(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF

brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld


Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Yevamos, 45


45b

1) LIVING WITH AN "EVED" OR A "NOCHRI"
QUESTION: The Gemara explains why, when an Eved or Nochri has relations with a Jewess, the child is not a Mamzer, whereas when two people who are Asur to each other because of an Isur Ervah have relations, the child is a Mamzer. In both cases, Kidushin does not take effect, and thus in both cases the child should be a Mamzer. The Gemara explains that in the case of Arayos, the Kidushin does not take effect only between those particular persons who are Asur to each other because of Ervah; Kidushin will take effect when each person marries someone else, to whom he or she is permitted. An Eved and Nochri, though, cannot marry anyone -- their Kidushin never takes effect, and therefore the child is not a Mamzer.

What is the logic behind this? If the Kidushin of an Eved or Nochri can never take effect with anyone, then on the contrary, the child should certainly be a Mamzer!

ANSWERS:

(a) The RASHBA answers that the reason a child becomes a Mamzer is because of the severity of the Isur involved with his conception. That severity is expressed by the fact that the union between the mother and father could not make Kidushin take effect. That is, the Isur is so severe that Kidushin cannot exist in such a union.

In the case of a woman who is Asur to a man because of an Isur Ervah, since she (and he) could marry others and have Kidushin take effect, but they cannot marry each other, this shows that there is a very strong Isur between them. It is the strength of the Isur that prevents Kidushin from taking effect. However, in the case of an Eved or a Nochri, the fact that he cannot make Kidushin with the Jewess with whom he had relations does not show anything about the strength of the Isur, because an Eved and a Nochri cannot make Kidushin with *anyone*. The reason they cannot make Kidushin with anyone is because the Torah did not give them the ability to make Kidushin in the first place. It has nothing to do with the Isur of the union between him and a Jewess. Hence, the child is not a Mamzer.

RAV ELCHANAN WASSERMAN (in Kovetz He'oros 37:2) asks that according to the explanation of the Rashba, how could the Gemara use this logic to legitimize the child of an Eved or Nochri who had relations with a *married* Jewess (an "Eshes Ish")? We know that the Isur of "Eshes Ish" is a strong Isur from the fact that she cannot make Kidushin with even someone who is able to make Kidushin (such as a normal Jewish man). Thus, even if she has relations with an Eved or Nochri, we should say that the child should be a Mamzer!

Rav Elchanan answers that even though an Eshes Ish cannot make Kidushin with any other man, since she could not make Kidushin with an Eved or Nochri *even when she is not an Eshes Ish*, the fact that she is an Eshes Ish and is unable to make Kidushin with anyone else does not affect the child.

This is difficult to understand, though, because the Rashba says that the ability of Kidushin to take effect is only a *sign* of the strength of the Isur. Accordingly, it should make no difference is she cannot make Kidushin with an Eved because he is never fit for Kidushin. As far as the strength of the Isur is concerned, we see from the fact that this Eshes Ish cannot effect Kidushin with anyone that the Isur is very strong! What difference does it make if Kidushin cannot be effected with an Eved? The child should still be a Mamzer.

Another answer may be suggested to the original question of Rav Elchanan. Even though an Eshes Ish has a very strong Isur to any other Jew, nevertheless, the Isur to an Eved or Nochri is different, because the act of Bi'ah with an Eved or Nochri is less severe (TOSFOS, Kesuvos 3b). Thus, an Eved living with an Eshes Ish is a less severe Isur, and therefore we have no proof for the strength of the Isur from the fact that she cannot make Kidushin with any other Jew.

(b) The RAMBAN and RITVA cite RAV HAI GAON who had a different Girsa in the Gemara. The text of his Gemara reads not that an Eved and Nochri cannot make Kidushin, but that in the case of "an Eved and Nochri, the child's lineage does not follow him (the father)," but rather it follows the Yichus of the mother. That is why the child is not a Mamzer. The father cannot affect the status of the child at all, even to give him a disqualifying trait, since the lineage of the child is not traced at all to the father who is a Nochri (as the Gemara says earlier on 17a).

They add that even though our Girsa is different, our Gemara might mean the same thing. When our Gemara says that the Kidushin of an Eved and Nochri does not take effect at all, it means that the father cannot affect the status of the child because the child is not considered to be related to the father, just like the Jewess with whom he had relations cannot be related to the father (since Kidushin cannot take effect).

Next daf

Index


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,
daf@shemayisrael.co.il