1)

TOSFOS DH "Achlah b'Shuk"

תוס' ד"ה "אכלה בשוק"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the Gemara.)

אומר רבינו יצחק דאיירי שפיר בקלא דקודם נישואין שיצא עליה קול זה ומדברות עליה לעז קודם שנשאת לכהן

(a)

Explanation: Rabeinu Yitzchak says that this case can be understood as referring to a rumor that is before marriage. This rumor went out beforehand, and she was spoken about in these rumors before she married the Kohen.

א"ל ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה א"כ לא הנחת בת לאברהם אבינו יושבת תחת בעלה כהן שהרי הוא אינו יודע במה שדברו עליה קודם ומה יש לו לעשות.

1.

Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah said to him that if so, you have not allowed a daughter of Avraham Avinu to sit (i.e. to stay married) with her husband who is a Kohen. He does not know what was said about her before he married her, and what he should do about it.

2)

TOSFOS DH "Beulah"

תוס' ד"ה "בעולה"

(SUMMARY: Rashi and Tosfos argue regarding the details of this rumor.)

פי' בקונט' משום בעולה לכ"ג ולעיל נמי פי' יצא לה שם מזנה בעיר כגון שנבעלה לעובד כוכבים או לעבד דפוסלין בביאה וה"נ הוה מצי לפרש חייבי כריתות

(a)

Opinion#1: Rashi explains that the rumor is insufficient to make her forbidden to marry a Kohen Gadol. Earlier, as well, Rashi explained that she obtained a name in the city of having being promiscuous, for example by having relations with a Nochri or with a slave, who are people that make her unfit to marry a Kohen through these relations. He could seemingly have also said that she had relations with people who she is forbidden from due to a punishment of Kares (i.e. her father).

ורבינו יצחק אומר דסתם בעילה דזנות שאין ידוע ממי פסולה לכהונה והרי היא בחזקת בעולה לנתין ולממזר עד שתביא ראיה לדבריה כדאמרינן בפ"ק דכתובות (דף יד.) דאין אשה בודקת ומזנה

(b)

Opinion#2: Rabeinu Yitzchak says that promiscuous relations in general mean that it is unknown who exactly made her unfit to marry a Kohen. She has the status of having had relations with a Nasin or Mamzer until she can bring proof otherwise. This is as the Gemara states in Kesuvos (14a) that a woman does not check someone's lineage before she has promiscuous relations.

ואפילו לר"ג דאמר נאמנת היינו היכא דאמרה לכשר נבעלתי אבל היכא דאמרה לא נבעלתי או אינה יודעת ממי אפי' רבן גמליאל מודה.

1.

Even according to Rabban Gamliel (in Kesuvos 13a) who says that she is believed, this is where she says that she had relations with a Jew of good lineage. However, if she says that she never had relations or that she does not know who she had relations with, even Rabban Gamliel would agree that she has the status of having had relations with a Nasin or Mamzer.

3)

TOSFOS DH "Arusah"

תוס' ד"ה "ארוסה"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why this is more of a novel law regarding an Arusah.)

לא מיבעיא נשואה דאם אמת היה הדבר היה מתפרסם אלא אפילו ארוסה דאין מתפרסם כל כך אין חוששין.

(a)

Explanation: This is not only referring to a married woman, about whom we could say that if it really had been true it would have been made public knowledge. Even an Arusah, about whom such a rumor would not have been as widely spread, does not give us cause for suspicion.

4)

TOSFOS DH "Ad"

תוס' ד"ה "עד"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that Rebbi Aba is not arguing on the previous Gemara.)

מסתמא לא פליג רבי אבא אעולא דלעיל ואברייתא דלוי וכן משמע מדלא קאמר ורבי אבא אמר

(a)

Implied Question: We can assume that Rebbi Aba is not arguing on Ula's statement earlier and on the Beraisa quoted by Levi. This is indeed implied from the fact that the Gemara does not say, "And Rebbi Aba says" (implying he is arguing). (Note: How can we reconcile Rebbi Aba's position with these opinions above?)

אלא לעיל דאיכא רגלים לדבר לא בעינן שיגיע לדבר ברור אבל הכא דליכא רגלים לדבר בעינן שיגיע לדבר ברור

(b)

Answer: In the cases earlier where there was circumstancial evidence that the rumor was true, it was not necessary to come to a clear conclusion. However, where there is no circumstancial evidence, it is necessary to have a clear conclusion.

וקול דלעיל לא שייך אלא בקדושין והך דהכא שייך בגירושין כמו בקדושין.

1.

The rumor discussed earlier is only applicable to Kidushin, whereas this rumor applies regarding divorce just as it applies to Kidushin.

5)

TOSFOS DH "Mevatlinan"

תוס' ד"ה "מבטלינן"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the Gemara's question.)

נראה כפירוש שני שבקונטרס כגון שחזרו פלוני ופלוני ממדינת הים ואמרו לא היו דברים מעולם

(a)

Opinion: The correct explanation appears to be the second explanation quoted by Rashi, that Ploni and Ploni came back from overseas and said that this never happened.

וכן אמרי' לקמן אילימא לכי מגליא דקדושין קמאי לאו קדושין מבטלין קלא

1.

The Gemara asks later (89b), "If you will say that it is when it is found that the original Kidushin is invalid (i.e. the witnesses who supposedly started the rumor deny they said so), we should nullify the rumor!" (Note: This implies that we are indeed discussing a case where the witnesses say they did not say she was Mekudeshes.)

ופירוש ראשון אין נראה

2.

His first opinion does not appear to be correct.

ומייתי ראיה מדאמר רב חסדא עד שישמעו מפי הכשרים ש"מ מבטלין קלא כיון שאין חוששין במהרה לקול.

3.

Rav Yosef proves his position from Rav Chisda's statement, "until they hear from kosher witnesses" implying that we do stop a rumor. This is because we do not quickly suspect the rumor is true (until we check it out and hear from people who directly heard from kosher witnesses that they were married).

6)

TOSFOS DH "Ad she'Yishmi'u"

תוס' ד"ה "עד שישמעו"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why the women's rumors do not seem to have an impact as they did in the Beraisa quoted by Levi above.)

אע"ג דאמר לעיל ונשים אומרות פלונית נתקדשה

(a)

Implied Question: This is despite the fact that the Beraisa (quoted by Levi) stated earlier that women said that she had been Mekudeshes. (Note: Why is the rumor believed there, but not in our case?)

שמא משום דהתם איכא רגלים לדבר

(b)

Answer: Perhaps in the Beraisa earlier the women are believed because of all of the circumstancial evidence pointing in that direction (i.e. candles lit etc., as stated in the Beraisa).

ואית ספרים דגרסי ובני אדם נכנסים ויוצאין ולא גרסינן ונשים.

(c)

Text: Some Sefarim have a text, "And people are going in and out," and they do not have the text, "women."

7)

TOSFOS DH "Kivan"

תוס' ד"ה "כיון"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos observes that this is unlike Rabah bar Rav Huna.)

לישנא משמע דסבר כר' יוחנן ופליג אדרבה בר רב הונא דאמר אמתלא שאמרו אפילו מיכן ועד עשרה ימים.

(a)

Observation: This phrase implies that he holds like Rebbi Yochanan and unlike Rabah bar Rav Huna (quoted earlier in our Gemara) who says that the excuse that breaks the rumor can even take place from the time of the rumor until ten days afterwards.

89b----------------------------------------89b

8)

TOSFOS DH "v'Hilchasa"

תוס' ד"ה "והלכתא"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses a ruling based on Rav Hamnuna's law, and shows that everyone rules this way.)

ומעשה בא לפני ר"ת באשה אחת שיצא עליה קול אחר נישואיה שנתקדשה לאחר והיה אותו האיש שיצא עליו קול בחופתה שנישאת לשני

(a)

Opinion: An incident came before Rabeinu regarding a woman about whom a rumor started after her marriage that she had accepted Kidushin from someone else (before she married her current husband, and never received a Get). The man whom she was rumored to have received Kidushin from attended her marriage to her current husband.

ואר"ת שאין צריכה גט מן הראשון ומותרת לשני חדא דקלא דבתר נישואין לא חיישינן

1.

Rabeinu Tam said that she does not require a Get from the first man, and is permitted to her current husband. Firstly, we never act on the suspicion of a rumor that only starts after a woman is married.

ועוד דכיון שנתקדשה לזה בפניו שריא חזקה אין אשה מעיזה פניה בפניו

2.

Additionally, being that she was Mekudeshes to her husband in front of the man whom she was rumored to have married she is permitted, as a woman would not have been so brazen to marry someone else in front of her husband.

וכדרב המנונא קיימא לן מדפריך מיני' הש"ס בכל דוכתי

(b)

Opinion: We rule according to the opinion of Rav Hamnuna, as the Gemara always asks questions from his opinion (showing that it is the law).

ובפ' שני דכתובות (דף כב:) קאמר לימא דרב המנונא תנאי היא לא דכ"ע אית להו דרב המנונא

1.

Additionally, in Kesuvos (22b) the Gemara entertains that Rav Hamnuna's law is actually an argument between Tannaim. However, the Gemara concludes that everyone holds of Rav Hamnuna.

ואע"ג דבסוף נדרים (דף צא.) דחי רבה ראיית רב המנונא דמייתי מינה

(c)

Implied Question: In the end of Nedarim (91a), Rabah pushed aside the proof brought by Rav Hamnuna. (Does Rabah argue on Rav Hamnuna?)

מ"מ כן הלכה ורבה נמי אפשר דלפי האמת סובר כרב המנונא.

(d)

Answer: Even so, this is the law. Rabah also might really agree with Rav Hamnuna (he just stated that his Rav Hamnuna's proof is not necessarily a proof.)

9)

TOSFOS DH "uvi'Neharda"

תוס' ד"ה "ובנהרדעא"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos answers why the fact that in Sura they would negate a rumor was not taken into consideration by Shmuel.)

אע"ג דהני בי רב דשלחו לשמואל הם תלמידי דרב ובסורא מבטלי קלא

(a)

Implied Question: This is despite the fact that the people from the house of Rav who sent to Shmuel were the students of Rav, and in Sura they would negate a rumor. (Note: This should change the law in this case, as the Gemara is basing itself on the fact that in Neharda they would not negate a rumor! Shmuel should have answered based on their presumably asking according to Rav!)

מ"מ לא הוה מורה להו דלא כנפשיה.

(b)

Answer: Even so, he would not rule on their question in a way that was unlike what he truthfully held.

10)

TOSFOS DH "v'Eedach"

תוס' ד"ה "ואידך"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos clarifies that Rav Huna does not say she is always believed without being in front of her husband.)

וא"ת וכי לרב הונא הוי דרב המנונא אפי' שלא בפניו הא תנן בהדיא בפ"ב דכתובות (דף כב.) דאם יש עדים שהיתה אשת איש אינה נאמנת לומר גרושה אני

(a)

Question: Does Rav Huna really hold that Rav Hamnuna's law applies even when she is not in front of her husband? The Mishnah in Kesuvos (22a) states that if there are witnesses that she was a married woman, she is not believed to say she is divorced!

וי"ל דודאי רב המנונא לא איירי אלא בפניו אבל להחמיר להצריכה גט משני סבר רב המנונא דנאמנת אפילו שלא בפניו

(b)

Answer: Rav Hamnuna certainly was only discussing a case where she was in front of her husband. However, to be stringent and require that she receive a Get from the second person, Rav Hamnuna holds that she is believed even when she is not in front of him.

והא דאמר בפרק שני דכתובות (דף כב:) מר סבר שלא בפניו נמי אינה מעיזה

(c)

Implied Question: The Gemara says in Kesuvos (22b) that one opinion holds that when she is not in front of him she also will not be so brazen. (Note: Perhaps Rav Huna holds like this opinion?)

היינו דנאמנת עם מיגו שהיה לה.

(d)

Answer: This means that she is believed with the Migu claim that she had (before witnesses arrived that she was married, or after she married and witnesses then came and said she had been married).

11)

TOSFOS DH "Amar Rav Huna"

תוס' ד"ה "אמר רב הונא"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains Rav Huna's opinion.)

אבל במצאו דבר על בוריו פשיטא לרב הונא דלא יגרש שני וישא ראשון

(a)

Explanation: If they found that the rumor was correct it is obvious that Rav Huna holds that she does not require a Get from her second husband and she marries the first.

וכיון דודאי קדשה ראשון ומקודשת נמי לשני לרב הונא כיון שפשטה ידה וקיבלה א"כ חיישינן שגירשה ראשון

1.

Being that the first person was certainly Mekadesh her (first) and she is also Mekudeshes to the second person according to Rav Huna, being that she stretched out her hand and accepted the Kidushin, we suspect that the first person divorced her.

ואם יגרש שני וישא ראשון הוה ליה מחזיר גרושתו מן הארוסין

2.

If the second husband will divorce her and she will marry her first husband, this would be returning to her first husband from Eirusin (which is why Rav Huna holds this is forbidden).

אבל בלא העמידו על בוריו דאין כי אם קול לקידושי ראשון הוה אמינא דמותר לשני לגרש ולישא ראשון קמ"ל דאפילו הכי לא יגרש שני כו'.

3.

However, if they did not ascertain that the rumor was true and the first Kidushin is only a rumor, I would think that it is permitted for the second person to divorce her and for her to marry the first "(rumored) husband." This is why Rav Huna says that even so (that the rumor that she had a first husband was not substantiated) the second husband should not divorce her (in order for her to marry the first "husband") etc.

12)

TOSFOS DH "Af"

תוס' ד"ה "אף"

(SUMMARY: Tosfos rules like Rav Huna.)

אליבא דרב הונא קאמר וכן אמימר דפסיק הלכתא דמותרת לשניהם לרב הונא קאמר ואומר ה"ר אלחנן דמשמע דהלכה כרב הונא.

(a)

Opinion: The statement of Rav Shinina is according to Rav Huna. Similarly, Ameimar's ruling that she is permitted to both is according to Rav Huna. Rabeinu Elchanan says that this implies that the law follows Rav Huna.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF