Daf Yomi - Yevamos 10 - Highlights (there's always more by the "click more")

Rav Adda Karchina said in front of Rav Kahana, in the name of Rava: Rebbe in fact agrees with Rabbi Chiya’s rules, but this is what he answered Levi: Regarding the case where one’s mother was violated by his father will only be in accordance with one of Rabbi Chiya’s rules, but not both.

The Gemora explains: If the father violated two sisters and had two sons. His two other sons married the two women who were violated by the father. Subsequently, they died childless and the two sisters fall for yibum to their sons. Each one of the women is a sister to a yevamah, but we cannot say that one who is forbidden to one brother will be permitted to the other brother because they are both prohibited to each of the brothers. One woman is the mother of the brother and the other woman is his aunt.

If the father violated two women who are unrelated to each other, we can say that one who is forbidden to one brother will be permitted to the other brother, but we cannot say that they are sisters of a yevamah. (10a)

Rav Ashi offers an alternative answer: The Mishna is following the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah, who maintains that a man is forbidden from marrying a woman who has been violated by his father; hence, this case is not possible.

Ravina asked Rav Ashi: Perhaps the Mishna is referring to a case where the brother transgressed and married the woman who was violated by his father; he then died childless. His widow is falling for yibum to her son. Why didn’t the Mishna include this case?

Rav Ashi responded: The Mishna does not want to discuss a case which can only occur “if” there is an illegal marriage.

Rav Ashi said to Rav Kahana: The Mishna can state a case even without the brother marrying his wife illegally. The case is: Yaakov violated his daughter-in-law, the wife of Reuven and had a son. Reuven dies childless and his wife falls for yibum to Reuven’s brothers; they cannot perform a yibum with her because she is their father’s violated woman.

Rav Kahana replied: The Mishna does not want to deal with cases that involve a prohibition.

Although Rebbe rebuked Levi’s question, Levi nevertheless included this case in his collection of braisos. (10a – 10b)

Rish Lakish asked Rabbi Yochanan: According to Levi, who includes in the Mishna cases where the brother had married his wife illegally, let the Mishna teach the following case: A man performed a chalitzah with his yevamah and then married her (this is prohibited) and then died childless. The yevamah will be forbidden to the brothers on account of her being the original brother’s wife. She is an ervah, subject to the penalty of kares and shall thus exempt her co-wife, as well.

Rabbi Yochanan answered: This case is not mentioned because this yevamah would not be included in the case of a co-wife’s co-wife (since she is forbidden to each of the brothers).

Rish Lakish could have answered that the yevamah is only forbidden to the brothers by a mere negative commandment (unlike Rabbi Yochanan, who maintains that she is subject to the penalty of kares) and thus would be eligible for chalitzah and yibum. (10b)

The Gemora presents the dispute between Rabbi Yochanan and Rish Lakish. A man performed a chalitzah with his yevamah and then married her; Rish Lakish said that he is not liable for kares for marrying the chalutzah (the one with whom the chalitzah was performed), but the brothers will be liable to kares for taking her. He (the one who performed the chalitzah) and his brothers will be liable to kares for taking the co-wife. Rabbi Yochanan says: Both he and the brothers will not be liable to kares for taking the chalutzah or her co-wife.

The Gemora cites the sources for their respective opinions. (10b)