1. I assumed that "shavya anafshei chaticha d'issura" requires one to actually testify and make a claim in beis din that his wife committed adultery. However, Tosafos explains the question of the gemara about Dovid Hamelech, "since the husband claiming pesach pasuach can make his wife assur on him, so too Dovid's knowledge that Bat Sheva committed adultery should make her assur on him". Although Dovid didn't make any formal claim of adultery, the knowledge itself that bat sheva committed adultery should make her assur on him. Clearly, shavya anafshei can apply even if no formal claim is made.
2. Rashi holds that the fact that it was common knowledge that bat sheva was taken to the palace is tantamount to having witnesses on her committing adultery with Dovid. Tosafos asks that the common knowledge of her being taken to the palace would not be equivalent to witnesses that she was mezaneh with Dovid. However, we find that the gemara says by Esther, that her z'nus with achashveirosh was classifies as 'public' - "Esther farhesia havi", and the shach in Y.D. 157 explains that since everyone knew she was taken to the palace of Achashveirosh, it is literally as if everyone witnessed her act of z'nus with Achashvirosh. It would seem that the gemara by Esther is a strong support for Rashi's opinion. But, Tosafos apparently holds that only in the context of Esther was it clear what she was being taken for, but by bat sheva it wasn't necessarily clear to everyone that she was taken and what she was taken for.
No comments:
Post a Comment