as if they are married, and he has the zika of two sisters which is forbidden. The second, perhaps after the third brother does yibum with one, the fourth brother will die, and then there will be no opportunity to perform the mitzva of yibum (or chalitza) as she is forbidden to him on account of his wife, her sister and it is forbidden to cause the mitzva of yibum to be canceled. The Mishna also listed a number of unique cases of four brothers and two sisters where each one can marry one of the brothers or one can and the other cannot. What if they did yibum anyway? Do they have to get divorced or not? According to Rabbi Eliezer, it is a debate between Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel. There is a debate between Rav and Shmuel regarding a case of three sisters who fell to yibum to three brothers. First, they understand Rav is talking about when all the brothers died at once. They correct it to a case of each of the brothers dying one after the other with the chalitza of each wife being performed before the next brother dies. Shmuel's opinion will be explained in two ways in the continuation of this sugya.

Yevamot 26 - Shabbat April 2, Rosh Chodesh Nissan, 1 Nissan Apr 01, 2022

Show notes

Presentation in PDF format

Yevamot 25 - April 1, 29 Adar 2 Apr 01, 2022

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Elisheva Gray in honor of Avivah Zornberg. "Mazal tov to my dear teacher and friend on the birth of your new book! Todah Rabah for continuing to illuminate the pages of Torah with your unique voice, your grace and your deep well of Jewish and worldly wisdom. Mazal tov, and may you go from strength to strength."

If one is suspected of having had a sexual relationship with a married woman, she needs to get divorced from her husband and if she marries the other man, she is forced to get divorced. According to Rav, this is case where there were witnesses and it is clear that she committed adultery. On the previous daf, Rav Sheshet questions this understanding based on a braita and the Gemara answers for Rav. Another braita is also brought to raise a doubt on Rav. Two answers are brought – either the case is referring to a different scenario or the braita is Rebbi's opinion but Rav disagrees. Rebbi is quoted in a braita as taking suspicions seriously when one has reason to think his wife has been with another man. The halacha is like Rebbi and Rav – how can that be? It depends on whether the rumor stops immediately or continues. What is considered "immediately"? The Mishna in Gitin 45b brings two cases – a husband who divorces his wife as he suspects her of cheating on him or because of vows she made. He is not allowed to remarry her if he wishes to. Raba bar Huna questions: What if he remarries her anyway, do they have to get divorced? Can we use the case in our Mishna (where we force the second husband – the one suspected of cheating with her - to divorce her) to answer the question? Are the cases comparable? If one brings a get from overseas and says it was written and signed in front of him (a requirement for a get brought from overseas) or he testifies that her husband died or he killed her husband on his own or with others, the woman is free to marry anyone except for him, since the evidence relies solely on him and therefore there is concern he is lying out of self-interest. Rabbi Yehuda doesn't accept his testimony at all if he says "I killed her." How can we accept his testimony at all if he says "I killed her", according to Tana Kama – as according to Rav Yosef, if one testifies that someone sodomized him willingly, his testimony is not accepted as he is making himself into a sinner and one who sins is not an acceptable witness! So why here, is his testimony acceptable? Do we need to say that RavYosef holds like Rabbi Yehuda or can it be explained in some other way? Perhaps we can distinguish between testimony to "free" a woman from being an aguna and the case of sodomy. Why does the Mishna mention both cases of "I killed her" and "we killed her"? What is the difference? If a chacham couldn't nullify the vow of a woman who forbade herself to her husband, therefore causing them to divorce, he cannot marry her. But if he was on a court in front of which she refused marriage to her husband (miun) or performed chalitza, he can. Can we infer from here that on can nullify a vow before one person – if so, in what situation? Is it only in front of three people that we don't suspect him of self-interest? In another source, it seems to indicate two is enough! In all these cases, if he married her anyway, does he have to divorce her? Can it be derived from the previous Mishna and if so, from what case?

Yevamot 24 - March 31, 28 Adar 2 Mar 31, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 24

Presentation in PDF format

The Gemara compares the case of the Mishna where after chalitza is performed with one sister, the other can do yibum and also if they both married the two sisters, we let them stay married, to the case of the Mishna in chapter 3 where both sisters can only do chalitza and if they do get marry the brothers, they must get divorced. The case here is one of doubt whereas the other is a case where each sister needs to do yibum, therefore we are stricter there as the connection of the yabam to the wives is stronger. A kohen is forbidden by rabbinic law to marry a woman who went through chalitza. Since it is only by rabbinic law, in our case, if he married the woman who underwent chalitza with the other husband's brother, he can stay married. Preference is given to the older brother to do yibum. From where is this derived? Drashot on other parts of that verse are brought as well, such as the brother who does yibum inherits his brother's property, one who is castrated is exempt from yibum. Why is the verse about the firstborn not used to derive other possible things, such as, only when there is a firstborn is yibum performed? If there is suspicion that one had a sexual relationship with a female slave or non-Jewish woman and the slave is freed or the non-Jewish woman converted, one cannot marry them. But if they did, they can stay married. However if one is suspected of having had a sexual relationship with a married woman, she needs to get divorced from her husband and if she marries the other man, she is forced to get divorced. Is this in a case where there were witnesses and it is clear that she committed adultery or not? Is it affected by whether or not she had children from her first marriage? Why?

Yevamot 23 - March 30, 27 Adar 2 Mar 30, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 23

Presentation in PDF format

Rabbi Yosi bar Yehuda derived from the verse "the daughter of his father's wife" to exclude a daughter of a union of his father and a Canaanite slave or a non-Jewish woman from being considered one's sister. The drasha is based on the word "wife" which seems to imply proper marriage. The Gemara questions why that case was limited, but others were not, such as, a sister born out of wedlock or from a prohibited relationship (either regular negative commandment, or one punishable by karet). In the end, only the non-Jewish woman is derived from the verse regarding the "daughter of his father's wife" and a different verse is used to derive a child from a Canaanite slave. From where do the rabbis derive the law about a non-Jewish woman (since they use the "daughter of his father's wife" to teach that one who has relations with his sister who is also his father's wife's daughter is punished double)? They derive it from the verse that says not to marry off your daughters to gentiles as they will turn your son (grandson) away. This is the verse from where we learn that a child's Jewishness goes by the mother. That leads us to say that if a man has a child with a non-Jewish woman, the child is not Jewish and therefore not considered one's sister. If a person betrothed a woman and isn't sure if he betrothed her or her sister, he needs to divorce them both. If he died childless before he divorces her, his brother does chalitza to each. If he has two brothers, one does chalitza with one of the women and then the other can do yibum with the other. What if both brothers went ahead and married the sisters (one to each)? What if all these scenarios took place with two different men who each betrothed one of the women but do not know which one? The Mishna plays out all the scenarios in the previous case, but with two and has some more permutations as well. The Gemara tries to see whether we can learn something from our Mishna about whether or not betrothal is valid in a case where the man and woman are not permitted to have sexual relations with each other.

Yevamot 22 - March 29. 26 Adar 2 Mar 29, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 22

Presentation in PDF format

Today's daf is sponsored by Rochel Cheifetz for the refuah shleima of Rabbi Chaim Wasserman, Rav Chaim Tzvi Ben Devora.

Today's daf is sponsored by Josh Blicker in honor of his wife, Atara on their wedding anniversary. "Here's to more years of depth in, marriage, Torah, and in life!"

Today's daf is sponsored by Brenda Coren and Achsah Weinberg in honor of their granddaughter, Talia Coren, on her 15th Birthday. "She started to learn Daf Yomi this past summer. We love you so much, and are proud of you too."

Is the wife of one's paternal great uncle or one's paternal great aunt (grandfather's sister) forbidden? Even though it is not on the list of secondary forbidden relations in the braita, it seems to be among those left off the list. All the ones in Rabbi Chiya's list were left off as well. Ameimar permits those cases (great aunts) and Rav Hillel questions him on this based on a list of Mar the son of Rabana who had 16 – eight of the braita, six of Rabbi Chiya and these two. In the end, they add another and connect these two to count as one (great aunt) but the list of Rabana is rejected as he hadn't signed off on it and therefore it is considered unreliable. Rabbi Chiya's list of forbidden relations by rabbinic law is brought and some questions are asked about it. Are the rabbinic laws about forbidden relationships relevant to converts, as once they convert, they are considered born again and not actually related to their relatives? Can one accept witnesses from a convert and his brother? Does it make a difference if they share the same mother or father? All brothers through the father are obligated in yibum, even mamzerim, but not ones born to a non-Jewish woman or a Caananite slave. Any child exempts the father's wife from yibum, even if the child is a mamzer. He/she is considered his child for all intents and purposes. For example, a kohen can become impure to the child upon death and the child receives the death penalty for hitting or cursing one's parent. But isn't that law only true for ones who observe the laws, not ones who sin, such as one who gives birth to a mamzer? If one has relations with one's sister who also shares both parents, is one obligated two sets of lashes, based on two different verses or only one? This is a subject of debate and the different readings of the verses according to each opinion are brought and explained.

Yevamot 21 - March 28, 25 Adar 2 Mar 28, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 21

Presentation in PDF format

Today's daf is sponsored by Rabbi Dan Ross and Rabbi Jade Sank Ross in honor of the birth of their daughter Adina Sydney Ross, Adina Sapir bat Harav Daniel Zalman v'harabah Yofi Channah. "May the joy of your arrival on Erev Purim follow you throughout your life, may you live to see your world fulfilled, may your destiny be for worlds still to come, and may you trust in generations past and yet to be."

If a high priest performs yibum with a widow, is the yibum effective to exempt a second wife? This is a debate between Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Elazar. A difficulty is raised against one of the opinions. From where can we find a hint in the Torah for the rabbinic extension of the prohibitions for forbidden relationships to other relatives? Four different verses are brought. A braita is brought which lists eight relatives that are included in the rabbinic decree. One of them mentioned is by Torah law – if so, why does it appear here? Rav says there are four relatives that are forbidden only that generation but it is not extended to earlier or later generations. What are the four cases? Also, one's daughter-in-law is forbidden by Torah law. Therefore, it is assumed that it is referring to one's daughter's daughter-in-law, who is forbidden on account of one's son's daughter-in-law. Is the wife of one's maternal half-uncle through their mother (the uncle and her mother have the same mother) forbidden? Why is this not considered a decree on a decree? To answer the question they bring a statement of Rav Yehuda bar Shila that any familial relationship where a woman is forbidden, if it is a man, his wife is forbidden as well. Since there are a number of exceptions to that rule that Rava states, the assumption is that he is referring to the case at hand. What is the difference between his case and the exceptions? What about the wife of one's paternal great uncle or one's paternal great aunt through his grandfather?

Yevamot 20 - March 27, 24 Adar 2 Mar 27, 2022

Show notes

Study Guide Yevamot 20

Presentation in PDF format

Rav Menashe raises a question on the reason for the rabbis' opinion regarding a brother who was born after the husband died. The Gemara then raises a similar type question on the reason for Rabbi Shimon's opinion. Both questions are resolved. The Mishna brings different categories or situations of a woman who can be in a forbidden relationship with her yabam. In some, there is no chalitza or yibum as the woman is exempt (as was learned in previous Mishnas). If it is isur mitzva or isur kedusha, they do chalitza. Isur mitzva is relationships that were forbidden by rabbinic law. Isur kedusha is ones that are only a negative transgression (lav), not one punishable by karet or by death in court. If two sisters fall to yibum to a brother, and one is forbidden to the brother, the other can do yibum or chalitza. An inference is made from wording in the Mishna (different versions are brought). Which type of forbidden relationship does the sister case relate to? Isur mitzva and isur kedusha are defined in an opposite manner by Rabbi Yehuda. The Gemara explains the reasoning behind each one's explanation. One of the cases mentioned in the Mishna is a widow to a high priest. As it doesn't specify in the Mishna, the Gemara assumes it refers to a case of yibum, even if she was just engaged and not married to his brother. This raises a question - why doesn't the positive commandment of yibum override the negative commandment of a high priest to marry a widow? Five answers are brought to this question and questions are raised against each answer. According to some of the answers, it is by Torah law; according to others, it is a rabbinic decree.

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Daf Yomi for Women – Hadran

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected