Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) ZIKAH BY 2 BROTHERS

(a) (Mishnah): 3 brothers, 2 are married to sisters, the other to an unrelated woman. A husband of a sister died; the brother married to the unrelated woman did Yibum, then died; the 1st woman is exempt (from Yibum and Chalitzah) because she is the sister of the Yavam's wife; the 2nd is exempt, because she is Tzaras Ervah;
(b) If the brother did not do Yibum, but gave a Ma'amar, then died, the unrelated woman does Chalitzah, not Yibum.
(c) (Gemara): This is only because he gave a Ma'amar - if not for the Ma'amar, she could do Yibum!

1. (Rav Nachman): This teaches that there is not Zikah, even by one Yavam (if there was Zikah, she would be Tzaras Ervah through Zikah).

(d) (Mishnah): 3 brothers, 2 are married to sisters, the other to an unrelated woman. The husband of the unrelated woman died; a brother (married to a sister) did Yibum, then died; the 1st woman is exempt because she is the sister of the Yavam's wife, the 2nd, because she is her Tzarah;
(e) Had he not done Yibum, but gave a Ma'amar before he died, the unrelated woman would do Chalitzah, not Yibum.
(f) (Gemara) Question: We already know this from the previous Mishnah!

1. In the previous Mishnah, the sister of his wife was (a secondary) Tzarah to the unrelated woman, and the unrelated woman was forbidden - here, the unrelated woman is the Tzarah to his wife's sister, all the more so she is forbidden!

(g) Answer: The Tana first taught our Mishnah, thinking that in the previous case, she would be permitted; later, he saw that even the previous case is prohibited;
(h) Since that is the greater Chidush, it is dear to him, he taught it 1st; our Mishnah (even though it is no longer needed) was not discarded.

(a) (Mishnah): 3 brothers, 2 are married to sisters, the other (Levi) to an unrelated woman. A husband of a sister died; Levi did Yibum. The sister (who did not do Yibum) died, then Levi died; the living sister is forever forbidden to the Yavam, she was once forbidden.
(b) (Gemara - Rav Yehudah): Any Yevamah to whom we cannot apply "Her Yavam will do Yibum with her" when she falls to Yibum, is like the wife of a brother that has children, and is forbidden.
(c) Question: We learned this in the Mishnah - she is forever forbidden to the Yavam, she was once forbidden!
(d) Answer: One might have thought, that is only when she did not become fitting for Yibum during the first fall to Yibum; but when she does become fitting during the first fall to Yibum, she is permitted!

1. Rav Yehudah taught that this is not so.

(e) Question: This also we learn from a Mishnah!

1. (Mishnah): 2 brothers are married to sisters. 1 brother died, then the wife of the other brother died. The Yevamah is forever forbidden to the Yavam, she was once forbidden!

(f) Answer: I would think, that only applies when she was unable to do Yibum with any brother; but when she could do Yibum with a brother, since she is fitting to him, she is fitting to another (when the prohibition will go away)!

1. Rav Yehudah teaches that this is not so.

(a) (Mishnah): 3 brothers, 2 are married to sisters, the other to an unrelated woman (call her Leah). A husband of a sister (call him David) divorced her; Leah's husband (Yakov) died, and David did Yibum, then died;

1. In this case they said, 'If an Ervah died or was divorced, the Tzaros are permitted'.

(b) (Gemara): We infer, Leah is permitted because the divorce preceded Yakov's death; had he died before, Leah would be forbidden.
(c) (Rav Ashi): This shows, there is Zikah, even by 2 brothers.
(d) Question: But Rav Nachman deduced above that there is not Zikah!
(e) Answer: Rav Ashi will explain, in that Mishnah, she cannot do Yibum even if no Ma'amar was given.

1. Ma'amar was taught to show that we do not hold as Beis Shamai, who say that Ma'amar fully acquires.

(f) Question: Rav Ashi's inference from our Mishnah disproves Rav Nachman!

1. Suggestion: Even if he dies before the divorce, she is permitted.

i. The words 'this is the case' exclude when the Yibum precedes the divorce (but not when death precedes the divorce).

2. This fits well if Rav Nachman holds as R. Yirmeyah, who said 'These Mishnayos (2A and 30A) must have different authors'.

i. The Tana of 2A holds that death causes the fall to Yibum (i.e. Leah is only considered Tzaras Ervah if she was Tzaras Ervah when her husband died).
ii. Our Tana (30A) holds that the initial marriage causes the fall (if she was Tzaras Ervah at any time during her marriage, she is considered Tzaras Ervah when her husband dies).
iii. If the Yibum preceded the divorce, since Leah was once Tzaras Ervah, even divorce of the sister will not allow Yibum later.

3. Question: If Rav Nachman holds as Rava, who said that the same Tana taught both - the Mishnah 2A teaches more (that death causes the fall to Yibum) - what does 'This is the case' exclude?
4. Answer: Rav Nachman must hold as R. Yirmeyah.

(g) We understand, if Rava holds as Rav Ashi, 'This is the case' excludes if he never divorced the sister (even if he never did Yibum, Leah is forbidden - she is Tzaras Ervah through Zikah).

1. Question: If Rava holds as Rav Nachman - what case is excluded?
2. Answer: Rava must hold as Rav Ashi.

(a) (Mishnah): When there was a Safek engagement or divorce of an Ervah, the Tzaros do Chalitzah, not Yibum;
(b) Safek engagement - he threw engagement money to her, and we are unsure if it landed closer to him or to her;
(c) Safek divorce - he wrote a Get himself, without witnesses; or, it has witnesses but no date; or, it has a date, but only 1 witness.
(d) (Gemara) Question: Why don't we teach, he threw her a Get, and we are unsure to whom it is closer, as a case of Safek divorce?
(e) Answer #1 (Rabah): The Tzarah was standing to be exempt from Yibum or Chalitzah - in Safek, we leave her in her Chazakah.
(f) Objection (Abaye): If so, we should say the same by Safek engagement!

1. The Tzarah was standing to be permitted to the Yavam - we should not forbid her from Safek!

(g) Answer: There, we are stringent.
(h) Objection: This stringency will lead to a leniency!

1. Reuven might engage Leah's sister; or, another man might engage Leah.

i. Since Leah's Tzarah was forbidden to do Yibum, people will think that Leah really was engaged, so this 2nd engagement is invalid!