Daf Yomi - Yevamos 11 - Highlights

The Gemora cites a dispute between Rav Acha and Ravina: If one of the brothers performs a yibum and another brother lives with her co-wife; one of them maintains that he is liable to kares and the other one holds that he is transgressing a positive commandment.

The Gemora explains: The one who maintains that he is liable to kares follows the opinion of Rish Lakish (who holds that the brother who performed the yibum is acting for himself and he is subject to the prohibition of not building two houses, but the other brothers are still subject to the prohibition of their brother’s wife). The one who holds that the brother has transgressed a positive commandment is in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan (who maintains that all the brothers are subject to a mere positive prohibition and not the kares prohibition of their brother’s wife since the brother who performed the yibum or chalitzah acted as an agent for all the brothers). (11a)

Rav Yehudah says in the name of Rav: The co-wife of a sotah, an adulteress (witnesses testified that she committed adultery) is forbidden to the yavam and is therefore exempt from chalitzah. (The sotah herself is also forbidden to the yavam.) He explains: The term tumah, defilement is mentioned in regards to the sotah just as it is mentioned by arayos. Just as an ervah is exempt from chalitzah and yibum, so too, a sotah and her co-wife are exempt from chalitzah and yibum.

The Gemora distinguishes between a sotah under Biblical law and one that is regarded as a sotah under Rabbinical law. (A man went overseas and a witness testified that he had died. The woman married another man and subsequently, the husband returned. The Rabbis regarded her as an adulteress because she did not investigate the matter thoroughly (although she was permitted to marry based on the testimony) and decreed that she is forbidden to return to her initial husband.) The Mishna later ruled that a woman who is regarded as a sotah under Rabbinical law must have chalitzah and her co-wife could be taken in yibum or chalitzah.

The Gemora makes a distinction between a woman who is a confirmed sotah and one who is an uncertain sotah (she had secluded herself with another man, but we have not ascertained if she had been defiled). If the husband of the uncertain sotah would die childless (prior to resolving the situation through the drinking of the bitter waters), she would be subject to chalitzah. The Gemora explains the distinction: The term tumah is only mentioned in reference to a confirmed sotah and not in regards to an uncertain sotah. (11a – 11b)

Rav Yehudah inquired of Rav Sheishes: If a person remarries his divorcee unlawfully after she had been married to another man, and he then dies childless, what is the law regarding this woman’s co-wife? Can the brother perform a yibum with her or not?

The Gemora elaborates: According to Rabbi Yosi the son of Keifar, there is no inquiry at all. He maintains that the term tumah is used in reference to the remarried divorcee, and therefore the halacha would be that she and her co-wife are exempt from yibum.

The inquiry would only be applicable according to the Chachamim who maintain that the term tumah written in the Torah portion regarding the remarried divorcee is referring to a sotah. Do we say that the verse never departs from its literal meaning and since the term tumah is written in the Torah portion regarding the remarried divorcee, she and her co-wife will be excluded from the yibum obligation? Or perhaps, since we expound the term tumah to be referring to a sotah and not to the remarried divorcee, she is not regarded as an ervah and her co-wife is available to be taken for yibum?

The Gemora presents an alternative explanation for this inquiry: According to the Chachamim, there is no inquiry at all. They maintain that the term tumah written in the Torah portion regarding the remarried divorcee is referring to a sotah and not to the remarried divorcee, she is not regarded as an ervah and her co-wife is available to be taken for yibum.

The inquiry would only be applicable according to
Rabbi Yosi the son of Keifar, who maintains that the term tumah is used in reference to the remarried divorcee. Do we say that although the term tumah is used in reference to the remarried divorcee, there is another verse which indicates that she is an abomination, but not the co-wife? Or perhaps, the verse is teaching us that she is an abomination, but her children are not (the co-wife would thus be eligible for yibum)? (11b)

Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said: Rabbi Yochanan inquired as follows: If a person remarries his divorcee unlawfully after she had been married to another man, and he then dies childless, what is the law regarding this woman’s co-wife? Can the brother perform a yibum with her or not?

Rabbi Ami said to Rabbi Yochanan: Why don’t you inquire regarding the woman herself?

Rabbi Yochanan replied: Regarding the remarried divorcee, I do not inquire at all. She cannot be taken for yibum on account of the following kal vachomer: If to the one she was permitted to initially (her husband), she became forbidden (after her marriage to another man), certainly in regards to the man that she was always forbidden to (her husband’s brother), she should be forbidden. The inquiry is only regarding her co-wife. Is the kal vachomer strong enough to exempt the co-wife from yibum?

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak learned as follows: Rabbi Chiya bar Abba said: Rabbi Yochanan inquired: If a person remarries his divorcee unlawfully after she had been married to another man, and he then dies childless, what is the law regarding this woman? Can the brother perform a yibum with her or not?

Rabbi Ami said to Rabbi Yochanan: Why don’t you inquire regarding the co-wife?

Rabbi Yochanan replied: The co-wife can certainly be taken for yibum since the kal vachomer is not strong enough to exclude her; the inquiry is only regarding the remarried divorcee herself.

The Gemora cites various braisos attempting to resolve these inquiries. (11b – 12a)