Explanation: It says so because Bas Sheva was a Safek Eshes Ish.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): This is because everyone who went out to war in Beis David would write a Get to his wife on condition that if he dies, he divorces her, so she will not fall to Yibum;

All those days [during the war, before he dies] she is Safek divorced.

Question #1 (R. Tam): If so, not everyone wrote a Get. It was only men with brothers and no children (in which case a widow falls to Yibum)!

Answer: Rashi did not mean that it is only due to Yibum. Rather, it is [also] due to Agunah (inability to remarry, e.g. if it is not known whether or not he died. The Get was on condition that he not return from the war.)

Question #2 (R. Tam): It says in Shabbos (56a) that anyone who says that David sinned, he errs. Why is this? Uriyah returned from the war afterwards!

Answer: We can say that the Get was on condition that he not return at the end of the war.)

Question #3 - Citation (Mishnah - Gitin 73a): What is her status (a woman who received a Get on condition that he die from his illness)? R. Yehudah says, she is like a married woman in every way;

Citation (cont.): R. Yosi says, she is divorced and not divorced.

Even according to R. Yehudah, David sinned, for she is not Vadai divorced!

Suggestion: That is when he did not say "from now." The Gemara establishes it when he said "from the time I am in the world", i.e. a moment before I die, and in the war of Beis David they wrote "from today."

Rejection #1: It explicitly taught in the Tosefta [that if he said] "from today if I die", R. Yehudah says, she is like a married woman in every way.

Note: In the Tosefta (Gitin 5:4), R. Yehudah says that he gets her earnings and Metzi'os and can annul her vows. R. Yosi says, the Bi'ah is contingent. Chachamim say, she is totally divorced, as long as he dies in the end. This shows that they argue in this case. Since our Mishnah did not bring Chachamim's opinion, surely the Halachah does not follow them.

Rejection #2: The Mishnah in Gitin (73b) proves that he said "from today", for it refers to what was taught above.

Implied question: The Gemara says "from the time that I am in the world"!

Answer (R. Tam and R. Chananel): This means that it is as if he said "from the time that I am in the world." Since he said "if I die", he intends to delay divorce as much as he can. He does not want to divorce her until close to his death;

He said "from today" to show that he wants the divorce to take effect in his lifetime.

Explanation #2 (R. Tam): In the war of Beis David, they divorced totally without any Tenai, but they did so covertly, lest people seek to marry their [ex-]wives. Therefore, she is called a Safek Eshes Ish.

Question: For all the Perushim, it is difficult. Even if he had Bi'ah with a Vadai Eshes Ish, this is better than one who [publicly] shames another!

Source: David said that one who has Bi'ah with a married woman, he is executed through choking, and he has a share in the world to come, but one who shames...

Explanation: Not only when they are idle, rather, even when they are engaged in difficult Halachos, and they do not pertain to Eshes Ish [they taunted David about this].

Alternative text: Some texts say "when they are engaged in the four Misos Beis Din."

Observation: "Mutzeis" is written without an Aleph, like "va'Yatzes Esh b'Tziyon."

Explanation: [Tamar] was already close to the fire, yet she sent to [Yehudah] only through a hint. Had he not admitted, she would not have publicized him (that he is the father).

Observation: It does not say "hear my crying" or "see my tears", rather, "do not be silent."

Explanation: I am reliant that you will not be silent, because the gates of tears are never locked.

Assertion: If there was not sand in between, R. Eliezer admits that it is considered a Kli, for the plaster around the oven connects the rings and stands them by each other;

Because he put sand in between to separate the rings from each other, R. Eliezer is Metaher.

Support: The Mishnah in Kelim (5:8) says that if he cut it widthwise less than four Tefachim [thick] in each slab, it is Tahor. If he smeared it with mud, it is Tamei (Mekabel Tum'ah) from when he ignites it to bake Sufganim (thin, soft wafers);

If he distanced the mud and put sand or pebble in between, about this they said that a Nidah, Tamei and Tahor may bake in it, and it is Tahor;

It teaches sand similar to a pebble, which is dry.

Alternative text: Some texts say "Chachnai." This is the text in the Yerushalmi.

Explanation: "Chachan" is a snake. Perhaps this was the name of the owner of the oven.

Implied question: It says in Yevamos (14a) that the Halachah follows Beis Hillel because a Bas Kol (voice from Heaven) said so!

Answer #1: Here is different, for [the Bas Kol] comes to argue with Divrei Torah. It says "Acharei Rabim Lehatos" (we follow the majority);

There, just the contrary (the Bas Kol came to support Torah law). Beis Hillel were the majority, [and surely we follow them], if not that we were unsure if we follow the majority, because Beis Shamai were sharper.

Answer #2: Here, the Bas Kol was only for the honor of R. Eliezer, who said that Shamayim should prove [that the Halachah follows him].

Implied question: There, we say "this is like R. Yehoshua, who says that we do not heed a Bas Kol." We heard R. Yehoshua say so only regarding the Bas Kol of this episode with R. Eliezer! (Perhaps he follows a Bas Kol when it is like Torah law, and not merely for a Chacham's honor!)

Answer: There we infer from his words "[Torah] is not in Shamayim. Torah was already given to us from Sinai." This implies that we never heed a Bas Kol.

Implied question: It says in Avodah Zarah (3b) that from the day that the Beis ha'Mikdash was destroyed, there is no laughter in front of Hash-m!

Answer: That refers to on a fixed basis. Here He merely said an amusing matter.

Suggestion: We can resolve from here the question in Mo'ed Katan (15b) whether or not a Menudah (someone excommunicated) must tear his clothes and remove his shoes!

Rejection: Perhaps he did so merely due to pain.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): This is Beis David, the father of the family. She (R. Gamliel's sister) was the daughter of Nesi'im, and they are from Beis David.

Note: Maharam and Maharsha explain that the coming Dibur is a continuation of this Dibur. There, Tosfos gives another explanation.

Explanation: This is because [Ona'ah] pains the heart, and [the victim] is prone to shed tears.

Inference: [Rashi explained so] because above we learned (59a) from a verse in Tehilim ("v'El Dim'asi Al Techerash") that the gates of tears are never locked.

Rebuttal: There was no need to explain like this. Above, Rav Chisda explicitly expounded from "Hinei Hash-m Nitzav Al Chomas Anach"!

Explanation #2: Perhaps she had a tradition from the house of R. Gamliel [ha'Zaken]. He was her father's father. She did not mean [that her tradition was from] David.

Support: We find also (Rosh Hashanah 25a) that R. Gamliel said "I received from my father's father's house that sometimes [the moon] comes on a long path (there is much time between when the old moon was seen and when the new moon is seen).

Explanation: Some say that this opinion counts "Ki Gerim Hayisem" and similar verses.