Yevamos - Daf 115
- החזיקה היא מלחמה בעולם מהו
The Gemara asks: החזיקה היא מלחמה בעולם מהו – If a woman established for us that there was a war in some part of the world, what is the halachah regarding believing her that her husband died in the war? Do we say, מה לה לשקר – what reason would she have to lie and say he died in war, when she would have been believed if she had said there was peace in the world? Or do we say כיון דאיחזקה אמרה בדדמי – since a war has been established, she might say that he died based on what seems to her to be the truth without having seen him dead? The Gemara’s second attempt to bring a proof is from a Baraisa that taught: If a woman came and said: נפלו עלינו עובדי כוכבים נפלו עלינו ליסטים – Idolaters fell upon my husband and me, bandits fell upon us, הוא מת ונצלתי נאמנת – “He died and I was saved,” she is believed, and permitted to remarry. Being attacked by idolaters or bandits is like the case of being in a war, and here we see that she is believed, evidently because she was the one who made us aware they were attacked, when she could have simply said her husband died and would have been believed. The Gemara rejects this proof saying the reason we believe her in the Baraisa’s case is that she stayed with her husband until he actually died, as Rav Idi said: אשה כלי זיינה עליה – A woman’s weapons are always upon her. The mefarshim explain that it is presumed that the idolaters or bandits will spare her life to have illicit relations with her. Therefore, she could remain with her husband to see that he died, and not need to flee like she would in the case of a war.
- עד אחד במלחמה מהו
The Gemara asks: עד אחד במלחמה מהו – What is the halachah regarding a single witness who testifies to a husband’s death during wartime? Is the reason he is generally believed when he testifies to a husband’s death משום מילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי הוא לא משקר – is that since it is a something that is likely to be exposed, he is presumed not to lie, and therefore, here too, he will not lie? Or is he believed because היא גופא דייקא ומינסבא – she herself investigates carefully and only then remarries, but here during wartime, she convinces herself that that he died, and she will not investigate carefully? The Gemara brings an incident where the wives of two talmidei Chochomim were permitted to remarry based on testimony of women who saw them drown. Now, since drowning is akin to dying at war, ונשים אפילו מאה כעד אחד דמו – and the testimony of women, even one hundred women, are considered like the testimony of one witness, we see that one witness is believed that a husband died at war. The Gemara rejects this answer, saying the situation was where the men drowned in a sea where the seashore cannot be seen, and in such a case, a wife would not be permitted to remarry. Rather, the women said, “They brought the bodies up in our presence, and we saw them immediately,” while they were still identifiable, and they said the simanim – the marks that identified them as the talmidei Chochomim. Therefore, the Rabbis did not rely on their testimony, but on the simanim they saw.
- Do we need to be concerned regarding two people sharing the same name re: testimony?
Yitzchak Reish Galusa, the son of the sister of Rav Bivi, was going from Cortava to Aspamya, and he died. They sent the following message from there: Yitzchak Reish Galusa from Cortava died. The Gemara asks: מי חיישינן לתרי יצחק או לא – Do we need to suspect that there are two Yitzchaks or not? Abaye said we must be concerned, and Rava says, we need not be concerned. Abaye is concerned that while there is no other person by that name living in Cortova, someone from somewhere else might have travelled to Aspamya. Rashi explains that Rava holds that since there was only one person known by that name in Cortava, we can assume it is the same person in the message. Abaye and Rava bring supports for their positions.
