Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) [line 5] SHECHACHTAH - I would have forgotten it
2) [line 7] B'MOSAV TELASA HAVEINA - we were sitting three together, as a proper session of Bais Din

3) [line 7] V'CHAD LEISOHI - and one of them is no longer alive
4) [line 9] SHETARA DENAN NAFAK L'KADMANA - this document came before us

5) [line 16] HA'PEH SHE'ASAR, HU HA'PEH SHE'HITIR - the mouth that forbade is the same mouth that permitted; i.e. since the only way that we know that she was once married is by her own testimony, we also believe her when she says that she is divorced

6) [line 33] SHAVYAH L'NAFSHAH CHATICHAH D'ISURA
A person is believed to say that something is Asur inasmuch as it relates to himself, even in a case where otherwise we would require two witnesses, such as a Davar sheb'Ervah. After such a testimony the result is binding and one is no longer believed to reverse his statement.

7) [line 35] AMASLA - an excuse for the previous declaration
8) [line 42] RAV ACHAH SAR HA'BIRAH - Rav Acha, the Minister of the Palace; this was his title (RASHI Kesuvos 88a)

9) [line 43] USHA - a city in the western part of the lower Galilee; it was one of the ten places to which the Sanhedrin was exiled

10) [line 1] TANA MINEI ARBA'IM ZIMNIN - he learned it from him 40 times
11) [line 9] MICHDI - since it is so, therefore...

12) [line 10] ASHAM TALUY
The Korban Asham Taluy is a ram worth two Sela'im that is offered when a person is in doubt whether or not he committed a transgression for which he must bring a Korban Chatas. If he later discovers that he did indeed sin, he must offer a Korban Chatas; the Asham Taluy only provides temporary atonement during the period of doubt.
Since this woman is now a Safek Eshes Ish, for there is contradictory testimony, relations with her would be a transgression requiring an Asham Taluy

13) [line 19] K'VEI TREI - like two witnesses

14) [line 19] KOL MAKOM SHE'HE'EMINAH TORAH ED ECHAD, HAREI KAN SHENAYIM
(a) Although the Torah requires two witnesses to prove a fact in Beis Din, there are three places where a single witness suffices to provide evidence: 1. to prove that a Safek Sotah was unfaithful to her husband after the steps of Kinuy and Stirah have taken place (Sotah 31a, see Background to Yevamos 85b); 2. to prove the identity of a killer in order to exempt the city closest to a disclosed corpse from bringing an Eglah Arufah (Sotah 47a, see Background to Megilah 20b). (It is not clear whether this latter case is mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan; see Insights); 3. in order to testify that a woman's husband died so that she may be able to remarry (Yevamos 117b).
(b) In all of these places the witness does not have to be a male who is fit to testify; a woman or a slave who are generally Pesulim l'Edus may also testify.
(c) If one witness testifies and is contradicted by another single witness, we do not consider the case a Safek. Rather, the first witness is believed, because "any place where one witness is believed he has the authority of two witnesses" with regard to refuting the testimony of the witness who follows him.
(d) If the single witness is contradicted by more than a single witness, sometimes we decide in favor of those who contradict him because they are the majority. See Yevamos Chart #26).

15) [line 23] "HASER MIMECHA IKSHUS PEH, U'LEZUS SEFASAYIM HARCHEK MIMEKA" - "Remove from yourself distortion of the mouth; and distance perversity of lips from yourself" (Mishlei 4:24)

16) [line 31] U'MI CHATZIFAH KULEI HAI? - is she so brazen (to falsely claim in his presence that he divorced her)?

Next daf