More Discussions for this daf
1. Death for sins 2. Malachim advocating on one's behalf 3. Insights #1, referring to Holy items with mundane words
4. "Ad she'Yivlu Sifsoseichem mi'Lomar dai" 5. Death for sins etc. 6. Collateral Damage?
DAF DISCUSSIONS - SHABBOS 32

Asher Brander asked:

The gemara states regarding avon nedarim that meitah ishto shel adam. Why should a wife be chayav for her husband's nedarim. Yeladim ketanim is less problematic

Also the story with mascha d'afarsema and the mother in law. Is there any deeper meaning to it ?

Also the gemara seems to say on 32a [the drasha of ki yipol hanophel mimenu - megalgalin zechus al yedei zakai ...] that a person can neverbe killed unless they are a mechuyav misah. Doesn't this contradict the famous Ohr Hachayim in Vayeishev regarding the brothers' placement of Yosef in the bor [which is actually the Zohar on Vayeishev]

The Kollel replies:

1) TOSFOS in Kesuvos (2b, DH Matzi) explains that legally, when a man and woman get married, the woman makes herself into the "property" of the man concerning certain matters. Just like a man might lose his property as a punishment for sinning, he can also lose his wife as a punishment for sinning. The same idea explains why his young children are taken from him, because they, too, are considered his "property" in some respects.

In addition, it could be that the wife is punished for not rebuking her husband (as we find in the Gemara later, 55a).

See also the Ben Yehoyada and the Iyun Yakov who explain that the wife's death is punishment for the husband measure for measure. According to their explanations, though, it is still not clear why the woman should be killed if she has no sins (it must be that she would not be killed if she were indeed totally sinless).

2) It has significant Halachic ramifications, as the Mishnah states clearly in Yevamos (117a). While one witness is believed to testify that a woman's husband was killed overseas (and the woman becomes permitted to someone else and is not an Agunah), if that one witness is the woman's mother-in-law, she is not believed, because the mother-in-law is assumed to have malicious intent (she wants the daughter-in-law to marry another man while her husband is really alive somewhere, so that her new marriage will be an act of adultery for which she will be liable to death when her husband shows up). Likewise, if that one witness is her daughter-in-law, she is not believed.

As to the reason for this hatred, see Rashi in Yevamos (117a, DH v'Yevamtah) and the other Rishonim there.

3) (a) The Gemara here does not contradict the Zohar on Vayeishev. The Zohar means that one who falls into the hands of humans (who have Bechirah) needs much more Zechuyos to be saved than one who is at the mercy of the elements, who can be saved with less Zechuyos. In all cases, a person only dies if it is Divinely decreed. Our Gemara is talking about someone who falls off of a roof, who is at the mercy of the elements, so his fate is certainly dependant upon what was decreed.

(b) Besides this, it is obvious that a person does not die without a Divine judgement. As for one who falls into the hands of Ba'alei Bechirah -- this, too, was Divinely decreed -- that this person should fall into the hands of the murderer.

David Leitner commented:

Dear Sirs,

I fail to understand the question. A wife belongs to the husband, and the husband has the responsibility to annul her Nedarim within the specified period, and override her Nedarim. It is therefore understandable that Avon Nedarim Ishto Meiso, the husband gets punished, by his wife dying, for not annuling her Nedarim.

David Leitner, Manchester.

The Kollel replies:

Thank you for your comments. We understood that the intention of the Gemara was to say that a woman dies as retribution for her husband's vows, not for her own vows, and that is how the Mefarshim learn (see Tosfos, Rosh Hashanah 6a, DH Ela Im Ken). But your way of learning the Gemara makes sense and answers the question.

Y. Shaw

Chaim Smulowitz comments:

I think, even Kipshuto, there is a way to wear out your lips. Even though saying "Dai" is not using your lips, but after saying it, your lips are brought together to original position. This could be all part of the Chidush, that you'll say "Dai" so much that your lips would wear out, even though you don't use the lips for the actual saying, only to bring it to the original position. Also, that it will happen so fast that the lips that regenerate so fast wouldn't be able to the rapid saying of "Dai". Of course this can be all a Guzma.

Daniel Taylor adds:

I think I heard someone mention in our shiur that if you try speaking for a long period of time without using the "lip letters" (Beis/Veis,vav,mem & peh/feh), with the air moving fast through the lips but the abstention of the use of the lip letters keeping the lips dry they would "Yivlu".