(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF

brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld


Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Yevamos, 104

YEVAMOS 104 & 105 (6 & 7 Adar II) - have been dedicated by Harav Avi Feldman & family in memory of his father, the Tzadik Harav Yisrael Azriel ben Harav Chaim (Feldman) of Milwaukee (Yahrzeit: 6 Adar)


104b

1) THE CHALITZAH OF A "KETANAH"
QUESTION: The Mishnah lists different types of Chalitzah that are invalid, such as Chalitzah performed by a Cheresh (a deaf Yavam), Chareshes (a deaf Yevamah), and a Katan. The Mishnah adds that if a a Ketanah does Chalitzah, she must wait until she grows up and then do Chalitzah again. Otherwise, her Chalitzah done as a Ketanah is invalid.

Why does the Mishnah not include the Chalitzah of a Ketanah along with the others in the list of Chalitzos that are invalid? Moreover, once the Mishnah teaches that the Chalitzah of a Ketanah is invalid, why does it have to add the words "she must do Chalitzah when she grows up?" It is obvious that she must do Chalitzah again when she grows up, because her Chalitzah done as a Ketanah is invalid!

ANSWERS:

(a) TOSFOS (105b) explains that the reason why the Chalitzah of a Katan is invalid is because, as the Gemara says, the Torah uses the term "Ish" (Devarim 25:7) with regard to Chalitzah. The Torah does not mention the word "Ishah" with regard to Chalitzah, and therefore we might have thought that a woman does not have to be an adult in order to do Chalitzah. However, a Hekesh is made between an Ish and an Ishah, and thus the Ishah must also be an adult in order to do Chalitzah.

Tosfos says that we might have thought that this comparison is only mid'Rabanan, since the Torah does not explicitly compare the two, Ish and Ishah. Because of this, when the Mishnah says that a Ketanah's Chalitzah is invalid we might have thought that it is only invalid mid'Rabanan, but not mid'Oraisa. The Mishnah goes out of its way to add the extra words "she must do Chalitzah when she grows up" in order to show that the Chalitzah of a Ketanah is *completely* invalid, even mid'Oraisa.

(b) TOSFOS (ibid.) in his second answer, the RAMBAM (Perush ha'Mishnnayos) cited by the RASHBA, and the RASHBA in the name of most of the Rishonim say that the Girsa in the Mishnah should be, "if she did not do a Chalitzah [later when she grows up], her Chalitzah [that she did when she was a Ketanah] is *Kesheirah*" -- and not "Pesulah!" According to this Girsa, indeed the comparison between Ish and Ishah which teaches that a Ketanah may not do Chalitzah is only a comparison mid'Rabanan; mid'Oraisa, though, the Ketanah's Chalitzah *does* work. Therefore, if b'Di'eved she does not do another Chalitzah when she grows up, the Chalitzah she did as a Ketanah is effective. That is why the Mishnah lists the Chalitzah of a Ketanah separate from the other types of Chalitzos Pesulos.

(c) The TIFERES YISRAEL suggests that even according to our Girsa, which says that "if she did not do a Chalitzah [later when she grows up], her Chalitzah [that she did when she was a Ketanah] is *Pesulah*," the Mishnah might be telling us that the Chalitzah of a Ketanah is Pesulah only mid'Rabanan and not mid'Oraisa.

He bases this on the Gemara at the beginning of Sukah that says that when discussing the act of a Mitzvah d'Oraisa which is not valid, the Mishnah records it as "Pasul." In contrast, when discussing the act of a Mitzvah d'Rabanan which is not valid, the Mishnah does not say that it is "Pasul," but rather the Mishnah gives the way to rectify the invalid act.

Here, the Mishnah says that the Ketanah should do Chalitzah when she grows up. The Mishnah is stating the way to rectify the invalid Chalitzah that she did as a Ketanah. This shows that the Mishnah holds that the Chalitzah of a Ketanah is invalid only mid'Rabanan (for if it was invalid mid'Oraisa, the Mishnah would have said simply that it is Pesulah without giving the way to rectify it).

(We may add that Tosfos might have come to the opposite conclusion -- that the Mishnah is implying that the Chalitzah of a Ketanah is invalid mid'Oraisa -- because he is following his own reasoning elsewhere. In the beginning of Sukah, Tosfos explains that the Mishnah's style of recording the way to rectify a Mitzvah when discussing a Mitzvah d'Rabanan applies only where the Mishnah says *only* the way to rectify it, without adding that if it is not rectified the act is "Pasul.")

Next daf

Index


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,
daf@shemayisrael.co.il