Yevamos - Daf 87
- The widowed or divorced bas Kohen does not return to her right to the chozeh v’shok
It was taught in a Baraisa: כשהיא חוזרת חוזרת לתרומה ואינה חוזרת לחזה ושוק – When she, (i.e. the Kohen’s daughter) returns to her father’s house, (after being widowed or divorced from a non-Kohen), she returns to her right to eat terumah, but she does not return to her right to eat from the chozeh v’shok. The Gemara brings five different sources for this din including the following. Rav Nachman said in the name of Rabbah bar Avuha that the source is: "מלחם אביה תאכל" – She may eat from her father’s bread, "מלחם" ולא כל לחם פרט לחזה ושוק – from the bread, but not all the bread, which excludes the chozeh v’shok. Rav Safra said the passuk states: "מלחם אביה תאכל" – she may eat from her father’s bread, לחם ולא בשר – bread, but not meat. Rav Pappa said the passuk teaches, לחם הקנוי לאביה – bread that belongs to her father, פרט לחזה ושוק דמשלחן גבוה קא זכו – which excludes the chozeh v’shok which do not belong to the Kohanim, rather they acquire these portions from the Table of the Most High.
- Why "וזרע אין לה" and "כנעוריה" were both needed to teach exclusions, re: eating terumah
From the passuk addressing the right of a bas Kohen to return to eat terumah in her father’s house, we learn two exclusions. From "וזרע אין לה" – and she has no offspring, we learn that if she has a child that is already born, she may not eat terumah. And from "כנעוריה" – as in her youth, we learn that she may not eat terumah if she is pregnant. The Gemara now explains why both teachings are needed. If the Torah had only written, "וזרע אין לה" - and she has no offspring, one might have thought that a woman who has a child is excluded from eating terumah because מעיקרא חד גופא והשתא תרי גופי – because originally she left her house as one body and now she is two bodies, herself and her child. But a pregnant woman is still only one body and therefore we might think she could eat terumah. And if the Torah had only written, "כנעוריה" – as in her youth, to exclude a pregnant woman, one might have thought a pregnant woman is forbidden, דמעיקרא גופא סריקא והשתא גופא מליא – because originally her body was empty and now her body is full, but a woman who has already given birth, who originally left when her body was empty and is returning with her body empty, I would say that she should not be excluded from eating terumah.
- עד אחד נאמן
The opening Mishnah of the tenth perek states: האשה שהלך בעלה למדינת הים ובאו ואמרו לה מת בעליך וניסת – Concerning a woman whose husband went overseas and they came and reported to her, “Your husband died,” and she went and married another man, ואחר כך בא בעלה – and afterwards her first husband returned, rendering her second marriage void, she faces sixteen consequences, beginning with the requirement to leave both husbands. The Gemara explains that even though the Mishnah stated, “they came and told her,” which implies that two witnesses came, it can be inferred from the seifa, which states: נשאת שלא ברשות מותרת לחזור לו – If she remarried without the sanction of Beis Din she is permitted to return to him, where the case refers to when there were two witnesses, that the reisha is dealing with a case where she got remarried based on עד אחד – the testimony of one witness. We can learn from here that עד אחד נאמן – a single witness is believed to permit a woman to marry. The Gemara’s attempt to bring a Scriptural source that one witness is believed with regard to prohibitions, is successfully challenged.
