Daf Yomi - Yevamos 29 - Highlights

The Mishna states: Three were three brothers, Reuven, Shimon and Levi. If two of them (Reuven and Shimon) are married to two sisters, or to a woman and her daughter, or to a woman and her daughter's daughter, or to a woman and her son's daughter (and both Reuven and Shimon die childless), these two women require chalitzah, but they may not be taken in yibum (since each one of these women is an ervah from the other zekukah). Rabbi Shimon exempts even from chalitzah.

If one of the sisters was an ervah to one of the brothers, he would be prohibited from marrying her, but permitted to her sister.

If her prohibition is because of mitzvah or because of sanctity, they would require chalitzah but they may not be taken for yibum. (28b)

The Mishna had stated: If one of the sisters was an ervah to one of the brothers, he would be prohibited from marrying her, but permitted to her sister.

The Gemora asks: Why is this halacha in the Mishna repeated here; precisely the same halacha was taught in a previous Mishna (26a)?

The Gemora answers that it is necessary according to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. He maintains that whenever two sisters fall for yibum to one yavam, they are excluded from yibum and chalitzah. One might possibly think that even if one of the sisters was an ervah to the yavam, the other sister should not be taken for yibum because we should be concerned that people will mistakenly think that you can perform a yibum with one of the sisters when there is no ervah; the Mishna teaches us that we do not institute such a decree and the brother may perform a yibum on the sister who is not an ervah. (28b)

The Mishna had stated: If her prohibition is because of mitzvah or because of sanctity, they would require chalitzah but they may not be taken for yibum.

The Gemora asks: If the latter portion of the Mishna follows Rabbi Shimon’s opinion, why in this case would Rabbi Shimon require a chalitzah; Rabbi Shimon maintains that whenever two sisters fall for yibum to one brother, they are exempt from yibum and chalitzah, and here both women are Biblically falling for yibum to the brother (one of them is only Rabbinically forbidden); there should be no chalitzah requirement?

The Gemora answers: They were concerned that if these women would be released without a chalitzah, we would release a yevamah who is Rabbinically forbidden to the yavam even without chalitzah (in a regular case, when they aren’t sisters).

The Gemora asks: This is understandable regarding the Rabbinically forbidden woman herself, but why do we require a chalitzah to her sister?

The Gemora answers: It was decreed because of the Rabbinically forbidden woman. If we would release the sister without a chalitzah, this would result in people releasing the Rabbinically forbidden woman without chalitzah.

The Gemora asks: Why don’t we issue the same decree when one of the sisters is Biblically forbidden; there the halacha is that the sister can be taken for yibum or chalitzah, but the ervah is released outright, without even a chalitzah?

The Gemora answers: Everyone is learned regarding a Biblical ervah; they all know that she is exempt from yibum and chalitzah. This reason becomes publicized. Not everyone knows the laws regarding a Rabbinically forbidden woman and therefore chalitzah was required. (28b – 29a)

The Mishna states: There were three brothers, two of whom were married two sisters, and one is unmarried. If one of the husbands of the sisters died, and the bachelor performed a ma'amar, and afterwards his second brother died. Beis Shamai said: His wife stays with him, and the other is released because she is his wife's sister. (Beis Shamai maintains that ma’amar is Biblically valid.) Beis Hillel said: He must release his ma’amar-wife with a get (bill of divorce) and with chalitzah, and his brother's wife with chalitzah. This is what they said, “Woe unto him because of his wife and woe unto him because of his brother's wife.” (29a)

Rabbi Elozar said: Do not say that a ma’amar according to Beis Shamai accomplishes a complete acquisition of the yevamah, and if he would want to release her, it would be sufficient for him to give her a get (and not chalitzah); rather, the ma’amar accomplishes that her relatives are now Biblically forbidden to be taken for yibum.

Rabbi Avin attempts to bring support from the Mishna (26a) to Rabbi Elozar’s interpretation. The Mishna had stated: (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 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.) If the brothers married them, they are required to divorce them. Rabbi Eliezer states: There is actually an argument between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel regarding this matter. Beis Shamai maintains that the brother may remain married to the sisters and Beis Hillel disagrees.

It can be implied from Beis Shamai’s words that the brothers should not initially perform yibum with the sisters. Now, if a ma’amar according to Beis Shamai would accomplish a complete acquisition of the yevamah, and if he would want to release her, it would be sufficient for him to give her a get (and not chalitzah), let each brother perform a ma’amar with one sister (it is not forbidden to perform a ma’amar with a zekukah’s sister) acquiring her as a wife (which would render the sister as his wife’s sister, dissolving any zikah attachment with her; this would allow him to take his ma’amar wife for yibum), and then he will be permitted to take her for yibum. Since Beis Shamai does not allow this option, it is evident that ma’amar does not accomplish a complete acquisition of the yevamah.

The Gemora deflects this proof: Even if the ma’amar does not accomplish a complete acquisition; it at least accomplishes that the relatives of the ma’amar-wife are forbidden to him. Accordingly, the same question can be asked. Why can’t each brother perform a ma’amar with one sister, which would reject the other sister from him, and then he should be permitted to take the woman he performed ma’amar with for yibum.

It is apparent that only a permitted ma’amar (one where it would be permitted to perform a yibum) accomplishes that the relatives of the ma’amar-wife are forbidden to him, so too if you hold that a ma’amar accomplishes a complete acquisition, that is only when the ma’amar is a permitted one. (29a – 29b)

Rav Ashi taught the above discussion differently: Rabbi Elozar said: Do not say that a ma’amar according to Beis Shamai accomplishes a complete rejection of the yevamah’s relatives, and her sister would not even require a chalitzah; rather, the ma’amar accomplishes that she will not become forbidden on account of being a zekukah’s sister, and that her sister will be Biblically forbidden to be taken for yibum, but she will require a chalitzah.

Rabbi Avin attempts to bring support from the Mishna (26a) to Rabbi Elozar’s interpretation. The Mishna had stated: (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 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.) If the brothers married them, they are required to divorce them. Rabbi Eliezer states: There is actually an argument between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel regarding this matter. Beis Shamai maintains that the brother may remain married to the sisters and Beis Hillel disagrees.

It can be implied from Beis Shamai’s words that the brothers should not initially perform yibum with the sisters. Now, if a ma’amar according to Beis Shamai would accomplish a complete a complete rejection of the yevamah’s relatives, and her sister would not even require a chalitzah, let each brother perform a ma’amar with one sister (it is not forbidden to perform a ma’amar with a zekukah’s sister) acquiring her as a wife, which would thereby reject the second sister from himself and then he will be permitted to take his ma’amar-wife for yibum. Since Beis Shamai does not allow this option, it is evident that ma’amar does not accomplish a complete rejection of the ma’amar-wife’s sister.

The Gemora asks: Didn’t Beis Shamai state in our Mishna that in the case where there were three brothers, two of whom were married two sisters, and one is unmarried. If one of the husbands of the sisters died, and the bachelor performed a ma'amar, and afterwards his second brother died. Beis Shamai said: His wife stays with him, and the other is released because she is his wife's sister. We see that the ma’amar-wife’s sister is released completely and does not require chalitzah?

This version of Rabbi Elozar is thus refuted.

The Gemora explains the reason of the other Mishna why each one of the brothers cannot perform a ma’amar with one of the sisters and then take her for yibum. Any yevamah who is not eligible for a complete yibum will not be eligible for a partial yibum, i.e. ma’amar either. (In that Mishna, the two sisters were widowed together and they each became forbidden on account of being a zekukah’s sister. Since they cannot be taken for yibum, ma’amar will not be fully effected either. In our Mishna, at the time that the yavam performed a ma’amar, there was only one widow and she could have been taken for yibum; here, the ma’amar is effective and later when the other sister falls for yibum, she is completely rejected on account of being his ma’amar-wife’s sister and is released without chalitzah or yibum.) (29b)

[END]