(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 19


(a) We just proved from the Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin that Rebbi Shimon is not sure whether Ma'amar is Koneh or not (how much more so Zikah and Ma'amar). But we counter this by asking that perhaps really, Ma'amar *is* Koneh in his opinion, and the reason that he requires Chalitzah on the second Yevamah is because of a decree.
Which decree?

(b) How do we refute this contention?

(c) So how does Abaye then try to resolve the discrepancy between our theory that Rebbi Shimon holds 'Zikah ki'Ch'nusah', and the Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin.

(a) 'K'lal Amar Rebbi Shimon; Kol she'ha'Leidah Kodemes le'Nisu'in, Lo Choletzes ve'Lo Misyabemes; Nisu'in Kodem le'Leidah, O Choletzes O Misyabemes'.
According to what we just said, how many Yevamin are there besides the new-born brother? Why must we say that?

(b) In that case, why does the Tana differentiate between 'Leidah Kodemes le'Nisu'in' and 'Nisu'in Kodem le'Leidah', and not between one Yavam and two Yevamin?

(c) What objection do we raise to this answer?

(a) In a Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin, the Tana Kama says that if two out of three brothers were married to two sisters, or a woman and her daughter, or a woman and her granddaughter (the daughter of her son or of her daughter) and died, both women require Chalitzah.
What does Rebbi Shimon say, based on the Pasuk "ve'Ishah el Achosah Lo Sikach li'Tz'ror"?

(b) How does Rav Oshaya attempt to refute our theory from here that Rebbi Shimon holds 'Zikah ki'Ch'nusah' (even by *one* brother)?

(c) On what grounds do we reject Rav Amram's suggestion that Rebbi Shimon does indeed only exempt the Yevamah that falls second to the Yavam, but not the one who falls first?

(a) Rava tried to answer 'Sh'niyah she'be'Zug Zeh u'Sh'niyah she'be'Zug Zeh'.
What mistake caused him to say this?

(b) Besides the fact that the Mishnah explicitly writes 'O' between each of the cases (and not 'u'), what else ought the Tana of the Beraisa to have said rather than 'Rebbi Shimon Poter bi'Sh'teihen'?

(c) What further proof do we bring that Rebbi Shimon does not hold 'Zikah ki'Ch'nusah' even by one Yavam, based on Rebbi Shimon's interpretation of the Pasuk "ve'Ishah el Achosah Lo Sikach li'Tz'ror"?

(d) We reinstate our original contention that Rebbi Shimon holds 'Zikah ki'Ch'nusah' by establishing Rebbi Shimon like Rebbi Yossi Hagelili.
What does Rebbi Yossi Hag'lili hold? In which case will the Mishnah and the Beraisa then be speaking?

5) According to Rebbi Yossi Hagelili, if an animal gives birth for the first time to a litter of two babies simultaneously, both babies must be given to the Kohen. What do the Rabbanan say?


(a) Rav Papa disagrees with Rav Oshaya, who maintained on the previous Amud that Rebbi Shimon argues with the Rabbanan in our Mishnah even in the Reisha (by Nolad ve'Achar-Kach Yibeim).
According to him then, why does the Tana need to mention the Reisha at all?

(b) How do we prove Rav Papa's opinion from the last case in the Beraisa, which cites the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Shimon by 'Yibeim ve'li'b'Sof Nolad Lo Ach'?

Answers to questions



(a) The first case in the Beraisa exempts the third brother to perform Yibum with the wife of the second, but not with the Yevamah who fell from the first brother, and with whom the second brother wanted to make Ma'amar, but did not manage to.
Why does the Tana need to make the latter part of the statement? What is he coming to teach us?

(b) What does Rebbi say about Ma'amar without the consent of the Yevamah? What is the basis of the Machlokes between Rebbi and the Rabbanan?

(c) From where do we learn that ...

  1. ... Yibum may be performed even without the consent of the Yevamah?
  2. ... Kidushin can only be performed with the woman's consent?
(d) 'Rebbi Shimon Omer, Bi'asah O Chalitzasah shel Achas Meihen Poteres Tzarasah'.
Why are we obligated to say that Rebbi Shimon is coming to argue, not on the case of 'Nolad Lo Ach, ve'Achar-Kach Asah Bah Ma'amar' but on that of 'Asah Bah Ma'amar ve'Achar-Kach Nolad Lo Ach'? What is the Chidush?
(a) 'Chalatz le'Ba'alas Ma'amar, Lo Nifterah Tzarah'.
Why is that?

(b) Rebbi Shimon has explained why he permits the third brother, if he is born after the second brother performed Yibum with her.
What is the problem with the opinion of the Rabbanan, who forbid the third brother in all cases?

(c) What do the Rabbanan learn from the Pasuk ...

  1. ... "u'Lekachah Lo le'Ishah *ve'Yibmah*"?
  2. ... "u'Lekachah Lo le'Ishah"?
(d) On what grounds do we Darshen from the latter D'rashah that she becomes his wife in totality, and from the former, that the original Yibumin remains?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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