ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Yevamos 57
YEVAMOS 46-60 - Ari Kornfeld has generously sponsored the Dafyomi
publications for these Dafim for the benefit of Klal Yisrael.
(a) Abaye (to establish Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya - who permits the
wife of a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka to eat Terumah according to Rebbi Elazar and
Rebbi Shimon) says 'Ho'il u'Ma'achilah be'Lo Yad'ah' meaning - that a Kohen
who had already been feeding his wife, who became a P'tzu'a Daka, may
continue to feed her as long as he does not make Bi'ah with her.
(b) Rava resolves Rebbi Elazar Amar Rebbi Oshaya - by pointing out a that a
Kohen P'tzu'a Daka too, feeds others Terumah; namely, his slaves.
1. Abaye does not learn like Rava - because, in his opinion, we can only
apply the S'vara of 'Ho'il she'K'var Achlah, from Kinyan Ishus on to Kinyan
Ishus, but not from Kinyan Avdus on to Ishus.
(d) Abaye proves that the fact that she has already eaten makes no
difference, from a bas Yisrael who was married to a Kohen, and who is not
permitted to eat Terumah after his death, in spite of the fact that she
already ate in his lifetime. Rava refutes that proof however - because
there, the fact that she already ate makes no difference simply because his
Kinyan (that permits her to eat in the first place) dissolved when he died
(which is not the case by a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka).
2. Rava does not learn like Abaye - because it is different when she has
(a) When Rebbi Yochanan asked Rebbi Oshaya whether a P'tzu'a Daka Kohen may
feed his wife who is a bas Geirim Terumah, he did not answer. When,
immediately after that, Resh Lakish asked him a She'eilah which he did
answer, Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah queried him - as to whether his refusal to
answer Rebbi Yochanan was perhaps because he did not consider him in high
(b) The real reason that Rebbi Oshaya remained silent is - because he was
stymied by the She'eilah.
(c) Assuming that a P'tzu'a Daka Kohen retains his Kedushah, Rebbi
Yochanan's She'eilah cannot have been according to ...
1. ... Rebbi Yehudah - because he holds 'Bas Ger Zachar ke'Bas Chalal
Zachar' (and a Bas Chalal is definitely forbidden to eat Terumah).
(d) If, on the other hand, a P'tzu'a Daka Kohen does not retains his
Kedushah, the She'eilah cannot have been according to ...
2. ... Rebbi Yossi - because he holds 'Af Ger she'Nasa Giyores, Bito
Kesheirah li'Kehunah' (in which case, she is obviously permitted).
1. ... Rebbi Yehudah - because he holds 'Kehal Geirim Ikri Kahal', in which
case she is forbidden to marry a P'tzu'a Daka.
2. ... Rebbi Yossi - 'Kehal Geirim Lo Ikri Kahal' (so she is permitted to
(a) So Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah can only have been according to Rebbi
Eliezer ben Ya'akov - who says (in a Mishnah in Bikurim) 'Ishah bas Geirim
Lo Tinasei li'Kehunah ad she'Tehei Imah mi'Yisrael'.
(b) Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah is - whether this means that she is Kasher
(but not Kadosh, to be called a Kahal), and is permitted to a P'tzu'a Daka,
or whether it means that she is also Kadosh, and is therefore considered a
Kahal, in which case she will be forbidden to marry a P'tzu'a Daka.
(c) We ultimately resolve Rebbi Yochanan's She'eilah from a Beraisa quoted
by Rav Acha bar Chin'na mi'Daroma, which specifically permits a P'tzu'a Daka
to feed his wife who is a bas Geirim, Terumah. The Tana learns it from the
Pasuk - "ve'Kohen Ki Yikneh Nefesh Kinyan Kaspo ... Hu Yochal Bo".
(d) The author of that Beraisa cannot be Rebbi Yehudah - because he holds
that whether a Kohen P'tzu'a Daka retains his Kedushah or not, she is not
permitted to eat; nor can it be Rebbi Yossi - because he holds (from a
S'vara) that, whether the Kohen retains his Kedushah or not, she is
permitted to eat, so why would he require a Pasuk.
(a) Rav Holds 'Yesh Chupah li'P'sulos' - meaning that, Chupah without
Kidushin (see Tosfos DH 'Rav') invalidates a widow who is a bas Kohen who
marries a Kohen Gadol, from eating Terumah (like Bi'ah does).
(b) Shmuel says 'Ein Chupah li'P'sulos'.
(c) Shmuel claims that Rav will agree with him - by a young girl of less
(d) Rava proves this from the Beraisa, which says that the Bi'ah of a
three-year old girl *is considered a Bi'ah* to invalidate her from Terumah
through the Bi'ah of one of the Pesulim - by inferring that, if she is under
three, it does *not*. And if the Bi'ah of a girl under three does not
invalidate her, it is obvious that Chupah will not invalidate her either.
(a) The Bi'ah of a girl of three and over, is considered valid with regard
to Kidushin, Yibum or to render her an Eishes-Ish. When the Tana adds ...
1. ... 'u'Metam'ah es Bo'alah ... ' - he means that a girl of three who is a
Nidah renders the Bo'eil Tamei to the extent that he makes the sheets on
which he is lying, Tamei too.
(b) A bas Yisrael who is under three - may eat Terumah if she marries a
Kohen, because her Bi'ah is not considered a Bi'ah, in which case she will
not become a Chalalah.
2. ... 'le'Tamei Mishkav Tachton ke'Elyon' - he means that it makes them
Tamei like the covers on top of a Zav (to render food and drink Tamei, but
not people and vessels like the sheets of the Nidah herself).