Resources for Kesubos daf 9

1.     The גמרא says that if a husband claims פּתח פּתוח מצאתי he is believed to make his wife אסורה to him. רש"י explains that a person is believed regarding themselves because of the principle of שויה אנפשיה חתיכה דאיסורא. There is a critical discussion here by the אחרונים here as to how שויה אנפשיה חתיכה דאיסורא works. The קצות החושן in סימן ל"ד אות ד says that there are those who say that it works מדין נדר. In other words, we aren’t believing the person in any way when they say something is אסור to them. Rather, we are just enforcing their words on them because a person can make anything אסור to themselves by making a נדר, and this is the equivalent of making a נדר. The שער המלך in הלכות אישות פּרק ט"ו הל׳ ט"ו brings the מהר"י באסן who agrees with this approach as well. However, both the קצות and שער המלך disagree with this approach. The קצות says that שויה אנפשיה works מדין נאמנות. In other words, the תורה gave a person actual נאמנות in regards to themselves. We see this concept by דיני ממונות  where a person is believed to say they owe money because of the principle of הודאת בעל דין כמאה עדים דמי. The קצות  understands that to be a real דין נאמנות  and applies the same concept to שויה אנפשיה . The תרומת הכרי  in סימן א׳ ד"ה ואת אשר says that it is not a דין נדר nor a דין נאמנות . Rather, ב"ד  just enforces a person’s own beliefs on themselves if they claim they know something to be אסור. The אחרונים bring fascinating proofs to each approach. The קצות brings the מהרי"ט who asks the obvious—if it is מטעם נדר why can’t you be מתיר נדר and annul the נדר? The  מהר"י באסןaddresses this by saying that there are some נדרים that one can’t be שואל on (like נזירות שמשון) and חז"ל felt that שויא אנפשיה is that kind of איסור. The נודע ביהודה in תנינא אבן העזר סימן כ"ג brings a proof from the משנה in ר"ה that says that ר"ג forced רבי יהושע to come to him on the day יוה"כ fell out according to his calculation with his money bag. If שויא אנפשיה is מדין נדר, how could ר"ג ask ר"י to violate a נדר? A question/proof asked by the אחרונים on both the נאמנות and נדר theory is the דין of אמתלא. The גמרא later on דף כ"ב says that if a woman says she is a נדה and then changes her mind and says she isn’t and gives an אמתלא (excuse) why she said she was a נדה originally she is believed. אמתלא doesn’t work by הודאת בעל דין nor does it work by a נדר where you would need real חרטה.

2.     תוספות in ד"ה ואי בעית asks that the chance the lady was אנוסה is a מיעוט since no one heard that there was an אונס and if one of the ספקות in is not a 50/50 ספק then you can’t call it a ספק ספיקא. This gets to the heart of how and why ספק ספיקא works. The רשב"א in תשובות הרשב"א סימן ת"א explains that ספק ספיקא works מטעם רוב. In other words, if you have one ספק which is 50/50 and then add an additional ספק on that, you have רוב צדדים לקולא. Based on that, the פּני יהושע asks on our תוספות that even if one ספק is 60/40, if the other ספק is 50/50 then put together you still have a רוב. The שערי יושר in שער א פּרק י"ט has a different explanation for ספק ספקא. He suggests that ספק ספקא isn’t just two ספקות; it’s a ספק on a ספק איסור. We are only מחמיר by a ספק איסור when it is a strong ספק but not when there is a ספק on the ספק איסור itself. Therefore, if one of the ספקות is less than 50/50, we will say that רוב was מכריע that ספק and we only have one ספק to work with in which case we will need to be מחמיר.

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander