Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

December 7, 2014 | 讟状讜 讘讻住诇讜 转砖注状讛

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

  • Masechet Yevamot is sponsored by Ahava Leibtag and family in memory of her grandparents, Leo and Esther Aaron. "They always stressed the importance of a Torah life, mesorah and family. May their memory always be a blessing for their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and great-great grandchildren".

Yevamot 64

Study Guide Yevamot 64


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

诪诇诪讚 砖讗讬谉 讛砖讻讬谞讛 砖讜专讛 注诇 驻讞讜转 诪砖谞讬 讗诇驻讬诐 讜砖谞讬 专讘讘讜转 诪讬砖专讗诇 讛专讬 砖讛讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 砖谞讬 讗诇驻讬诐 讜砖谞讬 专讘讘讜转 讞住专 讗讞讚 讜讝讛 诇讗 注住拽 讘驻专讬讛 讜专讘讬讛 诇讗 谞诪爪讗 讝讛 讙讜专诐 诇砖讻讬谞讛 砖转住转诇拽 诪讬砖专讗诇

This teaches that the Divine Presence does not rest upon less than two thousands and two ten-thousands of the Jewish people, as the terms thousands and ten-thousands are both in the plural. Consequently, if there were two thousands and two ten-thousands of the Jewish people, less one, and this man did not engage in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, is he not found to have caused the Divine Presence to be depart from the Jewish people?

讗讘讗 讞谞谉 讗诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讞讬讬讘 诪讬转讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讘谞讬诐 诇讗 讛讬讜 诇讛诐 讛讗 讛讬讜 诇讛诐 讘谞讬诐 诇讗 诪转讜 讗讞专讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讙讜专诐 诇砖讻讬谞讛 砖转住转诇拽 诪讬砖专讗诇 砖谞讗诪专 诇讛讬讜转 诇讱 诇讗诇讛讬诐 讜诇讝专注讱 讗讞专讬讱 讘讝诪谉 砖讝专注讱 讗讞专讬讱 砖讻讬谞讛 砖讜专讛 讗讬谉 讝专注讱 讗讞专讬讱 注诇 诪讬 砖讜专讛 注诇 讛注爪讬诐 讜注诇 讛讗讘谞讬诐

Abba 岣nan said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer: A man who does not engage in procreation is liable to death, as it is stated with regard to the sons of Aaron: 鈥淎nd Nadav and Avihu died鈥and they had no children鈥 (Numbers 3:4). This indicates that if they would have had children they would not have died. Others say: He causes the Divine Presence to depart from the Jewish people, as it is stated: 鈥淭o be a God to you and to your seed after you鈥 (Genesis 17:7). When your seed is after you, i.e., when you have children, the Divine Presence rests upon the Jewish people, but if your seed is not after you, upon whom can the Divine Presence rest? Upon wood and stones?

诪转谞讬壮 谞砖讗 讗砖讛 讜砖讛讛 注诪讛 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 讜诇讗 讬诇讚讛 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇讘讟诇 讙讬专砖讛 诪讜转专转 诇讬谞砖讗 诇讗讞专 讜专砖讗讬 讛砖谞讬 诇砖讛讜转 注诪讛 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 讜讗诐 讛驻讬诇讛 诪讜谞讛 诪砖注讛 砖讛驻讬诇讛

MISHNA: If a man married a woman and stayed with her for ten years and she did not give birth, he is no longer permitted to neglect the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. Consequently, he must either divorce her and marry someone else, or take another wife while still married to her. If he divorced her she is permitted to marry another man, as it is not necessarily on her account that she and her first husband did not have children, and the second husband is permitted to stay with her for ten years. And if she had a miscarriage, he counts the ten years from the time of the miscarriage.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 谞砖讗 讗砖讛 讜砖讛讛 注诪讛 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 讜诇讗 讬诇讚讛 讬讜爪讬讗 讜讬转谉 讻转讜讘讛 砖诪讗 诇讗 讝讻讛 诇讛讘谞讜转 诪诪谞讛

GEMARA: The Sages taught: If a man married a woman and stayed with her for ten years and she did not give birth, he should divorce her and pay her marriage contract, because perhaps he did not merit to be built, i.e., to have children, from her. It is not certain that their failure to have children is due to her, as it is possible that they are not a suitable match for bearing children.

讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诇讚讘专 讝讻专 诇讚讘专 诪拽抓 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 诇砖讘转 讗讘专诐 讘讗专抓 讻谞注谉 诇诇诪讚讱 砖讗讬谉 讬砖讬讘转 讞讜抓 诇讗专抓 注讜诇讛 诇讜 诪谉 讛诪谞讬谉 诇驻讬讻讱 讞诇讛 讛讜讗 讗讜 砖讞诇转讛 讛讬讗 讗讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讞讘讜砖讬诐 讘讘讬转 讛讗住讜专讬诐 讗讬谉 注讜诇讬谉 诇讜 诪谉 讛诪谞讬谉

Although there is no explicit proof for the matter that one must take another wife if he has not had children after ten years of marriage, there is an allusion to the matter, as the verse states: 鈥淎nd Sarai, Abram鈥檚 wife, took Hagar鈥after Abram had dwelled ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to Abram her husband to be his wife鈥 (Genesis 16:3). Incidentally, this verse also comes to teach you that the years spent dwelling outside of Eretz Yisrael do not count as part of his tally. Consequently, if he was sick during this period or she was sick, or if one of the two of them was imprisoned in jail, it does not count as part of his tally.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜诇讬诇祝 诪讬爪讞拽 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讬爪讞拽 讘谉 讗专讘注讬诐 砖谞讛 讘拽讞转讜 讗转 专讘拽讛 讜讙讜壮 讜讻转讬讘 讜讬爪讞拽 讘谉 砖砖讬诐 砖谞讛 讘诇讚转 讗讜转诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讬爪讞拽 注拽讜专 讛讬讛

Rava said to Rav Na岣an: Let us derive from Isaac that one may wait a longer period of time, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah鈥o be his wife鈥 (Genesis 25:20), and it is written with regard to the birth of Jacob and Esau: 鈥淎nd Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them鈥 (Genesis 25:26). This indicates that one may wait twenty years. Rav Na岣an said to him: Isaac knew that he was infertile, and therefore there was no reason for him to marry another woman, as Rebekah was not the cause of their infertility.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讗讘专讛诐 谞诪讬 注拽讜专 讛讬讛 讛讛讜讗 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇讻讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇诪讛 谞诪谞讜 砖谞讜转讬讜 砖诇 讬砖诪注讗诇 讻讚讬 诇讬讬讞住 讘讛谉 砖谞讜转讬讜 砖诇 讬注拽讘

The Gemara responds: If so, Abraham also should not have married another woman, as he was also infertile. Rather, the tanna requires that verse that states when Jacob and Esau were born for that which Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba taught. This is because Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Why were Ishmael鈥檚 years counted in the Torah, as they do not appear to be relevant to its narrative? In order to determine through them the years of Jacob, i.e., Jacob鈥檚 age at the time that various events took place, as explained in tractate Megilla (17a). The verse concerning Jacob鈥檚 birth was not meant to allude to a halakha about remaining married before having children, but to make it possible to determine Jacob鈥檚 age by relating it to the age of Ishmael.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讬爪讞拽 讗讘讬谞讜 注拽讜专 讛讬讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬注转专 讬爪讞拽 诇讛壮 诇谞讻讞 讗砖转讜 注诇 讗砖转讜 诇讗 谞讗诪专 讗诇讗 诇谞讜讻讞 诪诇诪讚 砖砖谞讬讛诐 注拽讜专讬诐 讛讬讜 讗讬 讛讻讬 讜讬注转专 诇讜 讜讬注转专 诇讛诐 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 讚讜诪讛 转驻诇转 爪讚讬拽 讘谉 爪讚讬拽 诇转驻诇转 爪讚讬拽 讘谉 专砖注

Rabbi Yitz岣k said: Isaac our father was infertile, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Isaac entreated the Lord concerning [lenokha岣] his wife because she was barren鈥 (Genesis 25:21). It is not stated that he entreated the Lord for [al] his wife, but lenokha岣, which can mean opposite, against, or corresponding to; this teaches that they were both infertile. The Gemara asks: If so, why does the verse continue: 鈥淎nd the Lord let Himself be entreated of him鈥? The verse should say: And the Lord let Himself be entreated of them. The Gemara answers that their prayers were answered due to Isaac, because the prayer of a righteous individual who is the son of a righteous individual is not similar to the prayer of a righteous individual who is the son of a wicked individual, and Rebekah鈥檚 father was the wicked Bethuel.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪驻谞讬 诪讛 讛讬讜 讗讘讜转讬谞讜 注拽讜专讬诐 诪驻谞讬 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪转讗讜讛 诇转驻诇转谉 砖诇 爪讚讬拽讬诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诇诪讛 谞诪砖诇讛 转驻诇转谉 砖诇 爪讚讬拽讬诐 讻注转专 诪讛 注转专 讝讛 诪讛驻讱 讛转讘讜讗讛 诪诪拽讜诐 诇诪拽讜诐 讻讱 转驻诇转谉 砖诇 爪讚讬拽讬诐 诪讛驻讻转 诪讚讜转讬讜 砖诇 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪诪讚转 专讙讝谞讜转 诇诪讚转 专讞诪谞讜转 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗讘专讛诐 讜砖专讛 讟讜诪讟诪讬谉 讛讬讜 砖谞讗诪专 讛讘讬讟讜 讗诇 爪讜专

Rabbi Yitz岣k said: For what reason were our forefathers initially infertile? Because the Holy One, Blessed be He, desires the prayers of the righteous, and He therefore wanted them to pray for children. Similarly, Rabbi Yitz岣k said: Why are the prayers of the righteous compared to a pitchfork [eter], as in the verse: 鈥淎nd He let Himself be entreated [vaye鈥檃ter]鈥? This indicates that just as this pitchfork turns over produce from one place to another, so the prayer of the righteous turns over the attributes of the Holy One, Blessed be He, from the attribute of rage to the attribute of mercy. Rabbi Ami said: Abraham and Sarah were originally tumtumin, people whose sexual organs are concealed and not functional, as it is stated: 鈥淟ook to the rock

讞爪讘转诐 讜讗诇 诪拽讘转 讘讜专 谞拽专转诐 讜讻转讬讘 讛讘讬讟讜 讗诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗讘讬讻诐 讜讗诇 砖专讛 转讞讜诇诇讻诐

from where you were hewn, and to the hole of the pit from where you were dug鈥 (Isaiah 51:1), and it is written in the next verse: 鈥淟ook to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you鈥 (Isaiah 51:2), which indicates that sexual organs were fashioned for them, signified by the words hewn and dug, over the course of time.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 砖专讛 讗诪谞讜 讗讬诇讜谞讬转 讛讬转讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜转讛讬 砖专讬 注拽专讛 讗讬谉 诇讛 讜诇讚 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬转 讜诇讚 讗讬谉 诇讛

Rav Na岣an said that Rabba bar Avuh said: Our mother Sarah was initially a sexually underdeveloped woman [aylonit], as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Sarah was barren; she had no child鈥 (Genesis 11:30). The superfluous words: 鈥淪he had no child,鈥 indicate that she did not have even a place, i.e., a womb, for a child.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 砖讬诇转 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讘讚讜专讜转 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 砖砖谞讜转讬讛谉 诪专讜讘讜转 讗讘诇 讘讚讜专讜转 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 砖砖谞讜转讬讛谉 诪讜注讟讜转 砖转讬 砖谞讬诐 讜诪讞爪讛 讻谞讙讚 砖诇砖讛 注讬讘讜专讬诐 专讘讛 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讻谞讙讚 砖诇砖 驻拽讬讚讜转 讚讗诪专 诪专 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 谞驻拽讚讜 砖专讛 专讞诇 讜讞谞讛

Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, said in the name of Rav: They taught that he waits ten years only with regard to the people who lived in former generations, whose years were numerous, i.e., they lived longer. However, with regard to the people who live in later generations, whose years are few, he waits only two and half years before divorcing her, corresponding to the time period of three pregnancies. Rabba said in the name of Rav Na岣an: He waits three years, corresponding to the three remembrances of barren women by God, as the Master said: On Rosh HaShana Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered, i.e., God gave them children. Since God determines on Rosh HaShana whether barren women will conceive that year, one may remain married until three such opportunities have passed.

讗诪专 专讘讛 诇讬转谞讛讜 诇讛谞讬 讻诇诇讬 诪讻讚讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪讗谉 转拽讬谉 专讘讬 讜讛讗 讘讬诪讬 讚讜讚 讗讬诪注讜讟 砖谞讬 讚讻转讬讘 讬诪讬 砖谞讜转讬谞讜 讘讛诐 砖讘注讬诐 砖谞讛

However, Rabba himself said: These principles are not accepted as halakha. Why not? Now consider, who established the content of the mishna? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Yet, in the days of King David, many years before the time of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the years of an average lifespan were already diminished, as it is written: 鈥淭he days of our years are seventy years, and if with strength eighty years鈥 (Psalms 90:10). Consequently, if Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi included in the mishna the statement that one remains married for ten years, that must apply even nowadays.

讜讛讗讬 砖诪讗 诇讗 讝讻讛 诇讛讘谞讜转 讛讬诪谞讛 讜讚诇诪讗 讗讬讛讬 讚诇讗 讝讻讬讗 讗讬讛讬 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 诪驻拽讚讗 讗驻专讬讛 讜专讘讬讛 诇讗 诪讬注谞砖讛

The Gemara asks about the language of the baraita. And what about this expression: Perhaps he did not merit to be built from her; perhaps it was she who did not merit to build a family. The Gemara answers: She, since she is not commanded to be fruitful and multiply, is not punished. Their worthiness therefore depends on him, not her.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 谞住讬讘 讗讬转转讗 讜讗讜诇讬讚 讘谞讬 讜讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗讬 讝讻讗讬 讛讜讜 诇讬 诪拽诪讬讬转讗 讛转诐 讚讞讜讬 拽讗 诪讚讞讬 诇讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗

The Gemara challenges the mishna鈥檚 statement that if one did not have children after ten years he should marry a different woman. Is that so? Didn鈥檛 the Sages say to Rabbi Abba bar Zavda: Marry a woman and have children, and he said to them: If I had merited, I would already have children from my first wife? This indicates that there is no obligation to remarry if one did not have children with his first wife. The Gemara answers: There, Rabbi Abba bar Zavda was merely putting the Rabbis off with an excuse, as the real reason why he would not marry was because Rabbi Abba bar Zavda became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse. Rav Huna鈥檚 students would hold back from relieving themselves until his lengthy sermons were finished, which caused them to become sterile.

专讘 讙讬讚诇 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 专讘 砖砖转 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讗讞讚转讬讛 住讜住讻讬谞转讗 转诇讬讜讛 讘讗专讝讗 讚讘讬 专讘 讜谞驻拽 诪讬谞讬讛 讻讛讜爪讗 讬专拽讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 砖讬转讬谉 住讘讬 讛讜讬谞讗 讜讻讜诇讛讜 讗讬注拽讜专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讘专 诪讗谞讗 讚拽讬讬诪讬 讘谞驻砖讗讬 讛讞讻诪讛 转讞讬讛 讘注诇讬讛

The Gemara similarly relates that Rav Giddel became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse, Rav 岣lbo became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse, and Rav Sheshet became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse. The Gemara relates: Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov was afflicted by suskhinta, a disease caused by holding back from urinating. They suspended him from the cedar column that supported the study hall, and a substance that was as green as a palm leaf emerged from him, and he was healed. Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov said: We were sixty elders present at the time, and they all became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse, aside from me, as I fulfilled with regard to myself the verse: 鈥淲isdom preserves the life of he who has it鈥 (Ecclesiastes 7:12). I used the above cure to avoid becoming impotent.

讙讬专砖讛 诪讜转专转 讜讻讜壮 砖谞讬 讗讬谉 砖诇讬砖讬 诇讗

搂 It was taught in the mishna that if a man divorced his wife after ten years without children, she is permitted to marry a second man, who may remain married to her for ten years. The Gemara comments: A second husband, yes, but a third one, no. Once she has been married to two men without children for ten years each, it is presumed that she is unable to have children.

诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪谞讬 专讘讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诪诇讛 讛专讗砖讜谉 讜诪转 砖谞讬 讜诪转 砖诇讬砖讬 诇讗 转诪讜诇 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 砖诇讬砖讬 转诪讜诇 专讘讬注讬 诇讗 转诪讜诇

The Gemara comments: Who is the tanna of the mishna? It is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who holds that a legal presumption [岣zaka] is established after two occurrences. As it is taught in a baraita: If a woman circumcised her first son and he died as a result of the circumcision, and she circumcised her second son and he also died, she should not circumcise her third son, as the deaths of the first two produce a presumption that this woman鈥檚 sons die as a result of circumcision. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: She should circumcise her third son, as there is not considered to be a legal presumption that her sons die from circumcision, but she should not circumcise her fourth son if her first three sons died from circumcision.

讜讛转谞讬讗 讗讬驻讻讗 讛讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讞专讬谞讬转讗

The Gemara asks: Isn鈥檛 the reverse taught in a baraita, that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that the woman鈥檚 third son must be circumcised and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that he is not circumcised? Which of them was composed later and is therefore presumed to be more reliable?

转讗 砖诪注 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪注砖讛 讘讗专讘注 讗讞讬讜转 讘爪驻讜专讬 砖诪诇讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 讜诪转 砖谞讬讛 讜诪转 砖诇讬砖讬转 讜诪转 专讘讬注讬转 讘讗转 诇驻谞讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗诪专 诇讛 讗诇 转诪讜诇讬

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: An incident occurred involving four sisters in Tzippori, that the first sister circumcised her son and he died, and the second sister circumcised her son and he died, and the third one circumcised her son and he too died. The fourth sister came before Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said to her: Do not circumcise him. This indicates that according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel a presumption is established only after three occurrences.

讜讚诇诪讗 讗讬 讗转讬讗 砖诇讬砖讬转 谞诪讬 讛讜讛 讗诪专 诇讛 讗诐 讻谉 诪讗讬 讗住讛讚讜转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讜讚诇诪讗 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗讞讬讜转 诪讞讝拽讜转

The Gemara refutes this proof: Perhaps if the third sister had come before him he would also have said to her the same ruling. The Gemara asks: If so, what is the purpose of Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba鈥檚 testimony? Why would he have related this incident if it does not teach us anything? The Gemara answers: Perhaps he comes to teach us that sisters establish a presumption in a case like this even though the children who died were not from the same mother.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 讗讞讬讜转 诪讞讝拽讜转 诇讗 讬砖讗 讗讚诐 讗砖讛 诇讗 诪诪砖驻讞转 谞讻驻讬谉 讜诇讗 诪诪砖驻讞转 诪爪讜专注讬诐 讜讛讜讗 讚讗转讞讝拽 转诇转讗 讝讬诪谞讬

Rava said: Now that you have said that sisters establish a presumption, a man should not marry a woman from a family of epileptics or from a family of lepers, as these diseases might be hereditary. The Gemara adds: And this applies only if it was established three times, i.e., three members of the family are afflicted with the disease.

诪讗讬 讛讜讛 注诇讛 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 注讜讘讚讗 讛讜讛 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讻谞讬砖转讗 讚诪注讜谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 讜诪诇讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 讜诪转 砖谞讬讛 讜诪转 砖诇讬砖讬转 讘讗讛 诇驻谞讬讜 讗诪专 诇讛 诇讻讬 讜诪讜诇讬

The Gemara asks: Which halakhic conclusion was about this matter? Is a presumption established after two occurrences or only after three? When Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael, he said: An incident occurred before Rabbi Yo岣nan in the synagogue of the town of Maon on a Yom Kippur that occurred on Shabbat. The first sister had circumcised her son and he died; the second sister circumcised her son and he also died. The third sister came before him, and he said to her: Go and circumcise your son, as a presumption is not established after only two occurrences.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讞讝讬 讚拽砖专讬转 讗讬住讜专讗 讜住讻谞转讗

Abaye said to Rav Yitz岣k: See to it that your report is accurate, as you are permitting an action that would otherwise constitute a prohibition and a danger. If the third baby should not be circumcised, doing so would be a prohibited labor and would endanger the life of the child.

住诪讱 注诇讛 讗讘讬讬 讜讗讝诇 谞住讘讛 诇讞讜诪讛 讘专转讗 讚讗讬住讬 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讚谞住讘讛 专讞讘讗 讚驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗 讜砖讻讬讘 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讜砖讻讬讘 讜谞住讘讛 讛讜讗 讜砖讻讬讘

The Gemara comments: Abaye relied on this report and went and married 岣ma, the daughter of Isi, son of Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rav Yehuda. 岣ma had previously married Ra岣va of Pumbedita, and he died, and then she married Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rabba bar bar 岣na, and he died; and he, Abaye, married her nevertheless, without concern that she had been established to be a woman whose husbands die; and he died as well while married to her.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讜诪讬 讗讬讻讗 讚注讘讬讚 注讜讘讚讗 讘谞驻砖讬讛 讻讬 讛讗讬 讜讛讗 讗讬讛讜 讚讗诪专 讗讘讬谉 讚住诪讻讗 讬爪讞拽 住讜诪拽讗 诇讗讜 讘专 住诪讻讗 讗讘讬谉 讬砖谞讜 讘讞讝专讛 讬爪讞拽 住讜诪拽讗 讗讬谞讜 讘讞讝专讛 讜注讜讚 讗讬诪专 讚驻诇讬讙讬 诇注谞讬谉 诪讬诇讛 讘谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 诪讬 驻诇讬讙讬

Rava said: Is there anyone who performs an action like this and endangers himself by marrying such a woman? Wasn鈥檛 it he, Abaye, who said that Avin is reliable but Yitz岣k the Red, i.e., Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef, is not reliable? He proceeds to explain the difference between them: Avin returns to Eretz Yisrael and hears whether the Sages there rescind their previous rulings, whereas Yitz岣k the Red does not return to Eretz Yisrael and never finds out if the Sages there rescind their rulings. And furthermore, say that they disagree with regard to whether a presumption is established by two or by three deaths due to circumcision, but do they necessarily argue with regard to marriage?

讗讬谉 讜讛转谞讬讗 谞讬住转 诇专讗砖讜谉 讜诪转 诇砖谞讬 讜诪转 诇砖诇讬砖讬 诇讗 转谞砖讗 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诇砖诇讬砖讬 转谞砖讗 诇专讘讬注讬 诇讗 转谞砖讗

The Gemara responds: Yes, and it is taught in a baraita: If a woman was married to her first husband and he died, to a second one and he also died, she may not get married to a third husband. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: She may get married to a third husband, but if he also dies, she may not get married to a fourth husband.

讘砖诇诪讗 讙讘讬 诪讬诇讛 讗讬讻讗 诪砖驻讞讛 讚专驻讬 讚诪讗 讜讗讬讻讗 诪砖驻讞讛 讚拽诪讬讟 讚诪讗 讗诇讗 谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诪专讚讻讬 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讛讻讬 讗诪专 讗讘讬诪讬 诪讛讙专讜谞讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪注讬谉 讙讜专诐 讜专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪讝诇 讙讜专诐

The Gemara asks: Granted with regard to circumcision a presumption of death due to circumcision can be established because there are families whose blood is thin and does not clot well, and there are families whose blood clots. However, in the case of marriage, what is the reason for concern that a subsequent husband will die? Rav Mordekhai said to Rav Ashi: Avimi of Hagron-ya said in the name of Rav Huna as follows: Her spring is the cause. In other words, the woman has some sort of condition that causes those who have intercourse with her to die. And Rav Ashi said that her constellation is the cause of her husbands鈥 deaths.

诪讗讬 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讚讗讬专住讛 讜诪讬转 讗讬 谞诪讬 讚谞驻诇 诪讚讬拽诇讗 讜诪讬转

The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between them? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where a man betrothed her and died before the wedding; alternatively, in a case where he fell off a palm tree and died. If the concern is due to intercourse, then in these cases the husband鈥檚 death cannot be attributed to his wife. Conversely, if the concern is due to her bad fortune, the husband鈥檚 death can be attributed to his wife even in these cases.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘讗 讘注讬 诪讬谞讬讛 诪专讘 讬讜住祝 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讗讬谉 讗讞讜讻讬 讗讞讬讱 讘讬

Rav Yosef, son of Rava, said to Rava: I inquired of Rav Yosef whether the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and he said to me: Yes. I subsequently asked him if the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and he said to me: Yes. Was he mocking me by issuing contradictory rulings?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 住转诪讬 讛讬讗 讜驻砖讬讟 诇讱 谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讜诪诇拽讬讜转 讻专讘讬 讜住转讜转 讜砖讜专 讛诪讜注讚 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇

Rava said to him: No, there are unattributed mishnayot in accordance with each opinion, and he resolved for you that the halakha is in accordance with each opinion in particular cases. With regard to marriage and lashings the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that two occurrences are sufficient for a presumption. Concerning set patterns of menstrual bleeding and a forewarned ox, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel that a presumption is established after three occurrences.

谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讛讗 讚讗诪专谉 诪诇拽讬讜转 讚转谞谉 诪讬 砖诇拽讛 讜砖谞讛 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讻讜谞住讬谉 讗讜转讜 诇讻讬驻讛 讜诪讗讻讬诇讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖注讜专讬诐 注讚 砖转讛讗 讻专讬住讜 谞讘拽注转 讜住转讜转 讚转谞谉 讗讬谉 讛讗砖讛

The Gemara identifies the aforementioned halakhot. Marriage is referring to that which we said with regard to a woman whose husbands have died. The case of lashings is as we learned in a mishna (Nidda 63b): One who was flogged for transgressing a Torah law, and repeated the same transgression and was flogged again, if he then repeats the sin a third time, the court places him in a narrow, vaulted chamber and they feed him barley until his stomach bursts. Once he has sinned and been flogged twice he has established a presumption of wickedness, and when he sins again he is caused to die so that he will not continue to sin. The case of set patterns of menstrual bleeding is as we learned in a mishna (Nidda 63b): A woman does not

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

  • Masechet Yevamot is sponsored by Ahava Leibtag and family in memory of her grandparents, Leo and Esther Aaron. "They always stressed the importance of a Torah life, mesorah and family. May their memory always be a blessing for their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren and great-great grandchildren".

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Yevamot: 58-64 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we are going to learn about who a High Priest and regular Priest can marry. What are the...
talking talmud_square

Yevamot 64: God Wants the Prayers of the Righteous

More aggadah - familiar interpretations of Genesis, for example...where Avraham takes Hagar to wife after 10 years of no children...
maon

Ask Your Local Rabbi

On Yevamot 64b we hear a story that took place in the synagogue of Maon, 讻谞讬砖转讗 讚诪注讜谉. Rabbi Yochanan is...

Yevamot 64

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Yevamot 64

诪诇诪讚 砖讗讬谉 讛砖讻讬谞讛 砖讜专讛 注诇 驻讞讜转 诪砖谞讬 讗诇驻讬诐 讜砖谞讬 专讘讘讜转 诪讬砖专讗诇 讛专讬 砖讛讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 砖谞讬 讗诇驻讬诐 讜砖谞讬 专讘讘讜转 讞住专 讗讞讚 讜讝讛 诇讗 注住拽 讘驻专讬讛 讜专讘讬讛 诇讗 谞诪爪讗 讝讛 讙讜专诐 诇砖讻讬谞讛 砖转住转诇拽 诪讬砖专讗诇

This teaches that the Divine Presence does not rest upon less than two thousands and two ten-thousands of the Jewish people, as the terms thousands and ten-thousands are both in the plural. Consequently, if there were two thousands and two ten-thousands of the Jewish people, less one, and this man did not engage in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, is he not found to have caused the Divine Presence to be depart from the Jewish people?

讗讘讗 讞谞谉 讗诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讞讬讬讘 诪讬转讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讘谞讬诐 诇讗 讛讬讜 诇讛诐 讛讗 讛讬讜 诇讛诐 讘谞讬诐 诇讗 诪转讜 讗讞专讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讙讜专诐 诇砖讻讬谞讛 砖转住转诇拽 诪讬砖专讗诇 砖谞讗诪专 诇讛讬讜转 诇讱 诇讗诇讛讬诐 讜诇讝专注讱 讗讞专讬讱 讘讝诪谉 砖讝专注讱 讗讞专讬讱 砖讻讬谞讛 砖讜专讛 讗讬谉 讝专注讱 讗讞专讬讱 注诇 诪讬 砖讜专讛 注诇 讛注爪讬诐 讜注诇 讛讗讘谞讬诐

Abba 岣nan said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer: A man who does not engage in procreation is liable to death, as it is stated with regard to the sons of Aaron: 鈥淎nd Nadav and Avihu died鈥and they had no children鈥 (Numbers 3:4). This indicates that if they would have had children they would not have died. Others say: He causes the Divine Presence to depart from the Jewish people, as it is stated: 鈥淭o be a God to you and to your seed after you鈥 (Genesis 17:7). When your seed is after you, i.e., when you have children, the Divine Presence rests upon the Jewish people, but if your seed is not after you, upon whom can the Divine Presence rest? Upon wood and stones?

诪转谞讬壮 谞砖讗 讗砖讛 讜砖讛讛 注诪讛 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 讜诇讗 讬诇讚讛 讗讬谞讜 专砖讗讬 诇讘讟诇 讙讬专砖讛 诪讜转专转 诇讬谞砖讗 诇讗讞专 讜专砖讗讬 讛砖谞讬 诇砖讛讜转 注诪讛 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 讜讗诐 讛驻讬诇讛 诪讜谞讛 诪砖注讛 砖讛驻讬诇讛

MISHNA: If a man married a woman and stayed with her for ten years and she did not give birth, he is no longer permitted to neglect the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. Consequently, he must either divorce her and marry someone else, or take another wife while still married to her. If he divorced her she is permitted to marry another man, as it is not necessarily on her account that she and her first husband did not have children, and the second husband is permitted to stay with her for ten years. And if she had a miscarriage, he counts the ten years from the time of the miscarriage.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 谞砖讗 讗砖讛 讜砖讛讛 注诪讛 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 讜诇讗 讬诇讚讛 讬讜爪讬讗 讜讬转谉 讻转讜讘讛 砖诪讗 诇讗 讝讻讛 诇讛讘谞讜转 诪诪谞讛

GEMARA: The Sages taught: If a man married a woman and stayed with her for ten years and she did not give birth, he should divorce her and pay her marriage contract, because perhaps he did not merit to be built, i.e., to have children, from her. It is not certain that their failure to have children is due to her, as it is possible that they are not a suitable match for bearing children.

讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诇讚讘专 讝讻专 诇讚讘专 诪拽抓 注砖专 砖谞讬诐 诇砖讘转 讗讘专诐 讘讗专抓 讻谞注谉 诇诇诪讚讱 砖讗讬谉 讬砖讬讘转 讞讜抓 诇讗专抓 注讜诇讛 诇讜 诪谉 讛诪谞讬谉 诇驻讬讻讱 讞诇讛 讛讜讗 讗讜 砖讞诇转讛 讛讬讗 讗讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讞讘讜砖讬诐 讘讘讬转 讛讗住讜专讬诐 讗讬谉 注讜诇讬谉 诇讜 诪谉 讛诪谞讬谉

Although there is no explicit proof for the matter that one must take another wife if he has not had children after ten years of marriage, there is an allusion to the matter, as the verse states: 鈥淎nd Sarai, Abram鈥檚 wife, took Hagar鈥after Abram had dwelled ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to Abram her husband to be his wife鈥 (Genesis 16:3). Incidentally, this verse also comes to teach you that the years spent dwelling outside of Eretz Yisrael do not count as part of his tally. Consequently, if he was sick during this period or she was sick, or if one of the two of them was imprisoned in jail, it does not count as part of his tally.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 诇专讘 谞讞诪谉 讜诇讬诇祝 诪讬爪讞拽 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讬爪讞拽 讘谉 讗专讘注讬诐 砖谞讛 讘拽讞转讜 讗转 专讘拽讛 讜讙讜壮 讜讻转讬讘 讜讬爪讞拽 讘谉 砖砖讬诐 砖谞讛 讘诇讚转 讗讜转诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讬爪讞拽 注拽讜专 讛讬讛

Rava said to Rav Na岣an: Let us derive from Isaac that one may wait a longer period of time, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah鈥o be his wife鈥 (Genesis 25:20), and it is written with regard to the birth of Jacob and Esau: 鈥淎nd Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them鈥 (Genesis 25:26). This indicates that one may wait twenty years. Rav Na岣an said to him: Isaac knew that he was infertile, and therefore there was no reason for him to marry another woman, as Rebekah was not the cause of their infertility.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讗讘专讛诐 谞诪讬 注拽讜专 讛讬讛 讛讛讜讗 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇讻讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇诪讛 谞诪谞讜 砖谞讜转讬讜 砖诇 讬砖诪注讗诇 讻讚讬 诇讬讬讞住 讘讛谉 砖谞讜转讬讜 砖诇 讬注拽讘

The Gemara responds: If so, Abraham also should not have married another woman, as he was also infertile. Rather, the tanna requires that verse that states when Jacob and Esau were born for that which Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba taught. This is because Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Why were Ishmael鈥檚 years counted in the Torah, as they do not appear to be relevant to its narrative? In order to determine through them the years of Jacob, i.e., Jacob鈥檚 age at the time that various events took place, as explained in tractate Megilla (17a). The verse concerning Jacob鈥檚 birth was not meant to allude to a halakha about remaining married before having children, but to make it possible to determine Jacob鈥檚 age by relating it to the age of Ishmael.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讬爪讞拽 讗讘讬谞讜 注拽讜专 讛讬讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬注转专 讬爪讞拽 诇讛壮 诇谞讻讞 讗砖转讜 注诇 讗砖转讜 诇讗 谞讗诪专 讗诇讗 诇谞讜讻讞 诪诇诪讚 砖砖谞讬讛诐 注拽讜专讬诐 讛讬讜 讗讬 讛讻讬 讜讬注转专 诇讜 讜讬注转专 诇讛诐 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜 讚讜诪讛 转驻诇转 爪讚讬拽 讘谉 爪讚讬拽 诇转驻诇转 爪讚讬拽 讘谉 专砖注

Rabbi Yitz岣k said: Isaac our father was infertile, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Isaac entreated the Lord concerning [lenokha岣] his wife because she was barren鈥 (Genesis 25:21). It is not stated that he entreated the Lord for [al] his wife, but lenokha岣, which can mean opposite, against, or corresponding to; this teaches that they were both infertile. The Gemara asks: If so, why does the verse continue: 鈥淎nd the Lord let Himself be entreated of him鈥? The verse should say: And the Lord let Himself be entreated of them. The Gemara answers that their prayers were answered due to Isaac, because the prayer of a righteous individual who is the son of a righteous individual is not similar to the prayer of a righteous individual who is the son of a wicked individual, and Rebekah鈥檚 father was the wicked Bethuel.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪驻谞讬 诪讛 讛讬讜 讗讘讜转讬谞讜 注拽讜专讬诐 诪驻谞讬 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪转讗讜讛 诇转驻诇转谉 砖诇 爪讚讬拽讬诐 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诇诪讛 谞诪砖诇讛 转驻诇转谉 砖诇 爪讚讬拽讬诐 讻注转专 诪讛 注转专 讝讛 诪讛驻讱 讛转讘讜讗讛 诪诪拽讜诐 诇诪拽讜诐 讻讱 转驻诇转谉 砖诇 爪讚讬拽讬诐 诪讛驻讻转 诪讚讜转讬讜 砖诇 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪诪讚转 专讙讝谞讜转 诇诪讚转 专讞诪谞讜转 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗讘专讛诐 讜砖专讛 讟讜诪讟诪讬谉 讛讬讜 砖谞讗诪专 讛讘讬讟讜 讗诇 爪讜专

Rabbi Yitz岣k said: For what reason were our forefathers initially infertile? Because the Holy One, Blessed be He, desires the prayers of the righteous, and He therefore wanted them to pray for children. Similarly, Rabbi Yitz岣k said: Why are the prayers of the righteous compared to a pitchfork [eter], as in the verse: 鈥淎nd He let Himself be entreated [vaye鈥檃ter]鈥? This indicates that just as this pitchfork turns over produce from one place to another, so the prayer of the righteous turns over the attributes of the Holy One, Blessed be He, from the attribute of rage to the attribute of mercy. Rabbi Ami said: Abraham and Sarah were originally tumtumin, people whose sexual organs are concealed and not functional, as it is stated: 鈥淟ook to the rock

讞爪讘转诐 讜讗诇 诪拽讘转 讘讜专 谞拽专转诐 讜讻转讬讘 讛讘讬讟讜 讗诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗讘讬讻诐 讜讗诇 砖专讛 转讞讜诇诇讻诐

from where you were hewn, and to the hole of the pit from where you were dug鈥 (Isaiah 51:1), and it is written in the next verse: 鈥淟ook to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you鈥 (Isaiah 51:2), which indicates that sexual organs were fashioned for them, signified by the words hewn and dug, over the course of time.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 砖专讛 讗诪谞讜 讗讬诇讜谞讬转 讛讬转讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜转讛讬 砖专讬 注拽专讛 讗讬谉 诇讛 讜诇讚 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讬转 讜诇讚 讗讬谉 诇讛

Rav Na岣an said that Rabba bar Avuh said: Our mother Sarah was initially a sexually underdeveloped woman [aylonit], as it is stated: 鈥淎nd Sarah was barren; she had no child鈥 (Genesis 11:30). The superfluous words: 鈥淪he had no child,鈥 indicate that she did not have even a place, i.e., a womb, for a child.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 砖讬诇转 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讘讚讜专讜转 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 砖砖谞讜转讬讛谉 诪专讜讘讜转 讗讘诇 讘讚讜专讜转 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 砖砖谞讜转讬讛谉 诪讜注讟讜转 砖转讬 砖谞讬诐 讜诪讞爪讛 讻谞讙讚 砖诇砖讛 注讬讘讜专讬诐 专讘讛 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讻谞讙讚 砖诇砖 驻拽讬讚讜转 讚讗诪专 诪专 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 谞驻拽讚讜 砖专讛 专讞诇 讜讞谞讛

Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, said in the name of Rav: They taught that he waits ten years only with regard to the people who lived in former generations, whose years were numerous, i.e., they lived longer. However, with regard to the people who live in later generations, whose years are few, he waits only two and half years before divorcing her, corresponding to the time period of three pregnancies. Rabba said in the name of Rav Na岣an: He waits three years, corresponding to the three remembrances of barren women by God, as the Master said: On Rosh HaShana Sarah, Rachel, and Hannah were remembered, i.e., God gave them children. Since God determines on Rosh HaShana whether barren women will conceive that year, one may remain married until three such opportunities have passed.

讗诪专 专讘讛 诇讬转谞讛讜 诇讛谞讬 讻诇诇讬 诪讻讚讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪讗谉 转拽讬谉 专讘讬 讜讛讗 讘讬诪讬 讚讜讚 讗讬诪注讜讟 砖谞讬 讚讻转讬讘 讬诪讬 砖谞讜转讬谞讜 讘讛诐 砖讘注讬诐 砖谞讛

However, Rabba himself said: These principles are not accepted as halakha. Why not? Now consider, who established the content of the mishna? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Yet, in the days of King David, many years before the time of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the years of an average lifespan were already diminished, as it is written: 鈥淭he days of our years are seventy years, and if with strength eighty years鈥 (Psalms 90:10). Consequently, if Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi included in the mishna the statement that one remains married for ten years, that must apply even nowadays.

讜讛讗讬 砖诪讗 诇讗 讝讻讛 诇讛讘谞讜转 讛讬诪谞讛 讜讚诇诪讗 讗讬讛讬 讚诇讗 讝讻讬讗 讗讬讛讬 讻讬讜谉 讚诇讗 诪驻拽讚讗 讗驻专讬讛 讜专讘讬讛 诇讗 诪讬注谞砖讛

The Gemara asks about the language of the baraita. And what about this expression: Perhaps he did not merit to be built from her; perhaps it was she who did not merit to build a family. The Gemara answers: She, since she is not commanded to be fruitful and multiply, is not punished. Their worthiness therefore depends on him, not her.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 诇专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 谞住讬讘 讗讬转转讗 讜讗讜诇讬讚 讘谞讬 讜讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗讬 讝讻讗讬 讛讜讜 诇讬 诪拽诪讬讬转讗 讛转诐 讚讞讜讬 拽讗 诪讚讞讬 诇讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗

The Gemara challenges the mishna鈥檚 statement that if one did not have children after ten years he should marry a different woman. Is that so? Didn鈥檛 the Sages say to Rabbi Abba bar Zavda: Marry a woman and have children, and he said to them: If I had merited, I would already have children from my first wife? This indicates that there is no obligation to remarry if one did not have children with his first wife. The Gemara answers: There, Rabbi Abba bar Zavda was merely putting the Rabbis off with an excuse, as the real reason why he would not marry was because Rabbi Abba bar Zavda became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse. Rav Huna鈥檚 students would hold back from relieving themselves until his lengthy sermons were finished, which caused them to become sterile.

专讘 讙讬讚诇 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 专讘 砖砖转 讗讬注拽专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讗讞讚转讬讛 住讜住讻讬谞转讗 转诇讬讜讛 讘讗专讝讗 讚讘讬 专讘 讜谞驻拽 诪讬谞讬讛 讻讛讜爪讗 讬专拽讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 砖讬转讬谉 住讘讬 讛讜讬谞讗 讜讻讜诇讛讜 讗讬注拽讜专 诪驻专拽讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇讘专 诪讗谞讗 讚拽讬讬诪讬 讘谞驻砖讗讬 讛讞讻诪讛 转讞讬讛 讘注诇讬讛

The Gemara similarly relates that Rav Giddel became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse, Rav 岣lbo became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse, and Rav Sheshet became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse. The Gemara relates: Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov was afflicted by suskhinta, a disease caused by holding back from urinating. They suspended him from the cedar column that supported the study hall, and a substance that was as green as a palm leaf emerged from him, and he was healed. Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov said: We were sixty elders present at the time, and they all became impotent from Rav Huna鈥檚 discourse, aside from me, as I fulfilled with regard to myself the verse: 鈥淲isdom preserves the life of he who has it鈥 (Ecclesiastes 7:12). I used the above cure to avoid becoming impotent.

讙讬专砖讛 诪讜转专转 讜讻讜壮 砖谞讬 讗讬谉 砖诇讬砖讬 诇讗

搂 It was taught in the mishna that if a man divorced his wife after ten years without children, she is permitted to marry a second man, who may remain married to her for ten years. The Gemara comments: A second husband, yes, but a third one, no. Once she has been married to two men without children for ten years each, it is presumed that she is unable to have children.

诪转谞讬转讬谉 诪谞讬 专讘讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诪诇讛 讛专讗砖讜谉 讜诪转 砖谞讬 讜诪转 砖诇讬砖讬 诇讗 转诪讜诇 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 砖诇讬砖讬 转诪讜诇 专讘讬注讬 诇讗 转诪讜诇

The Gemara comments: Who is the tanna of the mishna? It is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who holds that a legal presumption [岣zaka] is established after two occurrences. As it is taught in a baraita: If a woman circumcised her first son and he died as a result of the circumcision, and she circumcised her second son and he also died, she should not circumcise her third son, as the deaths of the first two produce a presumption that this woman鈥檚 sons die as a result of circumcision. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: She should circumcise her third son, as there is not considered to be a legal presumption that her sons die from circumcision, but she should not circumcise her fourth son if her first three sons died from circumcision.

讜讛转谞讬讗 讗讬驻讻讗 讛讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讞专讬谞讬转讗

The Gemara asks: Isn鈥檛 the reverse taught in a baraita, that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that the woman鈥檚 third son must be circumcised and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that he is not circumcised? Which of them was composed later and is therefore presumed to be more reliable?

转讗 砖诪注 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪注砖讛 讘讗专讘注 讗讞讬讜转 讘爪驻讜专讬 砖诪诇讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 讜诪转 砖谞讬讛 讜诪转 砖诇讬砖讬转 讜诪转 专讘讬注讬转 讘讗转 诇驻谞讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗诪专 诇讛 讗诇 转诪讜诇讬

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: An incident occurred involving four sisters in Tzippori, that the first sister circumcised her son and he died, and the second sister circumcised her son and he died, and the third one circumcised her son and he too died. The fourth sister came before Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said to her: Do not circumcise him. This indicates that according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel a presumption is established only after three occurrences.

讜讚诇诪讗 讗讬 讗转讬讗 砖诇讬砖讬转 谞诪讬 讛讜讛 讗诪专 诇讛 讗诐 讻谉 诪讗讬 讗住讛讚讜转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讜讚诇诪讗 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗讞讬讜转 诪讞讝拽讜转

The Gemara refutes this proof: Perhaps if the third sister had come before him he would also have said to her the same ruling. The Gemara asks: If so, what is the purpose of Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba鈥檚 testimony? Why would he have related this incident if it does not teach us anything? The Gemara answers: Perhaps he comes to teach us that sisters establish a presumption in a case like this even though the children who died were not from the same mother.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 讗讞讬讜转 诪讞讝拽讜转 诇讗 讬砖讗 讗讚诐 讗砖讛 诇讗 诪诪砖驻讞转 谞讻驻讬谉 讜诇讗 诪诪砖驻讞转 诪爪讜专注讬诐 讜讛讜讗 讚讗转讞讝拽 转诇转讗 讝讬诪谞讬

Rava said: Now that you have said that sisters establish a presumption, a man should not marry a woman from a family of epileptics or from a family of lepers, as these diseases might be hereditary. The Gemara adds: And this applies only if it was established three times, i.e., three members of the family are afflicted with the disease.

诪讗讬 讛讜讛 注诇讛 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 注讜讘讚讗 讛讜讛 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘讻谞讬砖转讗 讚诪注讜谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 砖讞诇 诇讛讬讜转 讘砖讘转 讜诪诇讛 专讗砖讜谞讛 讜诪转 砖谞讬讛 讜诪转 砖诇讬砖讬转 讘讗讛 诇驻谞讬讜 讗诪专 诇讛 诇讻讬 讜诪讜诇讬

The Gemara asks: Which halakhic conclusion was about this matter? Is a presumption established after two occurrences or only after three? When Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael, he said: An incident occurred before Rabbi Yo岣nan in the synagogue of the town of Maon on a Yom Kippur that occurred on Shabbat. The first sister had circumcised her son and he died; the second sister circumcised her son and he also died. The third sister came before him, and he said to her: Go and circumcise your son, as a presumption is not established after only two occurrences.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讞讝讬 讚拽砖专讬转 讗讬住讜专讗 讜住讻谞转讗

Abaye said to Rav Yitz岣k: See to it that your report is accurate, as you are permitting an action that would otherwise constitute a prohibition and a danger. If the third baby should not be circumcised, doing so would be a prohibited labor and would endanger the life of the child.

住诪讱 注诇讛 讗讘讬讬 讜讗讝诇 谞住讘讛 诇讞讜诪讛 讘专转讗 讚讗讬住讬 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讚谞住讘讛 专讞讘讗 讚驻讜诪讘讚讬转讗 讜砖讻讬讘 专讘 讬爪讞拽 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讜砖讻讬讘 讜谞住讘讛 讛讜讗 讜砖讻讬讘

The Gemara comments: Abaye relied on this report and went and married 岣ma, the daughter of Isi, son of Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rav Yehuda. 岣ma had previously married Ra岣va of Pumbedita, and he died, and then she married Rav Yitz岣k, son of Rabba bar bar 岣na, and he died; and he, Abaye, married her nevertheless, without concern that she had been established to be a woman whose husbands die; and he died as well while married to her.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讜诪讬 讗讬讻讗 讚注讘讬讚 注讜讘讚讗 讘谞驻砖讬讛 讻讬 讛讗讬 讜讛讗 讗讬讛讜 讚讗诪专 讗讘讬谉 讚住诪讻讗 讬爪讞拽 住讜诪拽讗 诇讗讜 讘专 住诪讻讗 讗讘讬谉 讬砖谞讜 讘讞讝专讛 讬爪讞拽 住讜诪拽讗 讗讬谞讜 讘讞讝专讛 讜注讜讚 讗讬诪专 讚驻诇讬讙讬 诇注谞讬谉 诪讬诇讛 讘谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 诪讬 驻诇讬讙讬

Rava said: Is there anyone who performs an action like this and endangers himself by marrying such a woman? Wasn鈥檛 it he, Abaye, who said that Avin is reliable but Yitz岣k the Red, i.e., Rav Yitz岣k bar Yosef, is not reliable? He proceeds to explain the difference between them: Avin returns to Eretz Yisrael and hears whether the Sages there rescind their previous rulings, whereas Yitz岣k the Red does not return to Eretz Yisrael and never finds out if the Sages there rescind their rulings. And furthermore, say that they disagree with regard to whether a presumption is established by two or by three deaths due to circumcision, but do they necessarily argue with regard to marriage?

讗讬谉 讜讛转谞讬讗 谞讬住转 诇专讗砖讜谉 讜诪转 诇砖谞讬 讜诪转 诇砖诇讬砖讬 诇讗 转谞砖讗 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诇砖诇讬砖讬 转谞砖讗 诇专讘讬注讬 诇讗 转谞砖讗

The Gemara responds: Yes, and it is taught in a baraita: If a woman was married to her first husband and he died, to a second one and he also died, she may not get married to a third husband. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: She may get married to a third husband, but if he also dies, she may not get married to a fourth husband.

讘砖诇诪讗 讙讘讬 诪讬诇讛 讗讬讻讗 诪砖驻讞讛 讚专驻讬 讚诪讗 讜讗讬讻讗 诪砖驻讞讛 讚拽诪讬讟 讚诪讗 讗诇讗 谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诪专讚讻讬 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讛讻讬 讗诪专 讗讘讬诪讬 诪讛讙专讜谞讬讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪注讬谉 讙讜专诐 讜专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪讝诇 讙讜专诐

The Gemara asks: Granted with regard to circumcision a presumption of death due to circumcision can be established because there are families whose blood is thin and does not clot well, and there are families whose blood clots. However, in the case of marriage, what is the reason for concern that a subsequent husband will die? Rav Mordekhai said to Rav Ashi: Avimi of Hagron-ya said in the name of Rav Huna as follows: Her spring is the cause. In other words, the woman has some sort of condition that causes those who have intercourse with her to die. And Rav Ashi said that her constellation is the cause of her husbands鈥 deaths.

诪讗讬 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讚讗讬专住讛 讜诪讬转 讗讬 谞诪讬 讚谞驻诇 诪讚讬拽诇讗 讜诪讬转

The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between them? The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where a man betrothed her and died before the wedding; alternatively, in a case where he fell off a palm tree and died. If the concern is due to intercourse, then in these cases the husband鈥檚 death cannot be attributed to his wife. Conversely, if the concern is due to her bad fortune, the husband鈥檚 death can be attributed to his wife even in these cases.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘讗 讘注讬 诪讬谞讬讛 诪专讘 讬讜住祝 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讗讬谉 讗讞讜讻讬 讗讞讬讱 讘讬

Rav Yosef, son of Rava, said to Rava: I inquired of Rav Yosef whether the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and he said to me: Yes. I subsequently asked him if the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and he said to me: Yes. Was he mocking me by issuing contradictory rulings?

讗诪专 诇讬讛 诇讗 住转诪讬 讛讬讗 讜驻砖讬讟 诇讱 谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讜诪诇拽讬讜转 讻专讘讬 讜住转讜转 讜砖讜专 讛诪讜注讚 讻专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇

Rava said to him: No, there are unattributed mishnayot in accordance with each opinion, and he resolved for you that the halakha is in accordance with each opinion in particular cases. With regard to marriage and lashings the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that two occurrences are sufficient for a presumption. Concerning set patterns of menstrual bleeding and a forewarned ox, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel that a presumption is established after three occurrences.

谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讛讗 讚讗诪专谉 诪诇拽讬讜转 讚转谞谉 诪讬 砖诇拽讛 讜砖谞讛 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讻讜谞住讬谉 讗讜转讜 诇讻讬驻讛 讜诪讗讻讬诇讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖注讜专讬诐 注讚 砖转讛讗 讻专讬住讜 谞讘拽注转 讜住转讜转 讚转谞谉 讗讬谉 讛讗砖讛

The Gemara identifies the aforementioned halakhot. Marriage is referring to that which we said with regard to a woman whose husbands have died. The case of lashings is as we learned in a mishna (Nidda 63b): One who was flogged for transgressing a Torah law, and repeated the same transgression and was flogged again, if he then repeats the sin a third time, the court places him in a narrow, vaulted chamber and they feed him barley until his stomach bursts. Once he has sinned and been flogged twice he has established a presumption of wickedness, and when he sins again he is caused to die so that he will not continue to sin. The case of set patterns of menstrual bleeding is as we learned in a mishna (Nidda 63b): A woman does not

Scroll To Top