Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) PARTIAL DIVORCE

(a) (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): A man divorced his wife, saying 'You are permitted to any man but not Peloni' - she is permitted to all other men;
(b) Chachamim say, she is (not divorced and) forbidden to all men.

1. He must take the Get and give it again, saying, 'You are permitted to all men.'
2. If he wrote in the Get (that she is not permitted to Peloni), even if this was later erased, the Get is invalid.

(c) (Gemara) Question: How did he say that she is not permitted to Peloni - 'You are permitted to any man except Peloni', or 'You are permitted to any man on condition that you do not marry Peloni'?

1. If he said except - in that case, Chachamim argue on R. Eliezer, because the Get does not fully divorce her;

i. But had he said on condition, all would agree that this as any conditional Get, it is valid.

2. If he said on condition - in that case, R. Eliezer argues;

i. But had he said except, all would agree that the Get is invalid, because the Get does not fully divorce her.

(d) Answer #1 (Ravina - Mishnah): All houses can become plagued, but not those of non-Jews.

1. We understand if this means 'except'.
2. Question: If it means 'on condition that' - can we say that houses of Yisrael can become plagued on condition that that non-Jewish houses cannot?!

i. Objection #1: This would imply - if non-Jewish houses can become Tamei, houses of Yisrael could not!
ii. Objection #2: Non-Jewish houses cannot become Tamei - "A plague in a house of your inheritance!"

(e) Our Mishnah is not as the following Tana.

1. (Beraisa - R. Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah): R. Eliezer and Chachamim agree, if he said 'You are permitted to all men except Peloni', she is not divorced;
2. They only argued when he said 'You are permitted to all men on condition that you do not marry Peloni'.

3. R. Eliezer says, she may marry any man except Peloni; Chachamim forbid her to marry.

i. R. Eliezer holds, this is as any other stipulation;
ii. Chachamim hold, this stipulation is different, for it creates a remnant of marriage that the Get does not sever.

(f) Question: In the Mishnah, R. Eliezer says that the Get is valid when he says 'except' - why is this?
(g) Answer #1 (R. Yanai): "She will leave his house and marry another man" - even if she only becomes permitted to 1 man, this is considered divorce.

1. Chachamim say, the verse teaches that she must become permitted to every man.

(h) Answer #2 (R. Yochanan): "Kohanim will not marry a woman divorced from her husband" - even if she is only divorced from her husband (and not permitted to anyone), she is (divorced and) forbidden to a Kohen.

1. Chachamim say, that is a stringency of Kehunah, she is not really divorced.

(a) Question (R. Aba): What is the law if Reuven engages a woman except for Peloni (i.e. regarding Peloni, she is single)?

1. This question may be asked according to R. Eliezer and Chachamim.
2. R. Eliezer learned from a verse that the corresponding case by divorce is valid - here there is no verse to learn from, he must fully engage her;

i. Or, perhaps "v'Yatzah v'Haysah" teaches that divorce and engagement have the same law.

3. Chachamim only said that such a divorce is invalid because the Torah specified a Sefer of Krisus (cutting) - by engagement, even a partial acquisition works;

i. Or, perhaps "v'Yatzah v'Haysah" teaches that divorce and engagement have the same law.

(b) Answer (R. Aba): All learn from "v'Yatzah v'Haysah", they have the same argument by engagement.
(c) (Abaye): If R. Aba is correct (and R. Eliezer holds that partial engagement works) - if Reuven engaged Leah except for his brother Shimon, and Shimon engaged her except for Reuven, and both died, Levi may do Yibum;

1. Leah is not considered the wife of 2 dead brothers (if she was, Yibum would be forbidden).
2. The reason is because Shimon's engagement had no effect (she was already forbidden to all other men, and he did not forbid her to Reuven).
3. Had Shimon engaged her normally, then also his engagement takes effect (to forbid her to Reuven); if they died, she would be the wife of 2 dead brothers.

(a) Question #1 (Abaye): A man told his wife: 'You are permitted to all men except Reuven and Shimon'; he then said, 'To Reuven and Shimon' - what is the law?

1. Do we say, he permitted (her to marry even) the ones he initially forbade her to?
2. Or, did he retract to say that she should only be permitted to Reuven and Shimon?
3. Question #2: If you will say that he permitted (even) the ones he initially forbade - what if he only retracted to say 'to Reuven'?

i. Does he permit her to Reuven - and also to Shimon (for conciseness, he only said the first one)?
ii. Or, perhaps he only permits her to Reuven, not to Shimon?

4. Question #3: If he only permits her to Reuven - what if he only retracted to say 'to Shimon'?

i. Does he permit her to Shimon - and also to Reuven (for conciseness, he only said the last one he mentioned)?
ii. Or, perhaps he only permits her to Shimon, not to Reuven?

(b) Question (Rav Ashi): What if he said 'Even to Shimon'?

1. Does he mean, not only to Reuven, rather, even to Shimon?
2. Or - does he mean, not only to all other men (that he permitted her to the first time), rather, even to Shimon?

i. These questions are unresolved.