Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) SISTERS THAT FALL TO YIBUM TOGETHER

(a) Answer: There are 2 explanations for that Mishnah.

1. Opinion #1: There is Zikah.
2. Opinion #2: It is forbidden to nullify the Mitzvah of Yibum.
3. In our Mishnah, each one can say that he is doing Yibum!

(b) (Mishnah): If they both did Yibum, they may keep their wives.
(c) (Shila): Even if they are Kohanim.

1. This is because the prohibition for a Kohen to marry a woman that did a Chalitzah is only Rabbinic; Chachamim did not prohibit a doubtful case (if the Kohen really did Yibum, the Chalitzah which preceded it was meaningless).
2. Objection: The prohibition is mid'Oraisa!

i. (Beraisa): "And (a divorced) woman" - to include a Chalutzah!

3. Answer: The prohibition is only Rabbinic; the verse is only an Asmachta.

(a) (Mishnah): The Mitzvah is for the oldest brother to do Yibum; if a younger brother did Yibum, it is valid.
(b) (Gemara - Beraisa): "And it will be the firstborn" - the Mitzvah is for the oldest to do Yibum;
(c) "That will give birth" - to exclude an Ailonis, that cannot give birth;
(d) "Will stand on the name of his brother" - for inheritance.

1. Question: Perhaps the verse rather says that the child should be named as the deceased?
2. Answer: It says here, "He will stand on the name of his brother"; it says elsewhere, "They will be called on the name of their brothers in inheritance".

i. Just as there, "name" refers to inheritance, also here.

(e) "His name will not be wiped out" - to exclude a eunuch, whose name is wiped out;
(f) (Rava): Even though in the entire Torah, a verse does not lose its simple meaning - here, a Gezerah Shaveh entirely uproots the simple meaning.
(g) Question: Without the Gezerah Shaveh, would one really think that the Mitzvah is to name the child after the deceased?

1. Whom does the Torah command?

i. If the Yavam - it should say, "He will stand on the name of *your* brother"!
ii. If Beis Din - it should say, "He will stand on the name of *his father's* brother"!

(h) Answer: The Torah would instruct Beis Din to tell the Yavam to call the child after the deceased.

1. The Gezerah Shaveh teaches that the verse is not to be understood simply (but rather, speaks of inheritance).

(a) Question: Now that the Torah told the oldest to do Yibum - we should say, only a firstborn does Yibum!
(b) Answer: If so, there would be no need for the Torah to teach that the wife of a brother that died before the Yavam was born does not do Yibum.
(c) Objection (Rav Achai): Perhaps this exclusion is only needed when the newborn brother is a firstborn to his mother!
(d) Answer: The Torah made Yibum dependent on inheritance, which is only from the father.
(e) Suggestion: Perhaps Yibum *only* applies when there is a firstborn (and then, any brother may do Yibum)!
(f) Answer: "And one of them died" - seemingly, even the firstborn, and the Torah says, a brother will do Yibum.

1. Question: Perhaps, only when a younger brother died, and the firstborn does Yibum!
2. Answer: If so, there would be no need for the Torah to teach that the wife of a brother that died before the Yavam was born does not do Yibum.

(g) Suggestion: Perhaps the Yibum of a younger brother is valid *only* when there is no firstborn!
(h) Answer: "When brothers will live together" - the brothers are equated (any may do the Mitzvah).
(i) Suggestion: Let us say, when there is a firstborn, the Mitzvah is on the oldest; when there is no firstborn, there is no preference!

1. Question: Abaye Kashisha taught, the Mitzvah is for the oldest to do Yibum; if he declines, we ask his younger brother; if he declines, we return to the oldest!

(j) Answer: The oldest is like a firstborn.

1. Being the firstborn causes that he ias first to do Yibum; similarly, being oldest (even if not firstborn) puts him first.

(k) Suggestion: We should say, when a firstborn does Yibum, he inherits the deceased, but not a regular brother that does Yibum!
(l) Rejection: "He will stand on the name of his brother" - even a regular brother fulfilled this!
(m) Question: Why did the Torah specify, the firstborn?

(n) Answer: To diminish his inheritance of the deceased.

1. Just as a firstborn doesn't inherit what is fitting to come, only what the deceased had - also, a Yavam.

(a) (Mishnah): One suspected of relations with a slave/Nochris, and she converts, he should not marry her; if he did, he may stay married;
(b) One suspected of relations with a married woman, and Beis Din made her husband divorce her, even if he married her; he must divorce her.
(c) (Gemara) Question: If she converts, she is considered a convert?

1. Contradiction (Beraisa - R. Nechemyah): One who converts to marry a woman or man, or to receive food or authority from the king - the conversion is invalid;
2. One who converts to be saved from lions, because of a dream, in the days of Mordechai and Ester - the conversion is invalid, unless he converts nowadays.
3. Objection: This cannot be!
4. Contradiction: Rather, as nowadays.

(d) Answer: R. Yitzchak Bar Shmuel said that the law is as the opinion that these are all valid conversions.
(e) Question: If so, he should be allowed to marry her!
(f) Answer: One should not cause people to speak ill about him.

1. (Rav Asi): "Remove from yourself stiff talk and ill rumors".

(g) (Beraisa): We do not accept converts in the Messianic period;
(h) Similarly, we did not accept converts in the days of David and Shlomo.

1. (R. Elazar): This is learned from "One will convert when Hash-m is not with us".
2. One who dwells with us in our poverty will receive a portion as us in the world to come; others, no.

(a) (Mishnah): One suspected of relations with a married woman ...
(b) (Rav): This only applies if there were witnesses.
(c) (Rav Sheshes): Rav must have been sleeping when he said this!
(d) (Beraisa): One suspected of relations with a married woman, and Beis Din made her husband divorce her; if she remarried and was divorced, and the suspected man married her, he may keep her.
(e) Question: What is the case?

1. Suggestion: If witnesses saw that they had relations - even if she married someone else in between and ceased the rumors, she is forbidden to the suspected adulterer!
2. Rather, there are no witnesses - they may stay married *only* because she married someone else in between and ceased the rumors - unlike Rav!

(f) Answer: Rav will learn, even if she didn't get married in between, they can stay married; we only force them to separate when there are witnesses.

1. The Beraisa teaches that even when she married in between, she may not marry the suspected adulterer L'chatchilah.

(g) Question (Beraisa): This applies when she has no children; if she has children, they may stay married;
(h) If witnesses say that they had had adultery, even if she has several children, he must divorce her.
(i) Answer: Rav establishes our Mishnah in a case that there are witnesses, and she has children.
(j) Question: What forced Rav to establish our Mishnah in such a case, to say that we only force them to separate when there are witnesses?

1. He could have said that she has no children, and we force them to separate even without witnesses!

(k) Answer #1(Rava): The Mishnah was difficult.

1. Why does it say, they (Beis Din) made him divorce her - let it say, he divorced her!
2. It is to teach that the coercion to divorce is only when Beis Din coerces, i.e. there are witnesses.

(l) Answer #2: These Beraisos are as Rebbi.
(m) (Beraisa - Rebbi): A peddler leaves the house, and the woman of the house is wearing a Sinar (skirt); spit is found on top of the canopy on the bed - since this is ugly, he must divorce her.