Yevamos 47

R' Yehuda told a Ger that claimed he didn't have a proper Geirus, that he's only believed about himself but is not believed about his children Tosfos explains that he's not actually believed on himself either, because if it's true he's a gentile who is Pasul to be a witness, Therefore, he's only prohibited to marry a Jewess, not because we assume he's a gentile, but because we prohibit anything that a person believes he's prohibited in. However, regarding other people we don't believe him to be a gentile. Therefore if he has relations with a Jewess, we don't prohibit her to a Kohain the same way we would prohibit someone who had relations with a gentile. Tosfos asks: what difference does it make to the child if the father was a Goy, since the mother was a Jewess, so the child is a regular Jew. Tosfos answers : R' Yehuda must hold like the Shita that if a Jewess has relations with a gentile, this would render the child to be a Mamzer. Therefore the father is not believed to make the child a Mamzer. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz. Have you been disappointed in your level of learning? Do you think your intellectually qualified to learn Tosfos but you don't have the time or skills to learn them properly? So try my English E-Sefer " Gemara in Tosfos" Sukka series. Only 2.49 a piece. Who says quality Torah publications cannot be affordable? Available at tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 39

In the Get Chalitza it says that she spat on the floor. Tosfos says this couldn't be the correct Girsa. The spit doesn't need to land on the floor. We see this from a Gemara in Perek Hacholetz. If the woman was taller than the Yavam and the spit was carried away by the wind before if fell to his height, you're not Yoitza. But if it did fall to his height before it was blown away, then we consider as it was spat before him and she was Yoitze her spitting. (If she was shorter, as soon as the spit comes out of her mouth is considered before the Yavam and even if the wind blows it away immediately, she's Yoitze.) Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 38

A Yavum and the Sufaik kid are coming to inherit the grandfather. We say the Yavam collects the whole thing since he's definitely inheriting while the kid is only a Safeik (because if he's the Yuvam's kid he doesn't get an inheritance from the grandfather. Rashi seems to learn that since the Yavum gets at least half, so that's why he's considered a definite heir. Tosfos asks from many places that just because someone has half does not mean that he's entitled to all. One such place is the first Mishna in Bava Metzia. If two jointly hold onto a cloak. One claims he found it first and is completely his while the other claims they found it together and he has half. The Halacha is that the second half that is in dispute gets divided. We do not say just because he definitely is entitled to half the cloak he's a definite owner and is entitled for the whole thing. Rather, Tosfos explains that since the Yuvam is a definite heir of the grandfather while the kid is only a Safeik whether he is a heir, so we cannot take away from a definite heir to split it with someone who hasn't established himself as a heir. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 37

The case: the brother did Yibum too early. The woman afterwards gave birth. We have a Safaik if the child born was a nine-monther from the original husband or a seven-monther from his brother, the child is definitely Kosher regardless if the Yibum was valid or not. If they're Kohain, the child is eligable to be the Kohain gadol. Tosfos asks: another Gemara says that if there was a room of ten Kohanim and one seperated himselfs to have relations with a woman. The child from the relations cannot do Avodah. We need the Kohain to be able to trace his linage. So, here too, the child can't know his linage, since he doesn't know which brother he comes from. Tosfos answers: The Gemara later asks the question. The Gemara answers that it's only a K'nass (a penalty) and they only penalize by Z'nus. here, the father was legally married, so there is no penalty. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 36

R' Yochanan holds that the one the owns the produce of a field is the real owner of the field. Tosfos asks : how does this fit into takanaos Usha that they decreed that a woman cannot sell her "Melug" fields. Although she holds the title of the field, but the husband keeps all the produce. So, according to R' Yochanan the woman anyhow doesn't have the main ownership to be able to sell the fields. Tosfos answers: that we could say that Takanus Usha was only said for the Shita of Reish lakish, that the one who holds the title is the main owner and not the one who owns the produce. Alternatively, the man's ownership is weaker than other ownership over the produce, because his whole ownership comes from being married to her. So we consider it somewhat more belonging to her. Alternatively, we consider his ownership weaker because it's only his because the rabbis decreed it to be. Another answer: they only decreed Takanas Usha in the case where the husband declines to receive the produce (but still would inherit her.) Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 34

R' Meir says that one can also transgress the Issur of carrying on Shabbos (while eating all those Issurim) by walking out on Shabbos and swallow it in a Reshus Harabim. Tosfos asks why should he be Chayiv? The Gemara exempt people who carry out objects in their mouths, since it's a Shinoi (since most people carry thing in their hands. Tosfos answers: though most objects are that way, however, food is different, since it's the regular way to carry food in your mouth when you're eating. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 33

The Gemara gives the case that a Kohain becomes Tamia and becomes blemished at the same time is when he cuts his finger off with a Tamai knife. Tosfos deals with the problem that both doesn't happen at the same time. The knife makes him Tamai at contact and he's not blemish until he cuts off the whole finger. So Tosfos explains that we refer to a case where the finger was already cut and was hanging on by the smallest amount. Therefore the contact of the knife also immediately severs the finger, rendering him a blemished Kohain. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 32

R' Shimon holds that one Issur doesn't compile on a different Issur. Hence if Reuvain marries a woman (and she is now Ussur to Shimon because she's his brother's wife.) Then Shimon married her her sister, she doesn't have the Issur of being his wife's sister. It cannot take effect since the original Issur of being his brother's wife is upon her. The Gemara asks: If so,if Reuvain dies, why can't Shimon do Yibum to his wife? (After all, she is only Usser for being his brother's wife just like all Yevamos.) The Gemara answers that the Issur of being his wife's sister hovers over her waiting if the other Issur falls off it will take effect. So even if the Issur of being his brother's wife would fall off he cannot do Yibum since another Issur would take effect, therefore the original Issur remains. Tosfos asks: if so, it comes out that the wife only has the Issur of being the wife's brother on her. Therefore we should allow Shimon to do Yibum on her Tzara since the first wife has no more Issur on her than any other wife, the Issur of a brother's wife. In order to exempt a Tzura she needs to have another Issur Ervah on her. Tosfos answers : the only time that the Issur of a brotehr's wife doesn't exempt from Yibum is only one that would fall off to permit Yibum. Since this Issur doesn't fall of, therefore it remains an Ervah that exempts the Tzara. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at https://www.tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 31

The Gemara said they decreed to write the date on a slave's document. Rashi explains this to mean a slave's sale document. Tosfos asks, if so, the could have asked from a document for selling land. Furthermore, the nrabbis never made a decree to date those documents. So Tosfos explains that the Gemara refers to documents of freeing slaves. You need to have a date to know when he had a Halacha of a slave and when he had a Halacha of a regular Yisrael regarding when he was permitted to marry a Jewish woman. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 30

The Gemara says that if a man was married to an Ervah to his brother and a regular woman and Safeik divorce the Ervah, when he dies the regular woman is exempt from Yibum. Since the Ervah has a Chazuka that she's married to the brother, her Tzara has a Chazaka that she's exempt from Yibum. Tosfos points out that even if the Safeik divorce happened before he married the other woman, where I might say that she was never definitely married along with the Ervah so she never had a Chazuka to be a Tzuras Ervah, yet she's exempt from Yibum. Since the Ervah has a Chazuka that she's married to the brother, therefore we extend that Chazuka to her that we consider her a TZuras Ervah. Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available at tosfos.ecwid.com

Yevamos 29

The Gemara concludes that R' Eliezer doesn't necessary hold that Maamar acquires the Yevama completely. (In the second answer) The reason he holds that he can annuls the Yevama's oath is because we refer to a case where the time that he needs to do Yibum arrived. Although he didn't do it yet, Beis Din obligates him to feed the Yevama. Since she's receiving her support from the Yuvam, when she makes an oath, she relies on the Yuvam to approve it, so it was only made on condition that the Yuvam consents.

Tosfos says that R' Yehusha that argues (and says that anytime there is more than one Yuvam no one can annul her oath) holds even if one gave Maamer, since the other brother can ruin it for him by giving a Get or having relations with her, the Yevama is not confident that he'll eventually marrying her, so she doesn't  make her oath on condition that the Yuvam consents.

R' Akiva (that holds that a Yuvam never can annul an oath) we don't necessary have to explain him like Rashi, that he holds there is no Zika so he's a complete stranger to her since there is no connection. We can says there is really a connection (Zika.) However, since the connection is a lot weaker than an actual wife (as proof, we see that if someone else has relations with the Yevama there is no death penalty)  therefore he's not enough of a husband that the Parsha of Hafaras Nedarim should apply to him

Rabbi Chaim Smulowitz 

If you ever though that Tosfos was beyond you. Think again. A few more free copies of Gemara and Tosfos: Sukka 2a-11a is still available 
at 
tosfos.ecwid.com