Daf Yomi - Yevamos 18 - Highlights

Rav Huna said in the name of Rav: If a woman awaiting the decision of the yavam died, the yavam is permitted to marry her mother. This obviously indicates that Rav maintains that no zikah (an attachment on the account of yibum, which would create halachos similar to marriage) exists between the yevamah and the yavam.

The Gemora asks: Let him then say, the halachah is in accordance with the view of the one who doesn’t hold of zikah?

The Gemora answers: If he would have said so, it might have been suggested that this applied only to the case where there are at least two surviving brothers, but that in the case of one brother, a zikah does exist.

The Gemora asks: Then let him say, the halachah is in accordance with the view of the one who doesn’t hold of zikah even in the case of one brother?

The Gemora answers: If he would have said so, it might have been assumed that there is no zikah even where the yevamah is alive (and he would be permitted to marry her mother then); Rav Huna taught us that only after the yevamah dies is he permitted to marry her mother, and not when she is still alive, because it is forbidden to abolish the commandment of yibum (marrying her mother would exempt the yevamah from yibum and chalitzah). (17b)

Rav Yehudah disagrees with Rav Huna: Rav Yehudah maintains that if a woman awaiting the decision of the yavam died, the yavam is still forbidden to marry her mother.

The Gemora asks: Let him then say, the halachah is in accordance with the view of the one who holds of zikah?

The Gemora answers: If he would have said so, it might have been suggested that this applied only to the case where there is but one brother, however when there are at least two surviving brothers, perhaps there is no zikah.

The Gemora asks: One could not possibly think that the dispute is only in a case where there is one brother because they explicitly argue in a case when there are two remaining brothers.

The Gemora answers: If he would have said so (the halachah is in accordance with the view of the one who holds of zikah), it might have been assumed that there is only a zikah when the yevamah is alive (and he would be prohibited to marry her mother then), but that after her death, the zikah is broken; Rav Yehudah taught us that the zikah is not automatically dissolved. (17b – 18a)

Abaye asks on Rav Yehudah from the following braisa: Reuven and Shimon were contemporary brothers and Reuven died childless. Shimon planned to perform a ma'amar to his yevamah, but before he managed to perform a ma’amar to her, a third brother, Levi was born and subsequently Shimon died childless. The first (Reuven’s wife) is exempt from yibum and chalitzah on account that she is the wife of his brother who was not in his world, whereas the second (Shimon’s wife) can be taken for yibum or chalitzah. Now, if you would say that a zikah does exist, Shimon’s wife should be regarded as a co-wife of the first wife, who is forbidden because she is the wife of his brother who was not in his world (and it should be forbidden for Levi to perform a yibum with her)?

The Gemora answers that this braisa is following the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who maintains that there is no zikah. (18a)

The Gemora asks: Does Rabbi Meir actually hold that there is no zikah; we have learned in a Mishna otherwise? The Mishna states: There were four brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters, and those who were married to the sisters died; these sisters require chalitzah, but they cannot be taken for yibum. (The only reason to prohibit yibum in this case would be because each yevamah is the sister of his zekukah, the bond that exists between the yavam and the yevamah.) Now, if Rabbi Meir is of the opinion that no zikah exists, each yevamah is coming from two different houses, and one brother could marry the one while the other could marry the other?

The Gemora answers: Actually Rabbi Meir maintains that no zikah exists, but nevertheless, it would be forbidden to perform yibum with each of the widows. This is because a yibum with one can annul the precept of yibum with the other; if one of the brothers performs yibum with one sister and the other brother dies, there would be no possibility of yibum or chalitzah with her (since she is the yavam’s wife’s sister) and this would have negated the mitzvah of yibum with her.

The Gemora asks: If there is no zikah, we should not be concerned with the possibility of negating the mitzvah of yibum either? The Gemora proves this to be the case from Rabban Gamliel.

The Gemora answers that Rabbi Meir is concerned even when it is merely a possibility that the mitzvah of yibum will be negated and Rabban Gamliel is not concerned even when the mitzvah of yibum will certainly be negated. (18a)

Abaye said to Rav Yosef: Rav Yehudah’s ruling follows his teacher Shmuel, for we have learned in a Mishna (41a): A woman was awaiting the decision of the yavam, and his brother (who is also a yavam) betrothed the yevamah’s sister; it was said in the name of Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira that we should tell him (the one who married the sister) to wait (from consummating the marriage) until his brother performs a yibum or chalitzah with the yevamah. (This ruling is based on the concept of zikah; the brother is forbidden to consummate the marriage with the sister of the yevamah because she is prohibited to him on account of her being the sister of his zekukah.) And Shmuel said: The halacha is like Rabbi Yehudah ben Beseira. (18a – 18b)

The Mishna states: There were two brothers, Reuven and Shimon. Reuven died childless and Shimon performed a yibum on Reuven’s widow, Penina. A third brother, Levi was born and subsequently Shimon died childless. Shimon’s two widows fall for yibum to Levi. Penina is exempt from yibum and chalitzah because she is the wife of Levi’s brother who was not in his world (Reuven and Levi were not alive at the same time.) Chana, Shimon’s original wife, is exempt as well because she is the co-wife of an ervah. If Shimon performed a ma’amar with Penina and then died childless, Levi can perform chalitzah, but not yibum.



Courtesy of http://chavruta.tripod.com/

Rabbi Shimon disagrees with the Mishna’s fist ruling. He maintains that Levi may perform yibum or chalitzah with any one that he desires. (This is because Reuven’s widow, Penina became Shimon’s wife before Levi was born; Penina never fell for yibum to Levi as the wife of his brother who was not in this world.) (18b)

Rabbi Oshaya states: Rabbi Shimon would disagree even in the case in the beginning of the chapter.



Courtesy of http://chavruta.tripod.com/

There are two brothers, Reuven and Shimon; Reuven dies childless and then a third brother, Levi is born to them. The second brother, Shimon performs a yibum with Reuven’s wife, Penina, and then, he too, dies childless. Shimon had another wife, Chana, as well. They both (Penina and Chana) fall to yibum to Levi. Penina is exempt from yibum and chalitzah because she is the wife of Levi’s brother (Reuven) who was not in his world (Reuven and Levi were not alive together). Chana is also exempt from yibum and chalitzah because she is the co-wife of an ervah.

Rabbi Shimon would permit Reuven’s wife, Penina to Levi even though Levi was born before Shimon took her in yibum. (18b)

The Gemora asks: If Rabbi Shimon disagrees in both cases, what would be a case of the wife of a brother that was not in his world, according to Rabbi Shimon?

The Gemora presents two cases: If there was only one brother and he died childless; afterwards another brother was born. The new brother may not perform a yibum on the wife of his brother that was not in his world. Another case is when there were two brothers and one of them died childless. The third brother, Levi was born and the second brother did not perform a yibum and did not die. The widow of the first brother will be forbidden to Levi even according to Rabbi Shimon. (18b)