Yevamos - Daf 92
- אין זו הוראה אלא טעות
The Mishnah ruled that if a woman got remarried על פי בית דין – according to the dictate of Beis Din, based on the testimony of a single witness, she is exempt from bringing a chatas. Ze’iri said: ליתא למתניתין מדתני בי מדרשא – The ruling of the Mishnah is not accepted in practice, in light of a Baraisa that was taught in the Beis Midrash, that stated: הורו בית דין ששקעה החמה ולבסוף זרחה – If Beis Din ruled that the sun had already set and Shabbos was over, and people relied on that ruling and did melachah, and then the sun shone, proving Beis Din was wrong, אין זו הוראה אלא טעות – this is not a case of a wrongful ruling but simply a mistake. Beis Din did not rule the sun had set. Rather they made a mistake on the sun’s position. Rashi explains that people cannot say that they relied on Beis Din’s ruling and are exempt from bringing a chatas. In our Mishnah as well, it cannot be said that Beis Din permitting the woman to remarry is a ruling. Rather, it was a mistake based on being misled by the witness as to the facts regarding the husband’s death. Rav Nachman disagrees and says Beis Din’s ruling is a הוראה, for they reasoned that one witness is believed to permit her to remarry, since the woman will investigate and make sure that the husband is dead before remarrying. Since in the Mishnah’s case, it became clear that the woman did not investigate well enough, the adultery that occurred was a result of a wrongful הוראה and that is why she is exempt from a chatas.
- Only a woman divorced from her husband is prohibited to the Kehunah
The next Mishnah brings numerous cases where a woman acted on the basis of incorrect testimony. In the final case, witnesses told a woman that her husband had died ונתקדשה – and she became betrothed to another man, and afterwards her first husband came back. מותרות לחזור לו – she is permitted to return to him. אף על פי שנתן לה אחרון גט לא פסלה מן הכהונה – Even if the last one, referring to the man who was mekadesh her, gave her a get, it does not disqualify her from the Kehunah. This is because this get was not required, even on a d’Rabbanon level. Rebbe Elazar ben Masya darshened the following passuk in support of this din, for it is written: "ואשה גרושה מאישה" – And nor shall they (Kohanim) take in marriage a woman divorced from her husband.” This teaches that only a woman divorced from her legal husband is prohibited to a Kohen, ולא מאיש שאינו אשה – but not a woman divorced from a man who is not her husband.
- Question if kiddushin takes effect with a yevamah and someone other than the yavam
Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: מנין שאין קדושין תופסין ביבמה – From where do we know that kiddushin does not take effect with a yevamah to someone other than the yavam? For it is written: "לא תהיה אשת המת החוצה לאיש זר" – The wife of the deceased shall not be outside to a strange man. Which implies, לא תהא בה הויה לזר – There cannot “be” any marriage to a stranger for her. But Shmuel says: בעניותנו צריכה גט – Because of our poverty, she requires a get from the second husband. The Gemara explains that Shmuel used the phrase, “because of our poverty” because he had a safek whether the passuk of "לא תהיה אשת המת החוצה לאיש זר" – the wife of the deceased shall not be outside to a strange man, אי ללאו הוא דאתא אי דלא תפסי בה קדושין הוא דאתא – whether it comes to teach a prohibition or whether it comes to teach that kiddushin does not take effect with her. If the passuk means, “she cannot be married to a strange man,” it teaches that kiddushin does not take effect. If it means, “she may not be married to a strange man,” it can mean that she is prohibited to him, but if he were to marry her, kiddushin would still take effect.
