Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) CAN A YAVAM GIVE THE PROPERTY OF THE DECEASED?

1. (Beraisa - R. Nasan): "To the one Asham (the principle) belongs" - this teaches, if Shimon owes money to David, and David to Moshe, we take money from Shimon to pay Moshe.

(b) Answer: Rather, the Beraisa is erroneous because we do not find a Tana that holds of 2 stringencies (favoring collection) of a Kesuvah.

1. We only find R. Meir, (who says it may be collected from Metaltelim) or R. Nasan, (who says it may be collected from one who borrowed from the husband).
2. (Rava): Now I understand what I had heard Abaye say - 'This is erroneous'.

(c) A woman fell to Yibum; the younger brother planned to give her a Get, to prevent the older brother from doing Yibum.

1. Older brother: Why do you want to do that? So I should not inherit our brother's property myself? I will split it with you!
2. Younger brother: I am afraid you will do as the trickster of Pumbadisa (81B)!
3. Older brother: If you want, I will divide the property with you now!

(d) Mar Bar Rav Ashi: Here, the division is void; this is unlike R. Yochanan's law.

1. (Rav Dimi citing R. Yochanan): 'Drag this cow, but it is not yours until 30 days from now' - 30 days from now he acquires it, even if it is in a swamp!
2. There, he could give the cow now; here, the Yavam cannot give the property (until he does Yibum and inherits it).

(e) Contradiction: Ravin quoted R. Yochanan as saying that the cow is not acquired in 30 days!
(f) Answer: Rav Dimi spoke in a case when he said 'acquire from now'; in Ravin's case, he did not say this.
(g) Question #1: If he did Yibum and then divided the property, is the division valid?
(h) Answer (Ula): No.
(i) Question #2: If he divided the property and then did Yibum, is the division valid?
(j) Answer (Ula): No.

1. Question: After hearing the 1st answer, it is obvious that the division is void in the 2nd case!
2. Answer: These questions were asked in cases that arose (the 2nd questioner had not heard the 1st answer).

(k) (Ravin): Whether he did Yibum and then divided the property or vice-versa, the division is void.

1. This is the law.

(a) (Mishnah): Chachamim say, attached fruit is his.
(b) Question: Why is this? There is a lien on all property of the deceased to pay the Kesuvah!
(c) Correction (Reish Lakish): The Mishnah should say, 'It is hers'.
(d) (Mishnah): If he does Yibum, she is as his wife.
(e) Question: What does this teach?
(f) Answer (R. Yosi Bar Chanina): That he may divorce her with a Get, and he may remarry her.
(g) Objection: Of course he may divorce her with a Get!
(h) Answer: One might have thought, "He will do Yibum with her" - she is still as a Yevamah, and a Get does not suffice to divorce her, rather Chalitzah is needed!

1. The Mishnah teaches, this is not so.

(i) Objection: Of course, he may remarry her!

(j) Answer: one might have thought, he performed the Mitzvah the Torah put upon him, and she is again forbidden as a brother's wife.

1. We hear, this is not so.

(k) Question: Why don't we say this?
(l) Answer: "He will take her as a wife" - once he takes her, she is as his wife.

(a) (Mishnah): However, her Kesuvah is paid from the property of the deceased.
(b) Question: Why is this?
(c) Answer: This wife was acquired to him by Heaven (so he should not have to pay her Kesuvah from his own property).

1. If she cannot collect a Kesuvah from the property of the deceased, she gets it from the Yavam, so it should not be light in his eyes to divorce her.

(d) (Mishnah): He should not say, your Kesuvah (is on the table) ...
(e) Question: Why does the Mishnah continue, 'Similarly, a man should not tell his wife...'?
(f) Answer: One might have thought, by a Yevamah, he did not write, 'There is a lien on all property I acquired and will acquire to pay your Kesuvah', so he should not designate money; but by a regular wife, he does write this, he may designate, since she is confident of collecting!

1. We hear, this is not so.

(g) (Mishnah): If he divorces her, she only collects her Kesuvah.

1. Only after he divorces her - before this, all the property must be preserved to pay her Kesuvah, as R. Aba taught (81A).

(h) (Mishnah): If he remarries her, she is as any woman, and only collects her Kesuvah.
(i) Question: Why is this needed - we learn this in a later Mishnah (89B)!

1. (Mishnah): One who divorced his wife and remarried her, it is understood that he remarries her on condition that she only has her original Kesuvah.

(j) Answer: One might have thought, this is only by a regular wife, since he wrote the original Kesuvah; but a Yevamah, he did not write the original Kesuvah, one would think that he now writes her an additional Kesuvah.

1. We hear, this is not so.

(a) (Rav Yehudah): Initially, there was no lien on property to pay a Kesuvah; men did not find women to marry, until Shimon Ben Shetach enacted a lien on all a man's property to pay the Kesuvah.
(b) Support (Beraisa): Initially, there was no lien on property to pay a Kesuvah; men did not find women to marry;

1. They enacted that he would leave the Kesuvah (100 or 200 Zuz) in her father's house; this caused that a man that got angry at his wife would divorce her (since the money was out of his hands anyway)
2. They enacted that he would leave the Kesuvah in his father's house;

i. For rich wives, the Kesuvah would be a silver or gold basket; for poor wives, of copper.
ii. Still, when he got angry at his wife, he would divorce her.

3. Shimon Ben Shetach enacted a lien on all a man's property to pay the Kesuvah.