Levi asked of Rebbe: Why did the Mishna list only fifteen cases of women who exempt themselves and their co-wives from yibum and chalitzah; the Mishna should have listed sixteen? Rebbe said: It would seem to me that he doesn’t have any brains in his head.
The Gemora explains Rebbe’s reaction: Which case should the Tanna have included; a man’s mother who has been violated by his father? This case is not possible according to Rabbi Yehudah who maintains that a man cannot marry a woman whom his father violated and therefore a woman cannot fall for yibum to her son. The Mishna does not list cases that involve a dispute.
The Gemora challenges the assertion that the Mishna does not discuss cases that involve a dispute: Doesn’t the Mishna later (20a) discuss cases where a woman is prohibited by mitzvah (arayos that are Rabbinically forbidden) or because of sanctity (women that would violate his innate sanctity, they are not subject to the penalty of kares) and yet, Rabbi Akiva and the Rabbis dispute the halacha in these cases?
The Gemora answers that Rebbe was only referring to the cases discussed in this chapter (the next perek, chapter does discuss disputed cases).
The Gemora asks: The Mishna cites the opinion of Beis Shammai, who maintain that the co-wives of the fifteen women mentioned in the Mishna are permitted for yibum?
The Gemora answers: The viewpoint of Beis Shammai when Beis Hillel disagrees is not regarded as an authoritative opinion.
The Gemora asks: Our Mishna mentioned a case of the wife of his brother who was not in his world (this brother and the yavam were not alive at the same time), and Rabbi Shimon and the Sages disagree (Rabbi Shimon maintains that she is eligible for yibum or chalitzah)?
The Gemora answers: Rabbi Shimon agrees when the brother (Levi) was born first and then Shimon performed a yibum (on Penina).
Courtesy of http://chavruta.tripod.com/
The Gemora explains Rebbe’s reaction: Which case should the Tanna have included; a man’s mother who has been violated by his father? This case is not possible according to Rabbi Yehudah who maintains that a man cannot marry a woman whom his father violated and therefore a woman cannot fall for yibum to her son. The Mishna does not list cases that involve a dispute.
The Gemora challenges the assertion that the Mishna does not discuss cases that involve a dispute: Doesn’t the Mishna later (20a) discuss cases where a woman is prohibited by mitzvah (arayos that are Rabbinically forbidden) or because of sanctity (women that would violate his innate sanctity, they are not subject to the penalty of kares) and yet, Rabbi Akiva and the Rabbis dispute the halacha in these cases?
The Gemora answers that Rebbe was only referring to the cases discussed in this chapter (the next perek, chapter does discuss disputed cases).
The Gemora asks: The Mishna cites the opinion of Beis Shammai, who maintain that the co-wives of the fifteen women mentioned in the Mishna are permitted for yibum?
The Gemora answers: The viewpoint of Beis Shammai when Beis Hillel disagrees is not regarded as an authoritative opinion.
The Gemora asks: Our Mishna mentioned a case of the wife of his brother who was not in his world (this brother and the yavam were not alive at the same time), and Rabbi Shimon and the Sages disagree (Rabbi Shimon maintains that she is eligible for yibum or chalitzah)?
The Gemora answers: Rabbi Shimon agrees when the brother (Levi) was born first and then Shimon performed a yibum (on Penina).
Courtesy of http://chavruta.tripod.com/
In this case, Rabbi Shimon will agree that Levi will not be able to perform a yibum on Penina or Chana if Shimon subsequently dies. This is because Levi was alive when Reuven dies and he was forbidden to perform a yibum on Penina then because he was not alive together with Reuven. Once she is forbidden to him, she remains that way and the prohibition of his brother’s wife can never be lifted. (9a – 9b)
The Gemora persists in its questioning: Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav and it was taught in the braisa of Rabbi Chiya: The following teaching can apply to the fifteen cases of the Mishna: The one who is forbidden to one brother will be permitted to the other brother, and her sister, who is also a yevamah can do chalitzah or be taken in yibum.
The case is as follows: There were four brothers; two of them, Reuven and Shimon were married to two sisters, Rochel and Leah. If Reuven and Shimon died, the remaining two brothers (Levi and Yehudah) cannot perform a yibum with any of them because each one of these women is attached to every potential yavam with a zikah, an attachment on the account of yibum. The Rabbis decreed that one cannot marry the sister of a zekukah (the woman who is attached to the yavam) because a zekukah is similar to a wife and one is not permitted to marry his wife’s sister.
If Rochel was an ervah to Levi (his mother-in-law) and Leah was an ervah to Yehudah; Levi can perform yibum with Leah and Yehudah can perform yibum with Rochel. In this case, the sisters are not forbidden because there is only a zikah from one man to one woman (since an ervah removes the zikah).
According to Rav Yehuda, the Tanna of the Mishna (26a) can only be referring to the last nine arayos listed in the first Mishna, but not to the first six (such as his daughter). The reason is because those six cases cannot occur unless the daughter was born through the violation of her mother (If Levi and Yehudah’s daughters are sisters, they obviously have the same mother; Levi and Yehudah could not possibly marry the same woman); and the Mishna is discussing cases of marriage, not cases of violation.
Abaye states that the Mishna can be referring to the first six cases because the Mishna has no compunctions discussing cases of violation. It is not discussing the case of the wife of his brother who was not in his world because that would involve a disagreement (Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis) and the Mishna does not involve itself with disputed cases.
Rav Safra states that the Mishna can be discussing the case of the wife of his brother who was not in his world, but only in the following scenario: There were six brothers all together. Originally, there were four, and two of them, Reuven and Shimon were married to two sisters, Rochel and Leah. Reuven died childless and then a fifth brother, Yissochar was born. (Rochel is forbidden to Yissochar on the account of being the wife of his brother who was not in his world.) Levi, the third brother, performed a yibum with Rochel and subsequently, Shimon died childless. (Yissochar can perform a yibum with Leah because he was alive together with Shimon.) A sixth brother, Zevulun was now born. (Rochel is not forbidden to Zevulun on the account of being the wife of his brother who was not in his world because when he was born she was married to Levi. Leah is forbidden to Zevulun on the account of being the wife of his brother who was not in his world.) Yehudah performed a yibum with Leah. Levi and Yehudah then died childless. The Rabbis maintain that each one is forbidden to the surviving brothers on the account of being the wife of their brother who was not in this world (because of the initial marriage). Rabbi Shimon disagrees and holds that the remaining brothers can perform yibum or chalitzah (he is concerned only with the last marriage).
The Gemora concludes its question: If this halacha is included in the Mishna, it is evident that the Tanna of the Mishna is discussing cases that involve a dispute.
The Gemora answers that Rebbe would understand the Mishna to be referring to a case where the brothers (Yissochar and Zevulun) were born before the other brothers (Levi and Yehudah) performed a yibum. Even Rabbi Shimon would agree in this case that they cannot perform a yibum. (9b – 10a)
0 comments:
Post a Comment