(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Yevamos 29

YEVAMOS 29 & 30 - sponsored by Hagaon Rav Yosef Pearlman of London, a living demonstration of the love and adoration of the Torah.



(a) Rebbi Shimon, who exempts the sister of a Zekukah from Yibum altogether, nevertheless requires the sister who is an Isur Mitzvah to one of the brothers, to receive Chalitzah from the other brother - a decree because of a regular case of Isur Mitzvah.

(b) And he decreed her sister (who is not an Isur Mitzvah) because of her.

(c) We do not make a similar decree by Isur Ervah (to require Chalitzah from the Ervah because of the Tzarah) - because everyone knows that the Ervah (who is not a Zekukah) does not require Chalitzah, and that her Tzarah is not Achos Zekukah, and requires Chalitzah.

(a) Our Mishnah cites a case of two of Reuven and Shimon who married two sisters, Reuven died and Levi, who is unmarried, made Ma'amar with the Yevamah. According to Beis Shamai, should Shimon die, Levi remains with the Ba'alas Ma'amar, and the sister is free to marry le'Shuk - because Ma'amar is Koneh like marriage (see Sugya, Amud 2).

(b) Beis Hillel say - that, since each Yevamah is Achos Zekukaso, Levi is obligated to send away the Ba'alas Ma'amar with a Get and Chalitzah, and her sister with Chalitzah.

(c) Beis Hillel say - that this is what Chazal meant when they said 'Woe to his wife and woe to his brother's wife'.

(a) With regard to the last case, Beis Hillel said 'Zu Hi she'Amru ... ', which comes to preclude a similar statement made by Rebbi Yehoshua in Perek Beis Shamai - with reference to two brothers who married two sisters, one, a Gedolah, the other, a Ketanah, and the husband of the Gedolah died.

(b) The Tana of our Mishnah holds either like ...

1. ... Rebbi Eliezer - who says that we teach the husband of the Ketanah to make Miy'un.
2. ... Raban Gamliel - who says that if she makes Miy'un of her own accord, well and good, and if not, we wait until she grows up, whereupon the Yevamah will be free to marry le'Shuk, because she is the Yavam's wife's sister.
(c) Rebbi Elazar explains that, in the opinion of Beis Shamai, Ma'amar does not effect a complete Kinyan. According to him ...
1. ... it *is* Koneh - with regard to pushing away the Tzarah (meaning that she does not forbid her sister because of Achos Zekukaso).
2. ... it is *not* Koneh - with regard to removing the Zikah from the Yevamah (permitting her to marry le'Shuk with a Get alone, without Chalitzah).



(a) Rebbi Avin attempts to prove from the Mishnah at the beginning of the Perek 'Beis Shamai Omrim Yekaymu' (but not Lechatchilah) that Ma'amar is not completely Koneh - because if it would be, let each Yavam make Ma'amar with one of the Yevamos, and then he will be able to perform Yibum with her?

(b) Rebbi Avin counters that proof - by pointing out that, even if we say that Ma'amar is only Koneh with regard to pushing away the Tzarah, that should be the Din - let each one make Ma'amar, to push away the Tzarah, and then Yibum.

(c) So we are forced to say that, that will only be in the case of a Yevamah with whom the Yavam has the option of performing Yibum (like in our Mishnah, when the brother performed Ma'amar before the Yevamah's sister fell to Yibum), but not when she had already fallen, forbidding Yibum on her sister. And just as we apply this S'vara if we hold that Ma'amar is only Docheh the Tzarah, so too will we apply it if we say that it is Koneh completely.

(a) According to Rav Ashi too, Beis Shamai, in the opinion of Rebbi Elazar, holds that Ma'amar is not completely Koneh. He said 'Do not think that Ma'amar is completely Docheh (the Tzarah), even to absolve the Tzarah from Chalitzah; it is Docheh her (from Yibum), but leaves a little over (to require Chalitzah)'.

(b) Once again, we quote Rav Avin's proof from Beis Shamai's 'Yekaymu' at the beginning of the Perek. Beis Shamai's statement here ('Ishto Imo, ve'Halezu Teitzei Mishum Achos Ishah' - implying completely (not like Rav Avin) speaks in a case when the Yavam had the option of performing Yibum, whereas in Rav Avin's case, he could not (because of Achos Zekukaso).

(a) Rabah asks whether Ma'amar creates marriage or betrothal. Abaye proves that the ramifications of this She'eilah cannot be regarding inheritance, burial and the annulment of vows - from the Beraisa of Rebbi Chiya, from which we learn that even Kidushin d'Oraysa does not acquire in these three regards, so it is unlikely that Ma'amar de'Rabbanan, will.

(b) If a man betroths a woman and either of them dies ...

1. ... he does not become an Onan if she dies - in which case he would be forbidden to eat Kodshim.
2. ... she receives her Kesubah (provided the Chasan had given her one at the engagement).
(c) If 'Lo Mitamei Lah' means that, if he is a Kohen, he is not *permitted* to bury her (see Tosfos DH 'Lo'), 'Lo Mitam'ah Lo' - will be referring to Yom-Tov, when even Yisre'eilim (both men and women) are prohibited from becoming Tamei Meis.

(d) The ramifications of the She'eilah, are - with regard to Chupah; if Ma'amar creates Kidushin, then she will still require Chupah, otherwise not.

(a) Rabah counters Abaye's Kashya that, if *without* Ma'amar, the Torah writes "Yevamah Yavo Alehah" - 'Afilu Ba'al Korchah', how much more so, *with* it (and Chupah should not be necessary) - he says that in his opinion, Ma'amar removes the Zikas Yibum, creating in its place, a Zikas Eirusin (according to that Tzad of the She'eilah).

(b) We learned in a Beraisa in Nedarim 'Shomeres Yavam, Bein Yavam Echad, Bein Sh'nei Yevamin, Rebbi Eliezer Omer, Yafer'; Rebbi Yehoshua Omer, le'Echad ve'Lo li'Sh'nayim; Rebbi Akiva Omer, Lo le'Echad ve'Lo li'Sh'nayim.'

1. Rebbi Akiva holds - 'Ein Zikah Afilu le'Chad.
2. Rebbi Yehoshua - 'Yesh Zikah le'Chad, ve'Lo li'T'rei'.
(c) According to Rav Ami, Rebbi Eliezer (who holds 'Yesh Zikah, va'Afilu li'Sh'nayim') says 'Yafer' (in the singular) - because he is speaking when one of the Yevamim made Ma'amar, and the author of the Beraisa is Beis Shamai, who holds that Ma'amar is Koneh completely.

(d) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak rejects the proof from here that Ma'amar makes Nisu'in, because otherwise, the Yavam could not negate the Yevamah's Nedarim without the father negating them, too - by establishing the Beraisa when the father also nullified them.

(a) Rebbi Elazar, who holds in Perek Beis Shamai, that Ma'amar acquires only with regard to rejecting the Tzarah, but not with regard to exempting the Yevamah from Chalitzah - agrees that, in every other regard, Ma'amar is fully Koneh according to Beis Shamai (including nullifying her vows).

(b) Alternatively, Rebbi Elazar counters that, even if Beis Shamai holds that Ma'amar is completely Koneh, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak should not have explained Rebbi Eliezer by saying that the Yavam can nullify the Yevamah's Nedarim in conjunction with her father - because Rebbi Eliezer said 'Lo Yafer' (and not 'Lo Yafeiru').

(c) So Rebbi Elazar explains - that Rebbi Eliezer speaks when they went to Beis-Din, who obligated the Yavam to sustain the Yevamah out of his own pocket, in which case he adopts the Din of a husband and can nullify her vows.

(d) According to Rebbi Elazar the Beraisa speaks even if the Yavam did not make Ma'amar, according to Rav Ami (see above 7c.), it speaks when he did.

9) Rebbi Elazar's last statement is based on the principle of Rav Pinchas quoting Rava - that when a woman makes a Neder, it is only with her husband's consent.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,