1

See Mishna Yevamot 7.4.

העובר, והיבם, והאירוסין, והחירש, ובן תשע שנים ויום אחד, פוסלין ולא מאכילין. ספק שהוא בן תשע שנים ויום אחד ספק שאינו, ספק הביא שתי שערות ספק לא הביא, נפל הבית עליו ועל בת אחיו ואין ידוע אי זה מת ראשון, צרתה חולצת ולא מתיבמת.‏

Translation.

The fetus, the man whose married brother died childless, the betrothal, the deaf, and the nine-year-and-one-day-old boy, disqualify but do not enable (the woman to eat teruma). A boy with regard to whom there is uncertainty as to wether he is nine years or not, or wether he has grown two pubic hairs, the house fell upon him and his brother's daughter, and it is unknow which of them died first, her rival needs chalitsa and cannot make levirate.

For an explained paraphrase see the mishna in Gemara Sefaria.

The first lecture, the more syntax congruent is that there are two paragraphs.

The first: Dinim of Disqualify but not enable.

The fetus, the man whose married brother died childless, the betrothal, the deaf, and the nine-year-and-one-day-old boy, disqualify but do not enable (the woman to eat teruma).

The second: Dinim in which there is a issue of Chalitsa and not of Ybum because of a doubt.

A boy with regard to whom there is uncertainty as to wether he is nine years or not, or wether he has grown two pubic hairs, the house fell upon him and his brother's daughter, and it is unknow which of them died first, her rival needs chalitsa and cannot make levirate.

However, in Gemara 68a, there is no doubt that the boy with regard to whom there is uncertainty as to wether he is nine years or not" is a part of the first paragraph, but is only a case for "does not enable to eat" according to Abaye (and this entail a kashia) , and according to Rava, a case of "disqualifies". Both Pshatim of Abaye and Raba in Mishna have a Dochak. Firstly the previous sentence is already closed, Secundly, the case is not entirely similar to the previous because only one of the dinim regards it.

There is a disagreement between Rashi and Ramban in one side, and Tosfot and probably Rambam in a second side, if Yabam 9 and one day old can make ybum Deorayita. But anyways, halachically he has restrictions that his Ybum is not more than a Maamar for an adult Yabam. According To the Ramban and Rashi, it seems that if he died and there is an other brother, we easily can assume that his widow can make Ybum mideorayta. So the boy with a doubt regarding being 9 and one day old, is a safek deorayta and his widow needs to make chalitsa as said in the dinim of the second paragraph. For a very clear formulation of the Rashi line, see Chidushe Haran Nidda 45a

So, I don't understand why this apparently not Dachuk pshat is not the pshat of the Gemara.

To understand easily the topic, read the link to the translation of Mishna in the Gemara Sefaria above.

Note. We can formulate the question as this. Lichora we have a proof for Tosfot, because according to Tosfot safek ben yabam who died, his wife is safek derabanan and ptura from chalitsa.

0

I have perhaps an answer. The words concerning the boys who are in a doubtful status aren't linked to any attribute. So we need to search if they can be linked to one the cases in the first paragraph.

For the boy about whom we have a doubt if he is 9 and one day old, the natural tendency is to link him to the case of the boy who is 9 and one day old. The partial sentence about him is an appendix, "and the same is true even if there is a doubt if he did reach 9 and one day".

But regarding the boy with the doubt about two pubic hairs there is less similarity with the first list and we can link him to each paragraph and it's better to associate him to the more mechudash case.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .