About this episode
This week's learning is sponsored by Judy and Zev Berman for the refuah shleima of our sister-in-law, Phyllis Hecht. Please say tehilim for גיטל פעשא בת מאשה רחל. May she have a complete recovery and may we all share b'sorot tovot. The statement made to Shmuel's father that a woman who spits at her yabam only, forbids all the brothers from performing yibum, can be understood also according to Rabbi Akiva's opinion. How? If Rabbi Akiva doesn't think spitting is an essential part of the ceremony, why does he distinguish then between reading and spitting regarding disqualifying the brothers from yibum? A different version is brought regarding the halacha that was sent to Shmuel's father - that if a yevama spit but didn't do chalitza, she should do chalitza and does not need to spit again. A situation like that happened and she did not spit a second time. What is the harm done in spitting a second time? Levi was asked three questions by people in the villages but he did not know the answers and went to the beit midrash to find out the answers. Two were about chalitza and one was about "writings of truth" mentioned in a verse in Daniel 10:21. From the writings of truth, the Gemara gets into a discussion regarding teshuva and what kind of decrees can be undone and which ones cannot. Even though Eli's family (in Samuel 1) were punished and God swore that they will not be atoned for with sacrifices, they can atone by learning Torah or doing acts of chessed. What is the difference between the power of the individual and the power of the community regarding prayers that can overturn a decree? What is the unique nature of the ten days of teshuva between Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur? Another halacha sent to Shmuel's father was also relating to the question they asked Levi, if a yevama spat blood, it is effective as blood is mixed with saliva. A source is brought to contradict but it is resolved as there are different ways in which someone bleeds in one's mouth. There is a debate regarding the validity of a chalitza with a woman who is a minor. From where does each derive his opinion? In order to show that the tana kama's opinion is that of Rabbi Yosi, a story is brought which includes some tension between Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosi, and Avdan. The story ends with a number of punishments to Avdan for insulting Rabbi Yishmael. Why was it necessary to state both that the halacha is not like the pair of rabbis who said that chalitza can be performed in front of two people and that chalitza needs to be performed in front of three people? Some questions are asked regarding the case the Mishna had quoted of the chalitza in the jail. Is it possible no one witnessed it - don't we need testimony to confirm that it in fact took place? Was Rabbi Akiva in the prison or the couple themselves?