Yevamot 120 - July 5, 6 Tamuz

This week's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the refuah shleima of her cousin Shlomo ben Rivka and Shimon.

Today's daf is sponsored by Sharon Russ for a speedy refuah shleima for Chaya Esther bat Barbara, a young mother in serious condition. "Please have her in mind in your learning and prayers."

Sisters-in-law who could both fall to yibum to each other's husbands are not believed regarding each other. In a case where there are only two brothers and each of their wives claims that their husband has died - we only believe each woman about her own testimony and therefore each cannot remarry as from her perspective, the yabam may still be alive. However if there were more brothers and the wives performed yibum with them, and the yabam died, they would each be allowed to remarry, according to Rabbi Elazar. Is it because he trusts sisters-in-law who could potentially be rival wives, as he trusts rival wives as well to testify for each other. Or is it because he holds that a woman wouldn't mess herself up in the process of trying to ruin things for someone else and therefore, since they already did yibum in this case,e, based on their testimony, they must not be lying? They attempt to derive the answer from the language in our Mishna and from another braita, but the proofs are inconclusive. If one testifies to the death of another, they need to see from their nose and up in order to identify the body and not other simanim on the body. They need to see them actually dead and not on their way to dying. Do they need to identify the body within three days of death, as the body changes form and may not be identifiable after that or does it depend on the situation? Can one infer from the Mishna that simanim are not valid proof from the Torah? If so, that contradicts another source that seems to indicate they are! Abaye claims it is a tannaitic debate as can be seen from another source. Rava explains the taanitic debate as rooted in something else. Several versions of Rava's answer are brought - each of which explains that there is a more internal debate between the two, but it is not regarding whether or not simanim are by Torah/rabbinic law. If Rava thinks that all hold that simanim are by Torah law, how can our Mishna be explained? Why can't we rely on simanim to determine one's death? The Mishna had stated that one cannot determine one's death if they saw one in various situations where they would likely die but hadn't yet. How does the case of one cut open make sense in light of the Mishna is Ohalot 1:6 which seems to indicate in the same situation, we can assume the person will die? Abaye and Rava each provide answers.