Resources for Yevamos daf 38
מראה מקומות
1. The גמרא says that זיקת אירוסין makes a ספק ארוסה and זיקת נישואין makes a ספק נשואה. What exactly is meant by the word “ספק”? The simplest פּשט is from the ר׳ אברהם מן ההר who understands that it is just a borrowed term and "ספק" just means it is a weaker זכות than a real husband has, just like a ספק has a weaker זכות than a ואדי. The ריטב"א says that the ספק is will יבום be done in the end or just חליצה? If חליצה is done then יבם will not have any זכותים in her. In the שיעורי ר׳ שמואל he brings that this works well with the מהרי"ק which is brought in שו"ע אה"ע סימן ק"ס סעיף ז who says that nowadays where we don’t allow anyone to do יבום and only חליצה can be performed, the יבם will not be יורש the יבמה (even a שומרת יבם מן הנישואין) since there is no ספק nowadays whether יבום or חליצה will be performed.
2. Regarding the above discussion of ספק נשואה the חידושי ר׳ שמעון says asks that no one holds that זיקה alone without יבום creates נישואין so what does our גמרא mean that she is a ספק נשואה? He answers that the discussion of our גמרא is only about money. Regarding money, it’s not that the יבם himself is זוכה like a husband. Rather, it is because the dead brother doesn’t relinquish his original קנין if there is a יבם. In other words, anything that a person doesn’t have a need for when they die, they lose upon death. Therefore, his marriage to wife dissolves once he dies. His money leaves his possession as well and goes to his יורשים. However, when there is a יבם, we don’t remove the person’s monetary זכותים that he had in his wife so his יבם can have them.
3. The גמרא says that if a woman has קינוי וסתירה and then her husband dies before she gets a chance to drink the מי סוטה, according to ב"ה she loses her כתובה. There is an interesting הפלאה in כתובות דף פּ"א ד"ה ואמאי who asks why isn’t this like a case of אינו יודע אם פּרעתיך? In other words, if someone admits they owed someone something but isn’t sure if they paid, then they have to pay מספק. Here too, we know he obligated himself to pay the כתובה and we have a ספק if she was מזנה תחתיו which she says she wasn’t, so why isn’t that a case like אינו יודע אם פּרעתיך? The קובץ שיעורים in חלק ב סוף סימן ג explains that the reason אינו יודע אם פּרעתיך has to pay is because of אין ספק מוציא מידי ואדי. However, when there is a ספק בפנינו, then the person’s position is weakened and we don’t say אין ספק מוציא מידי ואדי nor do we say there is a חזקת חיוב to pay since the obvious ספק בפנינו destroys both.