[a - 56 lines; b - 50 lines]
1)[line 1]ומטמא להU'MITAMEI LAH (TUM'AS KOHANIM - The Prohibition Forbidding a Kohen from Becoming Tamei)
(a)Kohanim are prohibited from coming into contact with most corpses. The exceptions to this rule are his mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister (with whom he shares at least a father, and who is an unmarried virgin), and wife (whom he was permitted to marry). A Kohen is obligated to become Tamei and handle the burial of these relatives (Vayikra 21:1-4).
(b)This prohibition applies male Kohanim to only. Immediately before and during the Shalosh Regalim (Pesach, Shavu'os, and Sukos), however, every Jew, both male or female, must be careful to remain Tahor (RASHI to Yevamos 29b DH v'Lo Mitames). The Mitzvah to handle the burial of one's seven closest relatives applies to all Jews.
(c)A Kohen who is married mid'Rabanan, such as one who married a minor after her father died, is not only allowed but is even required to handle her burial. This is true since her husband inherits her (mid'Rabanan), and therefore nobody else will handle her burial. She is therefore a Mes Mitzvah (a corpse with no relatives; see Background to Yevamos 7:4) (Yevamos 89b; see Background to Sotah 45:31 and Insights to Yevamos 89b).
2)[line 2]אינה צריכה הימנו גט שניEINAH TZERICHAH HEIMENU GET SHENI- she does not require another Get from him [since it took effect a moment before his death]
3)[line 3]בעילתה תלויהBE'ILASAH TELUYAH- [whether or not] her relations [with one other than her husband are punishable] depend [upon whether or not her husband dies as a result of his illness, since if he does she will have been retroactively divorced from the time that she received the Get]
4)[line 4]בעילתה ספקBE'ILASAH SAFEK- [whether or not] her relations [with one other than her husband are punishable] is in doubt [since, although her divorce occurs just before her husband dies, he may have been about to die at the time that she committed adultery]. That which he remained alive for a while afterward does not prove that he was not close to death earlier (RASHI KSAV YAD).
5)[line 6]אשם תלויASHAM TALUY - A Dependant Korban Asham
(a)If one is in doubt as to whether or not he committed a transgression for which he must offer a Korban Chatas (see Background to 55:13), he must offer a ram worth two Sela'im as a Korban Asham Taluy (dependant; Vayikra 5:17-19). Should he later discover that he did indeed sin, he must then offer a proper Korban Chatas; the Asham Taluy provides only temporary atonement as long as he is unsure of his requirement (see Background to Nazir 23:2b).
(b)One who offers a Korban Asham first leans on the animal with all his might (Semichah) in the northern area of the Azarah. He then recites Viduy, confessing his sin and asking Hash-m for forgiveness. The animal is then immediately slaughtered. The blood of the Chatas is applied to the northeastern Keren (cubic Amah post on the corner of the Mizbe'ach) in such a way that it touches both the northern and the eastern sides, and then to the southwestern Keren in such a way that it touches both the southern and the western sides (Shenayim she'Hen Arba). The remaining blood is then spilled onto the Yesod (base) of the Mizbe'ach. Like with the Korban Chatas, certain parts of the Korban are consumed by Kohanim in the Azarah; they must be consumed before the day following its offering (Vayikra 4:27-31).
(c)Certain Tana'im, including Isi ben Yehudah, rule that one is obligated to offer an Asham Taluy only if there was a permitted object and a forbidden one, and he is not sure with which of them his action was performed. This is termed "Chatichah mi'Shtei Chatichos". An example of this would be a case in which there were two pieces of fat, one of which was known to be Shuman (permitted fat) and the other Chelev (forbidden fat; see Background to Gitin 2:19). In such a situation, if one consumed one of the two pieces and he is unsure as to which, he would be obligated in an Asham Taluy. If, however, he was unsure if the piece of fat that he consumed was Chelev or Shuman, then he is not obligated. Other Tana'im, including Rebbi Akiva, maintain that even in this case one is obligated to offer an Asham Taluy.
6)[line 8]מייתי אשם תלויMAISI ASHAM TALUY- [one who had relations with her] must offer an Asham Taluy [since we are unable to determine whether or not she was married at the time of the relations]
7)[line 12]בעלה חייב במזונותיהBA'ALAH CHAYAV BI'MEZONOSEHA (MEZONOS - One's Obligation to Provide his Wife with Sustenance)
(a)A man has certain obligations toward his wife, some of which he is obligated in mid'Oraisa, and some mid'Rabanan. Some of these conditions of marriage are written into every Kesuvah (Jewish marriage contract; see Background to 55:54), and they are all enforced by Beis Din. His Torah obligations include:
1.One must provide his wife with marital relations (Shemos 21:10).
2.One must provide her with clothing.
3.One must provide her with sustenance (Mezonos).
(b)Some opinions maintain that these last two obligations are mid'Rabanan in nature (see Kesuvos 47b and RAMBAN ibid.). According to those who maintain that Mezonos is a Rabbinic institution, the Rabanan established a reciprocal institution as well. In return for that which one must support his wife, all money that she earns or possessions that she acquires belong to her husband.
8)[line 15]מיכן ועד שלשים יוםMI'KEN V'AD SHELOSHIM YOM- [at any time] between now and thirty days' time
9)[line 18]צידןTZIDON- Sidon, a city in the north of Eretz Yisrael on the Mediterranean coast (Bamidbar 34:7). It was once the capital of Phoenicia, and is north of the border of modern-day Israel.
10)[line 19]איצטליתיITZTELISI- my robe made of fine wool
11)[line 20]דמיהDAMEHA- its value
12a)[line 21]והיא תתןV'HI SITEN- and she shall give [her husband the 200 Zuz, at which point the condition was fulfilled; the divorce, however, occurred when she received the Get]
b)[line 22]לכשתתןLECHESHE'TITEN- [the Get takes effect only] when she gives [her husband the 200 Zuz]
13)[line 22]נתקרעNISKARE'A- it was torn up [before she gave the 200 Zuz]
14)[line 26]קידושיןKIDUSHIN - Betrothal and Marriage
(a)The first stage of Halachic marriage is called Kidushin (betrothal). Kidushin can be accomplished in one of three ways:
1.Kesef - A man can be Mekadesh a woman through giving her money or anything equal in value to a Perutah (a very small coin). Upon doing so, he must proclaim, "Harei At Mekudeshes Li b'(-----) Zu" - "Behold you are betrothed to me through this (-----)".
2.Shtar - A man can be Mekadesh a woman through giving her a marriage document. This may be written upon any surface, and need not be of any specific value. The words "Harei At Mekudeshes Li bi'Shtar Zeh" must be written upon the Shtar.
3.Bi'ah - A man can be Mekadesh a woman through having relations with her. At that time, he must proclaim, "Harei At Mekudeshes Li b'Bi'ah Zu". Because Kidushin requires witnesses, the Chachamim strongly condemned anyone who uses this method of Kidushin.
(b)The Torah refers to this stage of marriage as "Erusin" (Devarim 22:23). The term "Kidushin" is used by the Rabanan in order to connote that just as everyone is prohibited to benefit from Hekdesh (an object sanctified to the service of Hash-m), through Kidushin a woman becomes prohibited to everyone in the world save her husband (Kidushin 2b; see also Tosfos 7a DH v'Nifshetu). Although a man and women are married after Kidushin, they may not yet live together as man and wife.
15)[line 31]פשטהPASHTAH- she stretched out
16a)[line 37]לקרובה קאתיLI'KEROVAH KA'ASI- he is coming to draw her close [and therefore intends to marry her immediately, with the money a stipulation to be fulfilled later]
b)[line 37]לרחוקה קאתיLI'RECHOKAH KA'ASI- he is coming to distance her [although he does not truly wish to, and therefore wishes to delay the divorce in the hope that he will meanwhile be able to convince her to reconsider]
17)[line 40]לא כסיף למיתבעהLO CHASIF L'MISBE'AH- he is not embarrassed to claim [money] from her (perhaps since he does not care if he alienates her after their divorce)
18)[line 49]נתנהNASNAH- if she had given [the money before his death]
19)[line 49]אינה זקוקה ליבםEINAH ZEKUKAH L'YAVAM (YIBUM / CHALITZAH - Levirate Marriage)
(a)Should a married man die without children, his widow is not then free to marry whomever she pleases. The brothers of her deceased husband have a Mitzvah to perform Yibum (levirate marriage); that is, they are obligated to marry her (Devarim 25:5-10). If the deceased has more than one brother, the oldest brother is offered the Mitzvah of Yibum first (Yevamos 24a).
(b)If the brother(s) does not wish to carry out this Mitzvah, he must perform Chalitzah. This is a procedure in Beis Din which dissolves the ties binding the widow to her brother(s)-in-law (known as "Zikah"), thus allowing her to marry anyone else. One of the brothers must appear together with his widowed sister-in-law before a Beis Din of three and state, "I do not wish to marry her." His sister-in-law then approaches him, removes his right sandal, and spits on the ground in front of him. She then declares, "This is what shall be done to the man who will not build his brother's family." After this she is free to marry whomever she wants.
20)[line 51]לי ולא ליורשיLI V'LO L'YORSHAI- [the implication of the word] "Li" [is] "to me" and not "to my heirs"
21)[line 53]כל האומר על מנת כאומר מעכשיו דמיKOL HA'OMER AL MENAS K'OMER ME'ACHSHAV DAMI - When One Says, "On Condition", it is as if He Says, "From Now"
(a)Much of the time, a Chalos (legally binding effect) or Kinyan (act of acquisition or an act that results in a change in status) may be made Al Tenai (conditionally).
(b)There are two general types of Tenai. One specifies that the desired effect take place only at the time that the condition is fulfilled. This is assumed when one simply states that the Chalos will take place "Im ..." ("if ..."). The other allows the effect to take place retroactively when the condition is later fulfilled. This is assumed when one adds the clause "me'Achshav" ("from now"). If one used the formulation "Al Menas" ("on condition"), then Rebbi maintains that he intends for the Chalos to take effect retroactively upon the fulfillment of the condition.
22)[line 54]כי הוינן בבבלKI HAVINAN B'VAVAEL- when we were in Bavel
23)[line 55]כי סליקיKI SELIKI- when I went up [to Eretz Yisrael]
24)[last line]"מהיום ולאחר מיתה""MEHA'YOM UL'ACHAR MISA"- "[I hereby divorce you] from today until after my death". There are two ways to understand this odd statement: a) he is giving his wife a Get that takes effect immediately, retroactive from the time of his death, or b) he first intended to divorce her immediately, but then changed his mind and retracted his original statement.
25)[line 1]והתניאVEHA'TANYA- This Beraisa is offered as proof of the Gemara's thesis.
26)[line 1]גט ואינו גטGET V'EINO GET- lit. it is Get and it is not a Get; i.e., the Chachamim are unsure if he intended it as a condition or if he retracted his original intention
27)[line 3]אדמיפלגיAD'MIFLEGEI- before disagreeing
28)[line 4]להודיעך כחו דרביL'HODI'ACHA KOCHO D'REBBI- [the reason why the Beraisa teaches that their Machlokes applies even in this case is] to let you know the extent of Rebbi's opinion
29)[line 6]כח דהיתירא עדיף ליהKO'ACH D'HETEIRA ADIF LEI - The Power of Leniency is Greater
(a)When a far-reaching disagreement that affects more than one possible case is recorded, there are two possible ways in which to demonstrate the disagreement. One is by detailing the case that highlights the extreme of one opinion, while the other is to detail the case that highlights the extreme of the other opinion.
(b)It is generally better to highlight the lenient opinion, as this teaches us more than the stringent one. If one rules stringently, we do not know his true opinion on the matter. He may have decided that the stringent ruling is the correct one. He may, however, have been in doubt regarding the correct ruling, and ruled stringently out of doubt. One who rules leniently clearly must have the necessary proof to back it up if he maintains that such his ruling is correct.
30a)[line 8]קפידיה לאו קפידאKEPEIDEI LAV KEPEIDA- his does not really men to insist [that she must pay within thirty days in order to be divorced]
b)[line 8]ולזרזה קאתיUL'ZARZAH KA'ASI- and he is coming [in saying so] in order to hurry her
31)[line 10]מאי תנא דקתני מעשה?MAI TANA DEKA'TANI MA'ASEH?- what did we learn [regarding that which she may substitute money for the value of an item] that we learned a story [illustrating such a point]?
32)[line 11]חסורי מיחסרא והכי קתניCHISUREI MECHSERA V'HACHI KA'TANI - Amending the Meaning of a Mishnah or Beraisa
(a)In order to answer a question posed from a Mishnah or Beraisa, the Gemara will sometimes explain that we have not understood the Mishnah or Beraisa correctly. The Gemara will say "Chisurei Mechsera v'Hachi ka'Tani" - "Words are missing, and it should be read as follows" - and then add words to the Mishnah or Beraisa which allow it to be read differently, thereby answering the question.
(b)The YAD MALACHI (Kelalei ha'Ches, #284) writes that the Gemara will sometimes use "Chisurei Mechsera" to change the original understanding of the Mishnah or Beraisa to one that expresses the opposite ruling. He then quotes the HALICHOS OLAM (2:2) as stating that the Gemara will not go that far, but will rather add to or adjust the original explanation of the Mishnah. The Yad Malachi cites the Gemara in Sanhedrin (12b), however, as proof of his opinion.
(c)How are we to understand that the Tana seemingly forgot to include such integral information? The VILNA GA'ON (end of Divrei Eliyahu, section entitled "Kelalim") explains that the use of "Chisurei Mechsera" does not reject the original reading of the Beraisa. The original reading may be read to mean what the Gemara understands in its final explanation, or it may be teaching a different point altogether (RABEINU BACHYA writes similarly in his commentary to Shemos 34:27). The BEIS YOSEF (in "Kelalei d'Gemara", Halichos Olam 2:41) explains that these teachings were originally given over in this fashion. Rebbi, who edited much of the Mishnah, recorded them in the Mishnah as they were, expecting those who learned them to fill in the "blanks" on their own. The TIFERES YISRAEL (Boaz to Erchin 4:1) explains that a special tune was utilized when learning Mishnayos and Beraisos to help one commit them to memory (a method used even today in some schools in Eretz Yisrael). The Tana would therefore use wording that fit with the tune even if it rendered the meaning less clear. The Tiferes Yisrael explains that the Tana knew that the true explanation would be apparent to anyone who studied the topic well, as evidenced by that which the Gemara is able to arrive at the proper understanding. (This explanation would appear to be at odds with the explanation of the Vilna Gaon above)
(d)The Gemara will sometimes correct the wording of a Mishnah or Beraisa with the word "Teni ..." ("teach") or "Eima ..." ("say"). Many Rishonim (e.g., RAN to Nedarim 46a) explain that these terms are used to explain the Tana's statement, as opposed to amending it. Similarly, the Gemara will sometimes answer a question by insisting that the Mishnah or Beraisa taught its ruling wherein the person involved verbally expressed a certain qualification. In such situations the Gemara will explain, "b'Omer ..." ("in a case where he said ..."). Here too, many Rishonim explain that the Gemara means that even if he did not actually express such a qualification, it is as if he did (e.g., TOSFOS to Yevamos 25b DH b'Omer).
33)[line 20]מחולים לךMECHULIM LACH- I forego them to you
34)[line 22]לא אחלה גבהLO ACHLAH GABAH- he does not forego them to her
35)[line 24]קא מפייסה ליה בדמיKA MEFAISAH LEI BI'DAMEI- she appeases him with money (i.e., the value of the robe)
36)[line 26]קונם שאתה נהנה ליKONAM SHE'ATAH NEHENAH LI (KINUYEI NEDARIM - Related Terms Utilized when Making a Vow)
(a)By accepting a prohibition or obligation upon oneself aloud, he has triggered a Torah obligation to fulfill that prohibition or obligation (Bamidbar 30:3). There are two categories of vows possible to accept upon oneself: Nedarim (Nidrei Isur) and Shevu'os.
(b)Generally speaking, the difference between a Neder and a Shevu'ah is that the object of a Neder is the item in question, whereas the object of a Shevu'ah is the person taking the vow. One who states, "This loaf of bread is prohibited to me" has voiced a Neder, whereas one who states "I hereby prohibit myself from eating this loaf of bread" has expressed a Shevu'ah. A Neder, therefore, is generally limited to prohibitions, whereas a Shevu'ah can obligate one in a previously voluntary activity as well. Furthermore, the subject of a Shevu'ah can be that which is intangible (a "Davar she'Ein Bo Mamash"), such as sleep. A Neder must focus upon a tangible object. A further difference between a Neder and a Shevu'ah is that through a Neder one may prohibit even his own object on another or another's object to himself. A Shevu'ah, however, affects only the one who expresses it. The Mishnah and Gemara (Nedarim 16b) suggest many other practical differences between Nedarim and Shevu'os. (See also Insights to 2:3.)
(c)A Neder may be expressed by relating the object in question to that which had previously been prohibited, such as a Korban. This is termed "Hatfasah". (Some Rishonim maintain that Hatfasah is integral to a Neder; see Insights to 2:2.) The object of the comparison, however, must be a "Davar ha'Nadur" - that which itself had been prohibited my man, either through a Neder or through Hekdesh (consecration). If one attempts to prohibit an object through a Neder by comparing it to a "Davar ha'Asur" - that which is prohibited by the Torah, such as non-kosher meat - is has no effect (Nedarim 14a).
(d)One need not mention the Davar ha'Nadur itself when expressing his Neder. He may instead utilize a Kinuy, a related term. For example, instead of saying, "This loaf of bread is forbidden to you like a Korban", one may use the term "Konam" or "Konach".
(e)Amora'im disagree as to the source of these terms. Rebbi Yochanan explains that they are words in foreign languages that are loosely based on the original Hebrew. Reish Lakish maintains that the Chachamim originated these expressions so that people would avoid using the actual terms. The reason for this is to prevent one from pronouncing Hash-m's name in vain. Since it is natural to say "Korban la'Hashem", which is the terminology of the Torah (Vayikra 1:2), one may come to mention the name of Hash-m before uttering the word "Korban". If he does not then end up finishing his Neder, he has uttered the Holy name of Hash-m to no end (Nedarim 10a).
(f)One who violates a Neder transgresses both a Mitzvas Asei (positive commandment) (Bamidbar ibid., Devarim 23:24) and a Mitzvas Lo Sa'asei (prohibition) (Bamidbar ibid.). As a result of the Lo Sa'asei, he receives Malkus (thirty-nine lashes) as long as his action was witnessed by two valid witnesses who first warned him of the consequences of his action.
(g)The Beraisa cited by our Gemara discusses a case of one who prohibits another from deriving any benefit from himself by stating, "All pleasure that you derive from me should be prohibited to you as if it was a Korban".
37)[line 27]כורKOR (Dry Measures)
(a)The following is a list of measures of volume used in the Mishnah and Gemara:
1.1 Kor (= 1 Chomer) = 30 Se'in
2.1 Lesech = 15 Se'in
3.1 Eifah = 3 Se'in
4.1 Se'ah = 6 Kabin
5.1 Tarkav (= Trei v'Kav, or 3 Kabin) = 12 Lugin
6.1 Kav = 4 Lugin
7.1 Log (= 1 Rova) = 4 Revi'iyos = 6 Beitzim
8.1 Beitzah = 2 or 3 k'Zeisim, according to the varying opinions
(b)A Kor contains approximately 216, 249, or 432 liters, depending upon the differing Halachic opinions.
38)[line 30]להתיר את נדרו שלא ע"פ חכםL'HATIR ES NIDRO SHE'LO AL PI CHACHAM (HATARAS NEDARIM - The Permitting of Vows)
(a)After one had taken a Neder (vow) or Shevu'ah (oath), pledged to be a Nazir, or designated Chalah (see Background to Beitzah 12:12), Terumah (see Background to Beitzah 12:15), or Hekdesh (that which is sanctified to Hash-m), he may have his vow revoked. He may not accomplish this himself; rather, he must appeal to either a Beis Din of three or a Yachid Mumcheh (an outstanding authority).
(b)One of two methods are possible when repealing a Neder. One is that the person who took the vow explains that had he been fully aware of the circumstances at the time that he took the Neder, or had he thought through the ramifications of his Neder, the he would not have taken the Neder in the first place. This is called a Pesach.
(c)Some opinions maintain that even if one expresses Charatah - sincere remorse that he had ever taken the Neder - then Beis Din or the Chacham may revoke the Neder. Charatah requires that he who vowed wishes that he had never taken the Neder to begin with, and not merely that the Neder would not now be in effect. (Nedarim 22)
(d)The Chachamim of our Beraisa rule that one need not go to a Chacham to permit his vow, since he may claim that he is as satisfied as if he had received what he had demanded even though he has not actually received it.
39)[line 30]הריני כאילו התקבלתיHAREINI K'ILU HISKABALTI- I consider it to be as if I have received it
40)[line 31]הכי השתא?HACHI HASHTA?- now [is this] so?
41)[line 31]התם לצעורה קא מכויןHASAM LI'TZE'URAH KA MECHAVEIN- there [in the case of one who divorced his wife on condition that she give him money] his intention is to cause her distress
42)[line 32]הרווחהHARVACHAH- [to receive] benefit
43)[line 34]אריסיהARISEI- his sharecropper, a hired field laborer who receives a percentage of that which the field produces
44)[line 34]דלו תלת דלוותאDALU TELAS DALVASA- irrigate [their fields] three times [a year]
b)[line 35]ואכלי ריבעאV'ACHLEI RIV'A- and they (lit. eat) receive one quarter [of that which the field produces]
45)[line 35]את דלי ארבעה ואכול תילתאAT DALI ARBA'AH, V'ECHOL TILSA- [I propose that] you irrigate [my field] four times [a year], and (lit. eat) receive one third [of that which the field produces]
46)[line 36]אתא מיטראASA MITRA- rain fell [rendering the fourth irrigation unnecessary]
47)[line 38]רב יוסף דאמר כרבנןRAV YOSEF D'AMAR K'RABANAN- Rav Yosef [who maintains that rainfall is not acceptable in place of a fourth irrigation] says like the Rabanan [who rule that money is not acceptable in place of the Itztela]
48)[line 39]ותיסברא?V'TISBERA?- is this logical?
49)[line 41]כרבנןK'RABANAN- [both Rav Yosef and Rabah are expressing their opinions] according to the Rabanan [in our Mishnah]
50a)[line 45]היה נטמןHAYAH NITMAN- he [who purchased a house in a walled city] would hide
b)[line 45]יום שנים עשר חדש כדי שיהא חלוט לוYOM SHENEIM ASAR CHODESH KEDEI SHE'YEHEI CHALUT LO - on the [last] day of the twelfth month (BATEI AREI CHOMAH - Houses in a Walled City)
(a)Houses located in a city that had been walled at the time of Yehoshua's conquest of Eretz Yisrael are termed Batei Arei Chomah. If one sells such a house, he has the right to purchase it back within one year of the sale. If he does not redeem it during that time, then it is "Chalut" to (becomes the permanent property of) the purchaser (Vayikra 25:29-30; see Charts to Erchin #4, sections 4a and 4b.)
51)[line 46]יהא חולש את מעותיו ללשכהSHE'YEHEI CHOLESH ES MA'OSAV LA'LISHKAH- that he [who sold the house] should throw his money into a room [in the Azarah (courtyard) of the Beis ha'Mikdash that had been set aside for this purpose]
52)[line 47]הלהHALAH- that one; i.e., the purchaser
53)[line 49]מדעתוMI'DAITO- if he accepts it willingly