Previous Daf

YEVAMOS 45

Ask A Question

click for question
1)
(a) According to (our initial understanding of) Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan, Shimon ha'Teimani (whom he refers to as 'everybody') agrees that a baby who is born from a slave or from a Nochri and a bas Yisrael is a Mamzer (despite the fact that it is only a Chayvei Lavin) - because (like Chayvei Kerisos) Kidushin is not effective by them.
(b) We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... in Vayera "Shevu Lachem Poh im ha'Chamor" - 'Am ha'Domeh la'Chamor' (that just as Kidushin is not effective by a donkey, so too, is it not effective by a slave.
2. ... in Va'eschanan "Lo Tis'chaten Bam" - that Kidushin is not effective by the seven nations of Cana'an, either.
3. ... in Ki Setzei "v'Achar-Kein Tavo Eilehah u'Ve'altah" (with regard to a woman captured in war) - that that Kidushin is not effective by other Nochrim (besides the seven nations) either.
(c) And we learn that the Kidushin of a (male) Nochri is not effective either - from a Nochris (with a 'Mah Matzinu').
(d) The She'iltos d'Rebbi Acha'i Gaon learns that there is no Chupah by Nochrim from "v'Hi Be'ulas Ba'al". He learns ...
1. ... that there is no Kidushei Kesef - from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Chupah.
2. ... that there is no Kidushei Bi'ah or Kidushei Shtar - because we learn all the three forms of Kidushin (Kesef, Shtar and Bi'ah) from each other with a Hekesh).

click for question
2)
(a) 'Akum v'Eved ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael, ha'Vlad Mamzer - Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah Omer, Ein Mamzer Ela mi'Mi she'Isuro Ervah v'Anush Kares'.
(b) Rebbi Shimon ben Yehudah who holds like Shimon ha'Teimani, (that the child of Chayvei Lavin is not a Mamzer),
- also holds that a baby who is born from a slave or from a Nochri and a bas Yisrael is not a Mamzer, disproving our initial version of Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan's statement.

click for question
3)
(a) We therefore conclude that the 'everybody agrees' referred to by Rabah bar bar Chanah is Rebbi, who says - that the Mishnah in Perek Raban Gamliel 'Ein Bi'ah Achar Chalitzah' goes according to Rebbi Akiva, who considers a Chalutzah like an Ervah, but that he did not concur with it.
(b) The new version of Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan's statement is - that even though Rebbi disagrees with the Mishnah in Raban Gamliel (and the son of a Chalutzah l'Shuk is not a Mamzer), he concedes however, that Akum v'Eved ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael, ha'Vlad Mamzer.
(c) This opinion is based on a statement by Rav Dimi, who, when he came from Eretz Yisrael, cited Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi, in the name of Rabeinu - that 'Oved Kochavim v'Eved ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael, ha'Vlad Mamzer'.
(d) 'Rabeinu' in Eretz Yisrael, is - Rebbi.

click for question
4)
(a) When Rebbi Ami ruled that the baby of a certain redeemed bas Yisrael who was pregnant from a Nochri, would be a Mamzer, on the basis of the ruling of Rebbi Yochanan, Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Chanina, who all concurred with that ruling - Rav Yosef commented that mentioning all those names was no big deal, seeing as he could quote just as impressive a list of Amora'im who hold that the child is Kasher (Rav and Shmuel in Bavel, and Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi and bar Kapara or the Ziknei Darom in Eretz Yisrael).
(b) According to Rav Yosef - Rebbi Ami's ruling is based on Rebbi (as quoted by Rav Dimi Amar Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi), whose opinion overrides that of the Amora'im.
(c) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi holds that the child is a 'Mekulkal'. He cannot have meant 'Mekulkal l'Kahal' - because we just quoted him as saying 'ha'Vlad Kasher (l'Kahal)'.

click for question
5)
(a) Everybody agrees that the child of a Nochri ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael, is Pagum li'Kehunah - which they learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from an Almanah l'Kohen Gadol (whose Lav is restricted to a Kohen Gadol, how much so our case, where the Lav applies to every woman - whether she is a Kohenes, a Leviyah or a Yisraelis).
(b) When they use the expression 'Bnah Pagum', it cannot be taken literally - because, on the one hand, it is obvious that the son of Nochri is not a Kohen, and on the other, there is no reason why he should be forbidden to marry a Kohenes (since Kohanos are not forbidden to marry men who are Pasul li'Kehunah). Consequently, they can only have meant 'Bitah Pegumah'.
(c) We ask the same Kashya on the 'Kal va'Chomer' from Almanah as we asked in the previous Sugya (that Almanah l'Kohen Gadol is different because she herself becomes a Chalalah) - and we answer that the woman in our case does indeed become Pasul too, as Rebbi Yochanan quoting Rebbi Shimon (or Rebbi Yishmael) specifically said.
(d) We learn from the Pasuk "u'Bas Kohen Ki Siheyeh Almanah u'Gerushah, v'Shavah el Beis Avihah ... " - that when a Yisrael dies, leaving behind an Almanah who is a Kohenes, and no children, the widow or the divorcee is permitted to return to her father's house and to eat Terumah, but only because she becomes an Almanah or a Gerushah, but not if she had relations with someone from whom she cannot become an Almanah or a Gerushah (such as an Akum or an Eved).

click for question
6)
(a) Ravin disagrees with Rav Dimi's quotation of Rebbi (that the child of a Nochri ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael is a Mamzer). In his opinion - Rebbi Nasan and Rebbi taught that the child is Kasher.
(b) Rav concurs with this ruling. When he ruled that that man who was the son of a Nochri ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael was Kasher - the man asked him for his daughter's hand in marriage.
(c) Shimi bar Chiya supported the man - because, if Rav would not give him his daughter, nobody else would.
(d) When Shimi bar Chiya persisted - Rav said that, even if he was like Yehoshua ben Nun, he would not give him his daughter, (because the children would be Pesulim li'Kehunah - Maharsha).

click for question
7)
(a) When the man refused to leave - Rav gave him an Ayin ha'Ra and he died.
(b) Rav Yehudah told the son of a Nochri ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael that he should either hide in a place where he was unknown or marry a woman like himself. Rava told a man with the same status - to go into Galus or to marry a woman like himself.
(c) They must both hold like Rebbi and Rav - because otherwise, they would never have issued a ruling permitting the men concerned to go to a place where they were unknown and to marry a Bas Yisrael.

click for question
8)
(a) They asked Rabah about the status of a child who is born to a Bas Yisrael from a Chatzi Eved and Chatzi ben Chorin. Rabah figured that if the child of a complete Eved and a Bas Yisrael is Kasher, then why should that of a Chatzi Eved and Chatzi ben Chorin be any worse?
(b) Yet Rav Yehudah rules Pasul, in spite of his previous ruling (that in a case of a complete Eved, 'ha'Vlad Kasher') - because, we try to answer, he is speaking about a Chatzi Eved and Chatzi ben Chorin who was Mekadesh a Bas Yisrael before having relations with her.
(c) It is worse when he is Mekadesh her - because then, she is betrothed to the part of him that is free, and the part of him that is not, is committing adultery with a married woman, which explains why the child is a Mamzer.

click for question
9)
(a) The compromise between a Chatzi-Eved and Chatzi-ben Chorin who had relations with a Bas Yisrael with Kidushin and one who did so without Kidushin, is not workable however, due to a statement by the Neherda'i in the name of Rebbi Yakov - who said that those who invalidate the child, do so even when he does not marry her, and those who do not, declare him Kasher even when he does.
(b) The source for this statement is 'Eishes Av' (from whom each side derived his respective view) - because the Torah juxtaposes Eishes Av right beside the Lav of "Lo Yavo Mamzer" in Ki Setzei.
(c) One learns from Eishes Av that Eved ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael is ...
1. ... Pasul even though he does not marry her - because an Eved is like Eishes Av, inasmuch as Kidushin does not take effect.
2. ... Kasher even if he does - because Eved is not like Eishes Av, where Kidushin does take effect by other people, whereas the Kidushin of an Eved does not take effect by anyone.
(d) When Rav Yehudah said that the child of a Chatzi Eved va'Chatzi ben Chorin and a Bas Yisrael has no Takanah (meaning that he is a Mamzer) - he was referring to the case of a Chatzi Eved va'Chatzi ben Chorin who had relations with a married woman.

click for question
10)
It happened once that Rebbi Yosi bar Avin arrived in Rav Gaza's town and he validated an unmarried woman, and invalidated a married one. Others quoting Rebbi Yosi bar Zvida, say that he validated both women. In each of the cases - the woman had relations with a complete Eved.

click for question
11)
(a) The Halachah by Akum v'Eved ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael is - ha'Vlad Kasher (though he is Pasul li'Kehunah).
(b) The connection between this ruling and Rami bar Chama is - that Rami bar Chama was the son of a Bas Yisrael who was raped by an Akum.
(c) It is necessary to inform us that Rava appointed him to the position of Gabai in Bavel - to teach us that, even though a regular Ger is invalidated from occupying any position of leadership, Rami bar Chama was not, because his mother was a Kasher Bas Yisrael (in fact, she was the daughter of Shmuel, who had been raped by Isur Giyora, one of her captors, who subsequently converted).
(d) We learn from the Pasuk "Som Tasim Alecha Melech" - that any important appointment can only be given to a Yisrael, but not to a Ger.

click for question
12)
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Ami's slave Toveled a certain Nochris for her Nidus. Rav Yosef legalized both her status as a Bas Yisrael, and that of any daughter that was born to them. He legalized ...
1. ... her - on the grounds that her Tevilah for her Nidus counted as a Tevilah for Gerus.
2. ... her daughter - because we have already ruled that 'Eved ha'Ba al Bas Yisrael, ha'Vlad Kasher'.
(b) We know that Tevilah for Nidus counts for Gerus - from Rav Asi, who declared that a certain Giyores, whose son people referred to as the son of a Nochris, was in fact a Kasher Giyores, because she must, on some occasions, have Toveled for her Nidus.
(c) It is not possible to explain 'Atbelah L'shem Intesah' to mean that he Toveled her for Gerus, in order to take her as a wife, and that as we learned earlier (in the second Perek), a conversion that is specifically for marriage purposes, is invalid - because we ruled there that this is the opinion of Rebbi Nechemyah, and is not Halachah.
(d) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi declared a certain man whom people referred to as a Nochri - to be a Kasher Ger, because his father was bound to have Toveled for his Keri, and Tevilas Keri (like Tevilas Nidah) is Kasher for Gerus too.

Next Daf