More Discussions for this daf
1. A rebellious Nidah and Arusah 2. Ben Azai and other questions 3. Rebellious Husband
DAF DISCUSSIONS - KESUVOS 63

Joshua Danziger asks:

Hello kollel, I was learning kesubos 63 and had a few questions

1) the gemara says Ben azai was r akiva son in law. But wasn't Ben azai famously not married?

2) rava has strong language for his son coming back from learning to his "zona". Doesn't this seem a bit harsh, and more so he was coming erev Yom Kippur when biah isn't allowed?

3) a general q. Some more of the background of r akiva is in avot derabbi natan. In general if an av is the word meaning Father, and in a way the most masculine word there is, why is the plural avot and not avim?

Thank you!

Josh

The Kollel replies:

Shalom Josh,

Great to hear from you. All good questions!

1) Yes! Chazal discuss this point in Sotah 4b, and conclude that right after he married her he separated from her, as Tosfos in Yevamos cites (63b DH Sheyiskayem). In case you are interested in the mystical side of this, I want to share with you a link: https://www.chabad.org/kabbalah/article_cdo/aid/1673831/jewish/Ben-Azzai-Souls-of-Converts-344.htm#footnoteRef1a1673831.

2a) Some, including Maharsha, have a Girsa which reads Zugascha, instead of Zonascha, which makes the term less graphic. But it seems according both Girsaos that Rava's intention was to insinuate that really it was his son's desire for his wife that led him to abandon what was supposed to be continuous Torah study.

2b) Baruch she'Kivanta! Maharsha writes that Rava's son specifically chose Erev Yom Kippur as the date to come visit his family, when marital relations are prohibited, precisely because he did not want to be suspected as having been motivated by lust. Rava was nevertheless Choshed. So learns the Maharsha.

2c) Ben Yehoyada, on the other hand, offers two different interpretations, as follows. First, Rava suspected that his son was bringing upon himself a potential Michshol, since by visiting his wife after a long time and not being intimate with her, he was liable to become a Baal Keri on Leil Yom Kippur. Second, Rava felt that his son was causing undue pain to his wife, since if he had been away, the wife would not feel an intense longing to be with her husband (out of sight, out of mind); but now that he was finally home after a long time away and nevertheless -- because of Yom Kippur -- refrained from being intimate with her, that would cause distress to his wife.

3) You are right to point this out. Even though most masculine plurals end with Yud Mem, and most feminine plurals end in Vav Tav, nevertheless there are exceptions. For example, "Nashim" and "Yadaim" are feminine. If I do find something specific about Avot, Bli Neder I will try to get back to you.

The issue you raised about masculine versus feminine nouns is fascinating. I spoke about it with some peers, and they helped me get a broader view of the many exceptions to the basic patterns.

For example, like the instance of Avos (fathers) that you cited, there are other words which end in Vav Taf but are actually masculine: Bechoros (eldest), Matos (staffs/tribes), Arayos (lions), Levavos (hearts), Sheimos (names), Mekomos (places), Kisaos (chairs), Luchos tablets), Masmeros (nails), Shulchanos (tables).

On the other hand, we mentioned that there are also words which end in Yud Mem but are actually feminine: Pilagshim (concubines), Shanim (years), Devorim (bees), Nemalim (ants), Te'ainim (figs), Arim (cities).

On a related note, children are taught that body parts which come in pairs are feminine. But this "rule" also has exceptions: Yadaim (hands) in Shemos 17:12; Panim (face) in Bereishis 40:7; Shadayim (breasts) in Shir ha'Shirim 4:5 and Hoshea 9:14.

What's more, a number of words can take on either gender: Even (stone), Shemesh (sun), Derech (path), Eish (fire), Ruach (wind), Lashon (tongue), Eretz (land), Aron (container), Chalon (window), Chatzer (courtyard).

Finally, a point I personally found surprising is that some Mefarshim cite a rule which says: Whenever a term refers to an inanimate object, then it can take on either masculine or feminine form (Avi Ezer Bereishis 23:17 and Bamidbar 32:5; Kaf ha'Chayim 142:10; Teshuvos Radvaz Vol. I 336:2; Meleches Shlomo on Avodah Zarah Chap. 1 Mishnah 9).

Shanah Tovah!

Yishai Rasowsky