Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) SISTERS THAT FALL TO YIBUM TOGETHER

(a) Question: But R. Shimon said, sisters do not do Chalitzah or Yibum!
(b) Answer: They must do Chalitzah as a decree, on account of prohibitions of Mitzvah or Kedushah that fall without a sister.
(c) Question: This explains why the one forbidden (Mitzvah or Kedushah) needs Chalitzah - why does her sister also need Chalitzah?
(d) Answer: We decree on her sister because of her (so people should not think that she also does not need Chalitzah).
(e) Question: Regarding Ervah, we do not decree!
(f) Answer: Ervah is well known.

(a) (Mishnah): 3 brothers, 2 are married to sisters, 1 is single. A married brother dies; the single brother gave a Ma'amar to the Yevamah, and the other married brother dies.
(b) Beis Shamai says, he keeps his wife (the Yevamah he gave a Ma'amar to), the other Yevamah is as the sister of his wife, (and does not need even Chalitzah);
(c) Beis Hillel say, he sends his wife away with a Get and Chalitzah, and does Chalitzah to the 2nd Yevamah.

1. In *this* case, they said, 'Woe to him that he loses his wife and the wife of his brother'.

(d) (Gemara) Question: What case does *This* come to exclude?
(e) Answer: That we do not say as R. Yehoshua (Daf 109A - A man is married d'Rabanan to an orphaned minor, and her sister, married mid'Oraisa, falls to him to Yibum; R. Yehoshua says, he cannot keep either one).

1. Rather, we conduct as R. Eliezer (we counsel his wife to do Mi'un), or as R. Gamliel (if she does not do Mi'un, when she becomes an adult, his marriage to her becomes mid'Oraisa and the Yevamah, his wife's sister, does not need even Chalitzah).

(f) Version #1 (R. Elazar): Do not say that Beis Shamai holds that a Ma'amar makes a complete acquisition of a Yevamah, and he can subsequently divorce her with a Get (without Chalitzah).

1. Rather, Ma'amar only acquires to dismiss the Tzarah.

(g) (R. Avin): Our Mishnah teaches this.

1. (Mishnah (26A)): Beis Shamai says, if they both did Yibum, they may remain married.

i. This is only B'diavad!

2. If Ma'amar makes a full acquisition - each brother may give a Ma'amar to a Yevamah, and acquire her - L'chatchilah!
3. Objection: But even R. Avin says it dismisses the Tzarah!

i. Still, each brother can give a Ma'amar to a Yevamah, and dismiss her Tzarah, permitting Yibum!
ii. R. Avin must admit, only a permitted Ma'amar dismisses the Tzarah, not a forbidden Ma'amar (e.g. to the sister of a Zekukah).
iii. We can likewise say, a permitted Ma'amar makes a full acquisition, not a forbidden Ma'amar!

(h) Version #2 (Rav Ashi - R. Elazar): Do not say that Beis Shamai holds that a Ma'amar completely dispels, and the Tzarah does not need even Chalitzah.

1. Rather, Ma'amar dispels partially.

(i) (R. Avin): Our Mishnah teaches this.

1. (Mishnah (26A)): Beis Shamai says, if they both did Yibum, they may remain married.

i. This is only B'diavad!

2. If Ma'amar fully dispels - each brother may give a Ma'amar to a Yevamah, and dispel her Tzarah - L'chatchilah!
3. Objection: But in our Mishnah, Beis Shamai says that he keeps his wife, and the Yevamah is exempt, as the sister of his wife!

i. One must say, Ma'amar fully dispels the Tzarah, only by a Yevamah that is fitting for all aspects of Yibum.

(a) Question (Rava): According to Beis Shamai - does Ma'amar make engagement or Nisu'in?
(b) Question (Abaye): What difference does it make?

1. Suggestion #1: If it makes Nisu'in, he inherits her, becomes Tamei to bury her (if he is a Kohen), and can annul her vows.
2. Rejection: R. Chiya taught, during engagement, the husband does not become an Onen (a bereaved relative before burial) over his wife nor become Tamei for her, nor she to him; he does not inherit her - if he dies, she collects a Kesuvah;

i. If he only gave her a Ma'amar - is there any doubt, perhaps these apply?!

3. Suggestion #2: Rather, if it makes engagement, she must be handed over to Chupah, but not if it makes Nisu'in.
4. Rejection: If he did not give a Ma'amar, the Torah says "Her Yavam will do Yibum with her" - against her will!

i. If he gave a Ma'amar - is there any doubt?

5. Answer (Rava): Yes, there is a doubt - when he gives a Ma'amar, the Zikah of Yibum departs, and she gets the law of engagement or Nisu'in.

(c) (Beraisa - R. Eliezer): A Yavam can annul the vows of a Yevamah, whether there are 1 or 2 Yavamim; R. Yehoshua says, when there is 1 Yavam, not when there are 2; R. Akiva says, even by 1 Yavam, he cannot.

1. We understand, R. Akiva holds, there is no Zikah, even by 1 Yavam; R. Yehoshua holds, there is Zikah by 1 Yavam, not by 2.
2. Question: R. Eliezer - granted, he holds, there is Zikah - why should this apply to 2 Yavamim?
3. Answer (R. Ami): The case is, he gave a Ma'amar, as Beis Shamai, who say that a Ma'amar makes a full acquisition.

(d) If Ma'amar makes Nisu'in - we understand why he can annul her vows.

1. Question: If it only makes engagement - why can he annul her vows?

i. (Mishnah): An engaged Na'arah - her father and husband annul her vows.

2. Answer (Rav Nachman Bar Yitzchak): When R. Eliezer said that he can annul her vows - he meant, in partnership (with her father)!

(e) Question: According to R. Elazar, who said that Ma'amar only dismisses the Tzarah - why can he annul in partnership?
(f) Answer #1: R. Elazar only said that it does not fully acquire, that Chalitzah should not be required - he did not say that it is not a full acquisition regarding vows!
(g) Answer #2 - Counter-question: Rav Nachman Bar Yitzchak says that he annuls with the father - but the Beraisa says *He annuls*, not *they annul*!

1. Rather, the case is, the Yevamah took him to Beis Din because he did not want to do Yibum nor Chalitzah; they ruled that he must feed her.

(h) (Rav Pinchas): A woman vows on condition that her husband approves. (Here, since she is fed by the Yavam, she vows on condition that he approves.)