ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Yevamos 111
(a) Rav Sheishes proves Rav Chisda's interpretation of Rav (that one
acquires a Chareshes only partially, and a Ketanah completely, only
mi'Safek) from a Beraisa. The Tana says that if two brothers are married to
two orphan sisters, one a Ketanah, and the other, a Chareshes, and the
husband of the Ketanah dies, he gives the Chareshes a Get (because of the
Safek Zikah of the Ketanah) - and performs Chalitzah with the Ketanah after
(b) Should the husband of the Chareshes die, the Ketanah goes out with a Get
(because she may be Achos Zekukaso) - the Chareshes remains forbidden to
marry for the rest of her life. The Yavam cannot perform Yibum with her, in
case he acquired the Ketanah completely, in which case she will be Achos
Gerushaso; nor is Chalitzah applicable by a Chareshes.
(c) If, in the latter case, he performed Yibum with the Chareshes - he gives
her a Get and she is permitted to remarry?
(d) Rav Sheishes proves Rav Chisda's interpretation of Rav to be correct
from the fact that, in the latter case, the Chareshes goes free with a Get.
If we were to reverse the mechanics of a Ketanah and a Yevamah - then she
would remain forbidden, because, since the Bi'ah with the Ketanah acquired
partially, the Bi'ah with the Chareshes was a Bi'ah Pesulah, which does not
remove the Zikah. And since some of the Zikah remains and a Cheresh is not
subject to Chalitzah, she should remain forbidden.
(a) We try to reject Rav Sheishes' proof by establishing the Beraisa like
Rebbi Nechemyah - who says that a Bi'ah Pesulah exempts from Chalitzah.
(b) The Seifa of the Beraisa states that if someone who is married to two
orphans, one of them, a Ketanah and the other, a Chareshes, dies, and the
Yavam made Yibum first with the Ketanah and then he or his brother performed
Yibum with the Chareshes, both Yevamos are now forbidden to him. The Ketanah
is forbidden to the Yavam (despite the fact that he either acquired her as a
Yevamah or as a wife, as we explained earlier) - because of a decree in case
he reverses the order.
(c) He must now give the Chareshes a Get - and wait for the Ketanah to
grow-up before performing Chalitzah with her.
(d) According to the Rabbanan, he cannot perform Bi'ah because of a decree
in case he performs Bi'ah with the Yevamah first (as we just explained). The
problem in establishing the Mishnah like Rebbi Nechemyah, and reversing the
mechanics of a Ketanah and a Chareshes (like we tried to explain in the
Reisha) is - that then, the Ketanah (whose Bi'ah was a Bi'ah Pesulah,
because the Bi'ah with the Chareshes might have acquired her completely)
should not require Chalitzah.
(a) We have now proved from the Seifa of the Beraisa that the author cannot
be Rebbi Nechemyah, in which case the Reisha is a proof for Rav Chisda's
interpretation of Rav. In a further attempt to prove that the author must be
the Rabbanan, we try to extrapolate from the Reisha 'Im Ba al ha'Chareshes,
Nosen Lah Get ve'Hutrah' - whereas it does not say the same by Ketanah
(ostensibly because since the author is the Rabbanan, a Bi'ah Pesulah will
not exempt the Ketanah from Chalitzah).
(b) We reject this proof - on the grounds that the Tana only mentions it by
a Chareshes because we have no other way out for her; whereas by a Ketanah,
where she has the opportunity to go free with a Get, the Tana does feel
inclined to mention the leniency of 'Ba Alehah'.
(a) Someone was married to two orphan Ketanos died, and the Yavam first
performed Yibum with one of them, and then he or his brother performed Yibum
with the other one. The first Yavam is permitted to remain with his Yevamah,
seeing as the two have exactly the same status.
Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel and Rebbi Elazar ben P'das rule like Rebbi Eliezer
(or Rebbi Elazar ben Shamua - Rashi appears to contradict himself in this
(b) If, in the equivalent case ...
1. ... the two Yevamos were Charashos - the same will apply.
(c) In a parallel case where the first Yevamah was a Pikachas and the second
one, a Chareshes, the latter does not forbid the former on the Yavam,
whereas if the first Yevamah was the Chareshes, the subsequent Yibum of the
Pikachas would forbid the Chareshes on the Yavam. And the same will apply if
the two Yevamos were a Gedolah and a Ketanah. Rebbi Eliezer say in the
latter case - that we teach the Ketanah with whom he performed Yibum first,
to make Miy'un.
2. ... the first Yevamah was a Ketanah and the second one, a Chareshes -
then the Yibum with the Chareshes forbids the Ketanah on the Yavam (because
of a decree, that one might apply the same Halachah in the reverse order, as
we have already learned a number of times).
3. ... the first Yevamah was a Chareshes, and the second one, a Ketanah -
then min ha'Din, the Ketanah forbids the Chareshes on the Yavam, in case one
acquires a Ketanah completely, as we learned above, whereas one only
acquires the Chareshes partially.
Having ruled like him ...
1. ... above in the Mishnah on 109a., they nevertheless find it necessary to
repeat the ruling here - despite the fact that he has already fulfilled the
Mitzvah of Yibum (which is not the case on our Mishnah).
2. ... here, why do they find it necessary to repeat the ruling there -
despite the fact that, as things stand, the Gedolah (who is Achos Ishah) is
not due to perform Yibum (which is not the case here).
(a) If a Yavam Katan performed Yibum with a ...
(b) If a Yevamah claims within thirty days that the Yavam did not yet
perform Yibum with her, we force the Yavam to perform Chalitzah. Despite
the fact that she is believed during that period, we do not give him the
option of performing Yibum - because we are speaking when the Yavam already
gave her a Get (which will be explained later).
- ... Yevamah Ketanah - they grow-up together.
- ... Yevamah Gedolah - he grows-up with her.
(c) We believe her in the first place - because of the Chazakah that a man
will not refrain from Bi'ah for more than thirty days.
(d) Should she make the same claim *after* thirty days - she is not
believed. Nevertheless, we ask him to perform Chalitzah with her, since,
having said that the Yavam did not perform Yibum with her, she becomes
forbidden to marry le'Shuk, due to the principle 'Shavya Anafshah Chatichah
de'Isurah' (meaning that whenever a person makes a statement forbidding
something on himself, even though we know the it to be incorrect, he is
believed as if he had made a Neder to that effect).
(a) We force him to perform Chalitzah even after twelve months - if he
admits that he did not yet perform Yibum.
(b) If a woman makes a Neder during her husband's life-time not to have any
benefit from her Yavam, then, when her husband dies, we force the Yavam to
perform Chalitzah with her. We will only request this of him, but not force
him - if she either made the Neder after her husband's death or if we know
that she specifically made the Neder in order to avoid having to make Yibum
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, a Katan or a Ketanah is forbidden to perform
Yibum with the Yavam or the Yevamah respectively - in case he turns out to
be a Saris or she, an Aylonis.
(b) We initially try and reconcile Rebbi Meir with our Mishnah, which
permits a Katan who performed Yibum with a Ketanah to remain with her - by
differentiating between a Gedolah to a Katan or vice-versa (which Rebbi Meir
forbids because one of them is a Gadol)and a Ketanah to a Katan (which our
Mishnah permits - because of the principle 'Katan Ochel Neveilos , Ein
Beis-Din Metzuvin Alav le'Hafrisho'.
(c) We then try and reconcile his opinion with the Seifa, which even permits
a Yavam who performed Yibum with a *Gedolah* to remain with her - on the
grounds that the Mishnah only permits this Bedieved, whereas Rebbi Meir
(d) We reject this contention however - on the grounds that the Tana says
'Tegadlenu', implying that they are permitted to continue living together as
husband and wife (something which Rebbi Meir will certainly permit, since
every Bi'ah is Asur, in his opinion).
(a) We ask why the Yibum of a Katan with a Gedolah should not be forbidden
because he cannot have children, and the Torah writes "Lehakim le'Achiv
Sheim" (see Maharsha). Abaye answers the Kashya by citing the Pasuk "Yevamah
Yavo Alehah" - which teaches us that any Bi'ah is permitted (and does not
need to be a Bi'ah which can produce children).
(b) Rava tries to answer the Kashya with the S'vara - that who has ever
heard of something that is forbidden now and will be permitted later?
(c) He bases his S'vara on a statement of Rav Yehudah Amar Rav - who says
that any Yevamah who is unfit to perform Yibum at the time when she falls to
Yibum, is, to all intents and purposes, considered Eishes Achiv, and
forbidden. Similarly, if a Katan would be forbidden at the time when he
falls to Yibum, how could he possibly become permitted later?
(d) Rava finally answer the Kashya (from "Lehakim le'Achiv Sheim") from the
Pasuk "Ki Yeishvu Achim Yachdav" - which precludes a brother who *was not
yet born*, but clearly includes one who *was* (even if he is only one day
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, up to thirty days a man is believed with
Ta'anas Besulim - the claim that his wife was not a Besulah when he married
her, in which case, she loses her Kesubah.
(b) According to Rebbi Yossi - if they made Bi'ah, then he must make his
claim immediately, if he is to be believed; and if they did not, then even
after many years he will still be believed.
(c) Rabah reconciles Rebbi Yossi with our Mishnah that gives a thirty day
leeway before one is not believed - by establishing Rebbi Yossi by a woman
with whom he was betrothed, and with whom, by the time they arrive at the
time of their wedding, he is already familiar; whereas our Mishnah speaks
about a Yevamah, with whom he still feels embarrassment. There, even Rebbi
Yossi will agree that a leeway of thirty days is required.