ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Yevamos 109
(a) Rebbi Elazar forbids Yibum with a woman whose husband divorced her and
took her back. Eifah initially gives the reason for this as being - because
she was once forbidden to the Yavam (since it is the *first* marriage that
creates the tie with the Yavam, as we explained earlier).
(b) We reject his suggestion that, if that is so, she does not require
Chalitzah either - on the basis of a Beraisa, where Rebbi Elazar himself
specifically requires Chalitzah.
(c) Eifah is therefore at a loss to understand Rebbi Elazar's opinion.
According to Abaye, Rebbi Elazar is in a quandary - he is not sure whether
it is the death of the husband that creates the tie with the Yavam (in which
case even Yibum would be permitted), or the first marriage (in which case
even Chalitzah would not be necessary).
(d) According to Rava, the prohibition (to perform Yibum) itself is a decree
because, although everyone knows about the divorce, not everyone knows about
the fact that he took her back. He gets round the Kashya that it ought to be
the opposite (i.e. most people would know that they are now living together,
but not necessarily about their previous divorce) - on the basis of those
cases where he took her back in the evening and died the following morning
(where more people will know about the divorce than about the second
(a) According to Rav Ashi, Rebbi Elazar decrees the previous cases in our
Mishnah on account of a Yesomah be'Chayei ha'Av. We prove this answer from
the fact that the Tana inserts a Yesomah be'Chayei ha'Av in the Mishnah -
because in itself, it is obvious that she is forbidden to the Yavam, and the
Tana can only have inserted it to inform us that it is the source of Rebbi
Elazar's stringent ruling in the Reisha.
(b) In the Beraisa, the Chachamim agree with Rebbi Elazar (that the Yavam
may not perform Yibum with her) when the father married off his daughter
when she was a Ketanah and her husband divorced her and took her back when
she was still a Ketanah and died. Should he take her back after she has
already become a Gedolah however - the Yavam may even perform Yibum, because
the second marriage too, is valid min ha'Torah.
(c) And they will even agree with Rebbi Elazar if he took her back when she
was still a Ketanah - if they were still living together when she became a
Gedolah (since the first Bi'ah after that will acquire her min ha'Torah).
(d) We prove from this Beraisa that Rav Ashi's explanation (in a.) is the
authentic one - because the Tana begins with the words 'u'Modim Chachamim
bi'Yesomah be'Chayei ha'Av ... ', implying that that is Rebbi Elazar's
reason in the subsequent cases, where he says 'Choletzes ve'Lo Misyabemes'.
(a) Rava asked Rav Nachman whether, according to Rebbi Elazar, the Yavam may
perform Yibum with the Ketanah's Tzarah. He replied - that the Ketanah
herself is only a G'zeirah, so to forbid her Tzarah would be a 'G'zeirah
(b) The Beraisa, which states 'Hi ve'Tzarasah Choletzes', cannot be
correct - because it would not be necessary for both Tzaros to perform
(c) We initially amend it - to read 'O Hi O Tzarasah Choletzes'.
(d) This is not a disproof for Rav Nachman's reply to Rava (who holds -in
a. - that the Tzarah may even perform Yibum) - because once we are forced to
alter the text, we may as well alter it to read 'Hi Choletzes, ve'Tzarasah,
O Choletzes O Misyabemes.'
(a) If two brothers are married to two sisters ...
1. ... who are Yesomos Ketanos, and one of them dies - his wife goes out
(without Yibum or Chalitzah) because of Achos Ishto (since the marriage of
both of them is only mi'de'Rabbanan).
(b) If the husband of the Gedolah dies, Rebbi Eliezer maintains that we
teach the Ketanah to make Miy'un, to enable the Yavam to perform Yibum with
the Gedolah - because he holds 'Yesh Zikah.
2. ... one a Gedolah, and one a Ketanah, who are both Charashos (Rashi does
not appear to have this word in his text), if the husband of the Ketanah
dies - she too goes out because of Achos Ishto.
(a) Raban Gamliel disagrees with Rebbi Eliezer. According to him - should
she make Miy'un, well and good; but if not, the Yevamah waits until the
Ketanah grows-up, and then goes out because of Achos Ishto.
(b) He disagrees with Rebbi Eliezer - because *he* holds 'Ein Zikah'.
(c) The Gedolah cannot perform Chalitzah immediately - because then the
Ketanah would be forbidden because of Achos Chalutzaso.
(d) Rebbi Yehoshua bemoans the unfortunate fate of both women, because, in
his opinion, the man's wife goes out with a get and his Yevamah with
Chalitzah. He holds 'Yesh Zikah', like Rebbi Eliezer, yet he disagrees with
his ruling - because he holds that one should avoid Miy'un at all costs
(even if it is for a D'var Mitzvah).
(a) Bar Kapara quoting a Beraisa, advises that one sticks to three things
and keeps well away from three others. The three things that one should
1. ... stick to are Chalitzah, making peace between warring parties - and
having one's Nedarim nullified.
(b) The advice to keep well away from Miy'un seems to conform with Rebbi
Yehoshua in our Mishnah. We reconcile it even with Rebbi Eliezer however -
by establishing that he does encourage Miy'un when it is for a D'var Mitzvah
(to enable a Yavam to perform Yibum).
2. ... keep away from are Miy'un, Pikdonos (accepting to look after other
people's articles) - and acting as a guarantor for a loan.
(c) Bar Kapara's advice regarding ...
1... Chalitzah is based on the opinion of Aba Shaul - who says that if
someone acquires his Yevamah for any motive other than for the Mitzvah of
Yibum, it is considered as if he was guilty of incest, and the child was
almost as if he was a Mamzer.
2. ... making peace is based on the Pasuk "Bakesh Shalom ve'Radfeihu". Rebbi
Avahu learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' from the Pasuk Rodef Tzedakah
va'Chesed, Yimtza Chayim Tzedakah ve'Chavod" - that pursuing peace is a
branch of Chesed, and that it is one of those Mitzvos for which one receives
reward in both worlds, life and Tzedakah in the World to Come (the
principle) and honor in this world (the fruits) (One wonders whether one
could not have learned the other way round: life and Tzedakah in this world
and honor in the World to Come).
(a) 'be'Hafaras Nedarim ke'Rebbi Nasan'. Rebbi Nasan considers someone who
1. ... makes a Neder - as if he had constructed a Bamah (an altar - an act
that became forbidden once the Beis Hamikdash was built).
(b) Despite the fact that he has already made the Neder, he is made to
rescind it, to prevent him from getting into the habit of making Nedarim.
2. ... someone who fulfills it (rather than having it rescinded) - as if he
had sacrificed on it.
(c) One should keep one's distance from Miy'un - because the girl might
later regret it.
(d) And one should keep one's distance from Pikdonos - referring
specifically to receiving a Pikadon from a townsman, because he knows his
house well and is likely to come and take his Pikadon without the Ba'al
ha'Bayis' knowledge, then claim it again (see also Agados Maharsha).
(a) ... 'and from acting as a guarantor for a loan'. This applies
specifically to Arvei Sheltzi'on - a guarantor to whom the creditor has the
right to go immediately to claim his debt (without first approaching the
(b) 'Sheltzi'on' may be the name of a place. It might also be the acronym of
'Sh'lof Dutz' - meaning to 'remove oneself' (from the debtor) and to 'attach
oneself' to the guarantor.
(c) This is, in fact, one of the three things which Rebbi Yitzchak
extrapolates from the Pasuk "Ra Yaro'a Ki Areiv Zar". Zarim also pertains
to Geirim. Rebbi Chelbo said - that Geirim are troublesome to Yisrael like
(the plague of) Sapachas (a form of Tzara'as) because they do not observe
the Mitzvos with the necessary care (see also Tosfos 47b. DH 'Kashim').
(a) The third thing to which the Pasuk hints is 'ha'Toke'a Atzmo li'D'var
Halachah'. Rebbi Yossi explains 'Kol ha'Omer Ein Lo Torah, Ein Lo Torah'.
This statement is so obvious that it is unacceptable. We initially amend
it to read - 'Kol ha'Omer Ein Lo Ela Torah, Ein Lo Ela Torah'.
(b) But that too, is obvious. So we amend it further to conform with Rav
Papa's interpretation of the Pasuk "ve'Limad'tem va'Asisem" - from which Rav
Papa extrapolates that whatever is subject to fulfilling, is subject to
learning (meaning that learning Torah without keeping it is absolutely
(c) The correct version of Rebbi Yossi's statement is therefore - 'Kol
ha'Omer Ein Lo Ela Torah, Afilu Torah Ein Lo'.
(d) Alternatively, we accept the initial amendment ('Kol ha'Omer Ein Lo Ela
Torah, Ein Lo Ela Torah') - pertaining to someone who teaches Torah (but not
with the intention of fulfilling his teachings himself). He receives reward
for the teaching, but not for the Mitzvos that his Talmidim subsequently
fulfill (from which we can infer that, if he taught with the added intention
of fulfilling the Mitzvos himself, he *would* share in the reward that his
Talmidim receive for fulfilling the Mitzvos).
(a) A third explanation of 'ha'Tokei'a Atzmo li'D'var Halachah' pertains to
a Dayan - who knows the Halachah, and who issues rulings based on what he
extrapolates from that knowledge, without first consulting his Rebbe.
(b) Based on the Pasuk in "Hinei Mitaso she'li'Sh'lomoh Shishim Giborim
Saviv Lah .... *mi'Pachad ba'Leilos"*, Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeini Amar Rebbi
Yonasan says - that a Dayan in the process of judging, should consider as if
a sword was placed between his thighs, and Gehinom was open beneath him.
(c) The "Giborim" mentioned there - refers to the Dayanim.
(a) According to Raban Gamliel in our Mishnah, when the Ketanah grows-up,
the Yevamah goes out without even the need to perform Chalitzah. Rebbi
Elazar asked Rav for Raban Gamliel's reason: One of the options is that the
Kidushin 'grows with the Ketanah' - meaning that, the moment she becomes a
Gedolah, the Kidushin becomes valid retroactively, revealing that the Zikah
of the Yevamah was not effective.
(b) The other option is - that it is the Bi'ah after she becomes a Gedolah
that renders her married to her husband, and the reason that the Yevamah has
to wait is because he holds 'Ein Zikah' (like we explained in the Mishnah).
(c) Rav replied that the latter explanation was the correct one, at which,
Rav Sheishes commented - that Rav must have been asleep when he said that.
(a) Rav Sheishes interpreted the Beraisa 'ha'Mekadesh es ha'Ketanah,
Kidushehah T'luyin' - to mean that, as soon as she grows-up, the Kidushin
takes effect retroactively.
(b) But Ravin B'rei de'Rav Nachman reconciles Rav with the Beraisa - by
interpreting it like Rav: that as long as she is a Ketanah, her Kidushin
hangs in the balance; should he make Bi'ah with her after she grows-up, they
are married, but if not, they are not.
(c) When the girl declares 'I am better than him, and he is better than me',
she is referring to the period between her Gadlus and the first Bi'ah (like
Ravin Brei de'Rav Nachman). What she means is - that he has the right to
divorce her should he wish, but she has the right to make Miy'un should she
wish (see Tosfos DH 'Hu Adif').