POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Yevamos 10
YEVAMOS 10 (Chanukah) - has been sponsored through the donation of Alex and
Helen Gross of Rechavya, Jerusalem; may the light of the Torah always light
their home and the homes of their descendants!
12) AN ERVAH THAT FALLS TO YIBUM WITH HER SISTER
(b) (Mishnah): 6 Arayos are more severe than these - they can
only marry others (but not any of the brothers), so their
Tzaros are permitted;
i. The way to remember the case is 'death, birth,
Yibum; death, birth, Yibum'.
2. Answer #1(To question 2, 9B): Rebbi does not hold of
these rules (and omits cases on which there is
3. Answer #2 (Rav Ada): Really, Rebbi holds of the
rules. His objection was that both rules cannot
apply to one's mother, who was raped by his father.
i. If Yakov (the father) raped 2 sisters, we have
2 sisters falling to Yibum, but we cannot say
that each is permitted to a different brother
(since the one that is not his mother is his
4. Answer #3 (Rav Ashi): Rebbi does not hold of these
rules; the Mishnah deals with cases of dispute.
ii. If he raped 2 unrelated women, we can have that
each is permitted to a different brother (one
that is not her son), but they are not sisters.
i. He criticized Levi for not deducing from the
coming Mishnah that R. Yehudah (who prohibits a
man to a woman raped by his father) the is the
1. Shimon's mother.
(c) Question: What is the case of his mother?
2. His father's wife.
3. His father's sister.
1. Suggestion: If she was married to his father - that
is the 2nd case!
(d) Question (Ravina): The case can also be found according
to R. Yehudah, if he transgressed and married her!
2. Rather, she was raped by his father; and the Mishnah
says, she can marry others, not the brothers!
3. R. Yehudah is the Tana that says that she is
forbidden; this is why the first Mishnah omitted
(e) Answer (Rav Ashi): The Tana does not list cases which
come through forbidden marriages.
(f) Question (Rav Ashi): The case can arise through permitted
1. Yakov raped the wife of his son Reuven, and had a
son. Reuven died without children. His widow falls
to her son to Yibum.
(g) Answer (Rav Kahane): The Tana deals with permitted cases
of sisters, not with forbidden cases.
i. Since she is forbidden, her Tzarah is also
(h) Still, Levi included in his Mishnah - sometimes Shimon's
mother exempts her Tzarah, sometimes not.
1. If she was married to the father, she does not
exempt the Tzarah.
13) ONE WHO MARRIES AFTER CHALITZAH
2. If she was raped by the father and married a
brother, she exempts the Tzarah.
(i) Even though we learned that 15 cases exempt the Tzarah,
we find this 16th case.
(a) Question (Reish Lakish): According to Levi, who learns
that Bedi'eved cases are listed - let the Mishnah teach,
one who does Chalitzah to his Yevamah, then engages her
and dies without children.
1. Since she may not do Yibum, her Tzarah is also
(b) Answer (R. Yochanan): This case is omitted, since there
cannot be the Tzarah of a Tzarah.
1. Question: Why didn't R. Yochanan answer, one who
engages his Yevamah after Chalitzah is Chaivei
Lavin, and they do Yibum or Chalitzah!
(c) One who engages his Yevamah after Chalitzah. Reish Lakish
says, he is not punished with Kares if he has relations
with her, but the brothers are; both he and the brothers
do get Kares for relations with a Tzarah;
2. Answer: R. Yochanan answered according to Reish
i. I (R. Yochanan) hold that they are Chaivei
Lavin, and do Yibum or Chalitzah. You (Reish
Lakish) who hold that they are Chaivei Krisus,
can answer because we cannot find the Tzarah of
(d) (R. Yochanan): Both he and the brothers are not
punishable with Kares, not for her nor for the Tzaros.
(e) Question: What is the reason for Reish Lakish?
(f) Answer: "That will not build the house of his brother" -
once he has not built, he cannot build.
1. He (the one who did Chalitzah) is forbidden by this
Lav - his brothers are forbidden as they used to be
(Kares, without the Mitzvah of Yibum to permit it).
(g) Rather, the brother that does Chalitzah acts on behalf of
all brothers; the widow that does Chalitzah acts on
behalf of all the widows.
2. The Lav only applies to the widow that did Chalitzah
- the others are forbidden as they used to be.
3. R. Yochanan argues - we never find, that initially
any brother may do Chalitzah on any widow, and now
(that he did not do Chalitzah to her), he will be
forbidden to her with Kares?!
(h) Question (R. Yochanan - Beraisa): One who does Chalitzah
to his Yevamah, then engaged her and died - she must do
Chalitzah with the brothers.
1. This fits with the opinion that the prohibition is
only a Lav - therefore, the engagement takes effect,
and Chalitzah is needed.
(i) Counter-question: The end of the Beraisa teaches, if one
of the brothers engaged her, she has no claim on him.
2. If the prohibition has Kares - the engagement does
not take effect, why is Chalitzah needed?
1. If it is only Chaivei Lavin, why does she have no
claim on him?
(j) Answer #1(Rav Sheshes): The end of the Beraisa is as R.
Akiva, who says that engagement does not take effect by
(k) Question: If so, let it say, according to R. Akiva, she
has no claim on him!