Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) THE PROPER WAY TO DO YIBUM

(a) Question: The Mishnah said 'How is this' - but never explained the case of Get after Get!
(b) Answer (Rav Yehudah): The Mishnah says thusly: Get after Get, and Ma'amar after Ma'amar - they are as in the Beraisa (above);

1. When there is only 1 Yevamah and 1 Yavam, how do we fix things? If he gave Ma'amar and a Get, she needs Chalitzah.

(c) (Mishnah): If he gave a Ma'amar and did Yibum, this is how the Mitzvah should be done.
(d) Suggestion: This supports Rav Huna.

1. Rav Huna: The proper way do Yibum is to first engage the Yevamah (with a Ma'amar).

(e) Rejection: There is no support - we can explain, this is *also* a proper way to do Yibum.
(f) Objection: This is obvious!
(g) Answer: No, it is not.

1. It was said, a Ma'amar removes Zikah of Yibum and makes her as an engaged girl. One might have thought, there is no more Mitzvah of Yibum, just standard Nisu'in!

(h) Rav Huna: The proper way do Yibum is to first engage the Yevamah; if he first did Yibum, and then gave a Ma'amar, he acquired her.
(i) Question: This is obvious, the Yibum acquired her!
(j) Correction: Rather say, if he did Yibum without a Ma'amar, he acquired her.
(k) Question (Beraisa): If he does Yibum without a Ma'amar, he is lashed (it must be, this does not fulfill the Mitzvah of the Torah)!
(l) Answer: The lashes are only Rabbinical.

1. Rav lashes: One that engages through relations;
2. One that engages in the market (in public);
3. One that engages without prior arrangement;
4. One that invalidates a Get;
5. One that tells witnesses that a Get he gave was invalid;
6. One that is brazen to a messenger of Chachamim;
7. One that endures excommunication for 30 days and does not ask for it to be lifted;
8. And a husband that lives by his mother-in-law.

i. Question: Only for living by her, but not for passing by?

i) Rav Sheshes lashed a man that passed by his mother-in-law's house!

ii. Answer: That man was suspected of relations with his mother-in-law.

(m) (Nehardai): Rav only lashes for one that engages through relations, and without prior arrangement.

1. Some say, even with prior arrangement, because it is lewdness.

(a) (Beraisa): How is Ma'amar done? He gave her money, or something of monetary value;
(b) How is it done with a document?

1. Question: What is the question? As it was taught - 'He wrote to her on a paper, or on pottery, even though it is not worth a Prutah - 'Behold, you are betrothed to me''.
2. Answer (Abaye): The Beraisa asks, how is a Kesuvah of Yibum? He wrote, I, Ploni accept to feed and support my Yevamah Plonis, but the Kesuvah is collected from the property of the deceased.

i. If there is no property from the deceased, a Kesuvah was enacted from the property of the Yavam, so it should not be light in his eyes to divorce her.

(c) Question (Abaye): He gave his Yevamah a Get, and said, 'You are divorced from me, and are not permitted to any man' - what is the law?

1. Do we say, a Get by a Yevamah is mid'Rabanan - only a Get that works by a married woman works by a Yevamah?
2. Or, do we say it does forbid Yibum, lest it be confused with a proper Get.

(d) Answer (Rabah): We are concerned, it may be confused with a proper Get.
(e) Question (Rabah Bar Chanan): If so, even for giving her a piece of paper, we should say that she may not do Yibum?!
(f) Answer (Rabah): A blank paper does not prohibit a girl to a Kohen; the Get Abaye asked about forbids a girl to a Kohen.

1. (Beraisa): "A woman divorced from her husband they (Kohanim) will not marry" - even if she was only divorced from her husband (and not permitted to anyone), they may not marry her.

i. This is the scent of a Get, which forbids a girl to Kehunah.

(g) (Rami Bar Chama): It was taught - A man asked a scribe to write a Get to his engaged wife, to be given after Nisu'in - the Get is valid, since he could divorce her now.

(h) If he tells him to write to a woman he is not engaged to, the Get is invalid, since he cannot divorce her.
(i) Question (Rami Bar Chama): What if he writes to his Yevamah?

1. Since she is tied to him, it is as his engaged wife, and the Get is valid.
2. Or, since he did not give a Ma'amar, we do not say this.

i. The question is unresolved.

(j) Question (R. Chanina): One wrote a Get for the Zikah (to prohibit Yibum), but not to undo his Ma'amar; or, to undo his Ma'amar, but not to prohibit Yibum - what is the law?

1. Does Ma'amar add to Zikah - and this is like divorcing half a wife?
2. Or, do Zikah and Ma'amar exist by themselves?

(k) Suggestion: We can settle the question from Rava's law.

1. (Rava): If a man gave a Get to undo his Ma'amar, the Tzarah is permitted.

(l) Response: Rava was sure, but R. Chanina never resolved his doubt.

(a) (Mishnah): If he did Chalitzah and gave a Ma'amar (nothing takes effect after Chalitzah).
(b) (Rav Yehudah): This is as R. Akiva, who says that engagement does not take effect between Chayavei Lavin; but Chachamim say, things take effect after Chalitzah.
(c) Question: The Mishnah cannot be as R. Akiva!

1. (Earlier in the Mishnah): If he gave a Get and a Ma'amar - she needs a Get and Chalitzah.
2. According to R. Akiva - once she got a Get, Ma'amar would not take effect!

i. (Beraisa - R. Akiva): One who gives a Get to his Yevamah may never do Yibum - "Her 1st husband (cannot remarry her) after divorcing her".

(d) Answer (Rav Ashi): A Get to a Yevamah is only mid'Rabanan - the verse is only an Asmachta.
(e) A Beraisa supports Rav Yehudah.

1. (Beraisa - Rebbi): Only R. Akiva, who considers a Chalutzah as Ervah, says this - but Chachamim say, things take effect after Chalitzah;
2. I say, this only applies when he intended for engagement; but if he intended for a regular Ma'amar of a Yevamah, nothing takes effect after Chalitzah.

(f) (Beraisa - Rebbi): A man did Chalitzah, then engaged her. If he intended for regular engagement, she needs a Get; if it was as a Ma'amar of a Yevamah, she does not need a Get;

1. Chachamim say, in either case she needs a Get.

(g) (Rav Yosef): Rebbi holds, we made the Yavam as one that is digging in the property of a convert (that died without heirs, and the property is ownerless) and thinks that the property is already his - he does not acquire it.
(h) Objection (Abaye): There, the digger has no intention to acquire - here, the Yavam intends to acquire her!
(i) (Abaye): The proper analogy is a man that is digging in the property of a convert, and thinks he is digging in the property of a different convert, and he does acquire!
(j) (Abaye): Rather, the case is, he told her, be engaged to me with this Ma'amar of Yevamin. Rebbi says, Ma'amar only increases an existing Zikah; once Chalitzah ended Zikah, the Ma'amar cannot take effect;
(k) Chachamim say, Ma'amar and Zikah are independent of each other.

1. If he initially said, be engaged to me with this Ma'amar of Yevamin, would it not work? Now also (after Chalitzah), it works!

(l) Objection (Rava): If he said, 'With this Ma'amar of Yevamin', all would agree that it takes effect. The case is, he said, be engaged to me with the Zikah of Yevamin.