Previous Daf

YEVAMOS 46

Ask A Question

click for question
1)
(a) Rav Chama bar Gurya Amar Rav says that if someone buys an Eved Kena'ani from a Nochri and the Eved has in mind to convert as he Tovels, he goes free - because he only buys from the Nochri a Kinyan Peiros, but not a Kinyan ha'Guf (since a Nochri cannot acquire a Kinyan ha'Guf in an Eved Kena'ani - and the purchaser can only acquire what the seller owns, and no more). That being the case, the Eved, who owns his own Guf, can acquire himself, if the purchaser lets him (as we shall soon see).
(b) Rava holds that Hekdesh, Chametz and Shichrur remove the Shibud (right to claim). When he says ...
1. ... Hekdesh - he means that if the owner designated an animal as collateral for a loan, and then he declares it Hekdesh Mizbe'ach (which is Kedushas ha'Guf, but not Hekdesh Bedek ha'Bayis), the Hekdesh takes effect, removing the Shibud.
2. ... Chametz - he means that if the owner designated Chametz as collateral for a loan (for a creditor who is a Nochri), and then the sixth hour of Erev Pesach arrives, he is obligated to burn it (seeing as it does not really belong to the Nochri).
3. ... Shichrur - he means that if he makes his Eved collateral for a loan, and then sets him free, he goes free, depriving the creditor of the right to claim him.
(c) We infer from the story cited by the Beraisa, where Bluryah the Giyores' slaves Toveled before she did, and the Chachamim ruled that they were free - that had she Toveled first, they would not have gone free.
(d) Rava explains that the Beraisa speaks in a case of Stam (where the Avadim did not say anything), and that is where they would not have gone free had she Toveled first - whereas Rav Chama bar Gurya Amar Rav is speaking when the Eved said specifically that he was Toveling for Gerus (in which case the Tevilah is effective even if the owner is a Yisrael).

click for question
2)
(a) Rav Ivya learns from the Pasuk in Behar "v'Gam mi'Bnei ha'Toshavim ha'Garim Imachem Mehem Tiknu Eved v'Amah" - that, on the one hand, a Yisrael can purchase a Nochri from himself as an Eved (and acquire him with a Kinyan ha'Guf). Consequently, the Eved cannot, during the Tevilas Avdus, override his master's intentions, by having in mind to Tovel for Gerus; On the other hand, a Nochri cannot purchase a Yisrael, nor can he purchase another Nochri, to acquire him with a Kinyan ha'Guf. That explains why, when one purchases an Eved from a Nochri, he does not acquire his Guf (and that is why his intention to Tovel for Gerus overrides the intentions of his master to Tovel him as an Eved).
(b) And from the Pasuk "O l'Eiker Mishpachas Ger" - we learn that a Nochri can acquire a Yisrael.
(c) But only with a Kinyan Peiros (for his work), explains Rav Ivya, so as not to clash with the previous Derashah ('O Hem Mikem').
(d) Who is to say, asks Rav Acha - that when the Torah permits a Yisrael to acquire a Nochri (from himself), it does not mean specifically by means of money and Tevilah, but only if he Tovels for the sake of Avdus, but that, should he Tovel for the sake of Gerus, he does not go free (a Kashya on Rav Ivya)?

click for question
3)
(a) To avoid the above problem, Shmuel says that when Toveling an Eved - one must hold him down in the water, thereby demonstrating one's ownership over him as he is Toveling, to prevent him from Toveling for the sake of Gerus.
(b) When Rav Ashi handed Menimin his slave to Ravina and Rav Acha B'rei d'Rava to Tovel on his behalf - he told them that, should Menimin free himself in the process of the Tevilah, he would hold them responsible.
(c) During the Tevilah, they tied a rope around his neck, which they tightened and loosened. They needed ...
1. ... to tighten the rope - to prevent him from coming up (without their consent) and proclaiming himself free.
2. ... to loosen it - because otherwise, the rope would be a Chatzitzah (in which case the Tevilah would be effective).
(d) As Menimin's head emerged from the water - they placed a vessel with cement on it on his head (as a sign that he was a slave) and instructed him to carry it to Rav Ashi's house.

click for question
4)
(a) When certain members of Papa bar Aba's household found Nochrim who had not paid their head-tax - they would pay on their behalf, and then force them to work for them.
(b) Rav Papa asked Rava - whether, when they finally let them go, they needed to give them a Get Shichrur.
(c) In his answer, Rava quoted Rev Sheshes - who said that the king kept records of the names of all those people who had not paid their taxes; and that he had announced that they would be slaves to whoever paid on their behalf.
(d) Rava therefore ruled - that they were indeed their slaves, and that they required a Get Shichrur before they could go free.

click for question
5)
(a) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba arrived in Gavla. He was silent when he saw that some of the women were pregnant from Geirim who had circumcised but not Toveled; that they used wine that had been poured out by Nochrim and that they ate Turmus-beans that had been cooked by Nochrim. He believed ...
1. ... that their children were not Mamzerim - because, he maintained a Ger requires Milah but not Tevilah.
2. ... that their wine was not Yayin Nesech - because the Nochrim had not actually touched it.
(b) Rebbi Yochanan instructed him to go back and tell the people of Gavla that ...
1. ... their children were Mamzerim - because, in his opinion, a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah.
2. ... that their wine was Yayin Nesech - because wine that has been shaken by a Nochri is also considered Yayin Nesech (because of the principle 'Lech Lech Amrin l'Nezira Sechor Sechor'), even though it was not actually touched by them.
3. ... that their Turmus-beans were forbidden - because they were not Bnei Torah, and would abuse this leniency to permit Bishul Akum (even though strictly speaking, the beans were permitted).
(c) Despite the fact that Turmus-beans are inedible when they are raw, he forbade them only because they were not Bnei Torah, and not intrinsically - because Turmus-beans are not generally served at a royal table to eat with bread (like the second opinion of Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak Amar Rav).

click for question
6)
(a) Whether or not, a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah, is a Machlokes Tana'im. The basis of ...
1. ... Rebbi Eliezer's opinion, that a Ger requires Milah but not Tevilah - is the fact that Yisrael (who 'converted' at Har Sinai) had performed Milah before leaving Egypt, but there is no mention of their having Toveled.
2. ... Rebbi Yehoshua, that a Ger requires Tevilah and not Milah - is the fact that the women there converted too, and they can only have performed Tevilah but not Milah.
(b) According to the Rabanan - a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah.
(c) The reason that Rebbi Eliezer does not want to learn from the Imahos (that Tevilah alone will suffice by a Ger) cannot be because he declines to learn what is possible from what is impossible - since we find elsewhere that he does ...
(d) ... in a Beraisa where he learns from Pesach Mitzrayim, that Pesach Doros must come from Chulin money (and not from money of Ma'aser Sheni), even though it is impossible for the money to have come from Chulin, seeing as there was no Ma'aser Sheni at that stage.

click for question
7)
(a) We therefore conclude that Rebbi Eliezer agrees with Rebbi Yehoshua, that Tevilah alone will suffice for Gerus - and their Machlokes concerns Milah without Tevilah: Rebbi Eliezer permits Gerus without Tevilah, whereas Rebbi Yehoshua forbids it.
(b) According to Rebbi Yehoshua there is no proof from the Avos who left Egypt, that Milah without Tevilah is sufficient for Gerus - because, in his opinion, Yisrael at Har Sinai did in fact, Tovel.
(c) Initially, we cite as Rebbi Yehoshua's source the Pasuk in Yisro "Lech el ha'Am v'Kidashtam ha'Yom u'Machar, v'Chibsu Simlosam" - implying that there must have been Tevilah, because if Tevilah is required even when Kibus Begadim is not (such as a Ba'al Keri), then how much more so when it is.
(d) We refute this proof however - by suggesting that the Kibus Begadim was merely for the purpose of cleanliness (so that they should wear nice clean clothes for Kabalas ha'Torah), and not because of Tum'ah.

click for question
8)
(a) We finally prove that, according to Rebbi Yehoshua, there must have been Tevilah, from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "va'Yikach Moshe es ha'Dam va'Yizrok al ha'Am" - because this refers to Haza'ah, and we have a tradition (one with which Rebbi Eliezer apparently disagrees) that there is no Haza'ah without Tevilah.
(b) Rebbi Yehoshua learns that the women before Matan Torah - because otherwise, how did they switch from Bnei Noach to Bnos Yisrael?

click for question
9)
Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan rules that a Ger requires Milah and Tevilah. This is not obvious (in spite of the principle 'Yachid v'Rabim, Halachah k'Rabim') - because the Chachamim here is really the individual opinion of Rebbi Yosi in a Beraisa (as we shall now see).

click for question
10)
(a) When Rebbi Yehudah says in a Beraisa ...
1. ... that someone who claims that he made Milah (for Gerus) but not Tevilah, 'Matbilin Oso u'Mah b'Kach' - he means that one may as well perform Tevilah and convert him, and who cares if his Milah was not done properly (since he holds that Tevilah alone will suffice for Gerus).
2. ... 'L'Fichach, Matbilin Ger b'Shabbos' - that he may go ahead and Tovel on Shabbos, provided he already made Milah previously.
(b) Despite the fact that, in his opinion, a Ger does not require both Milah and Tevilah, this is not obvious at all - because we might have thought that Rebbi Yehudah requires specifically Tevilah, in which case it would be forbidden.
(c) We can now extrapolate from here that, in Rebbi Yehudah's opinion - a Ger requires either Milah or Tevilah.

click for question
11)
(a) When Rebbi Yosi, commenting on Rebbi Yehudah's first ruling, says 'Ein Matbilin', he means - that one may not Tovel a Ger on Shabbos, because, in his opinion, a Ger requires both Milah and Tevilah.
(b) 'Ein Matbilin' is not so obvious at all - since we might otherwise have thought even though Tevilah alone will not suffice, Milah will, in which case, the Tevilah would not be crucial and would therefore be permitted on Shabbos.
(c) Rebbi Yosi in fact - is synonymous with the Chachamim that we cited earlier, as we explained there.

click for question
12)
(a) According to Rav Safra, Rebbi Chiya bar Rebbi, Rebbi Oshaya b'Rivi and Rebbi Oshaya b'Rebbi Chiya were all present when a Ger who had had Milah but not Tevilah appeared before them one night. They instructed him - to wait until the following day when they would Tovel him.
(b) Besides the fact that Tevilas Ger cannot be performed by night, we learn from this episode - that a. Tevilas Ger requires three people, and that b. Gerus requires Milah and Tevilah.
(c) We do not also include in the list that Gerus requires expert Dayanim - because it may have been only by chance that those three Dayanim happened to be there at the time.
(d) Rebbi Yochanan learns that Gerus requires three - from the fact that the Torah writes "Mishpat" next to Gerus (in Parshas Shelach Lecha), and Mishpat automatically implies three people.

Next Daf