Yevamot II 114: Are Parents Responsible for Minors' Transgressions?; A Woman's Testimony on Her Husband's Death Overseas

Daf 114 is filled with a number of interesting tidbits.  To begin, the Gemara discusses whether or not parents must ensure that their children keep the mitzvot.  We know that minors are not obligated to keep the mitzvot until they are of age (12 for girls, 13 for boys).  The rabbis compare minors to Gentiles who are what we might called "Shabbos Goyim".  Then they consider tithing and ritual impurity.  If a child's father is a chaver, one who keeps mitzvot meticulously, but his maternal grandfather is not, that child might arrive home with untithed food.  The rabbis believe that the parent need not take away that food.  

I would like to extrapolate from this halacha.  The rabbis are suggesting that we need not be heavy-handed with our children regarding mitzvot.  Some ultra-orthodox families who even forbid their children from visiting with less observant family members.  This particular discussion and resulting halacha - particularly with regard to a less observant grandfather - might hold important information.

The rabbis go on to consider other related potential prohibitions.   For example, is it permitted for a Jewish child to breastfeed from a Gentile woman?  The rabbis also consider both minors and adults who suckle directly from animals - even forbidden animals.  There is a suggestion that this action should be fine on Shabbat and Festivals, when one should drink differently than at other times. This is clarified: when a life is at stake, one may drink in this manner regardless of the day.  The rabbis also consider when it might be permissible to consume the blood of an animal.  Exactly how much blood is forbidden?  And is it the blood in that animal part or is it the blood that flows in that animal while it alive that is being counted? 

Offering a number of bizarre case examples, the rabbis wonder about situations when it is unavoidable to bump against prohibitions.  Two brothers marry two sisters, one of each is deaf and mute, one man dies childless, what is the remaining brother to do?  In some of these cases he is required to divorce his current wife and to perform chalitza with the other because of the numerous prohibitions in yibum.  I won't go through the details of these examples again; needless to say, men who become deaf and mute lose their rights to divorce.

We interrupt today's daf to introduce Perek XV, which begins with a new Mishna.  We learn about more occasions when the testimony of women might be taken more seriously.  When a couple goes overseas and their is no war; there are no arguments, and she returns - childless - claiming that the husband died, she may enter into yibum.  If there is a war or if they were arguing when they left, she is not believed when she claims on her return that he died.   Rabbi Yehuda argues that she is never believed unless she returns in torn clothing, crying.  The rabbis disagree.  

The rabbis note that "peace between him and her" and ""War in the world" are phrases chosen in order to teach us the phrases, "A quarrel between him and her" and "Peace in the world".  The rabbis go on to argue whether she might be saying what she believes to be true rather than what she knows is true.  They consider whether famine, pestilence, rockslides or other maladies are similar to "a war in the world".  In each of these cases the rabbis consider the credibility of a woman's testimony.