POINT BY POINT OUTLINE
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
1) AN "ERVAH" THAT FALLS TO "YIBUM" WITH HER SISTER
(a) Answer #1: Rebbi disagrees with these rules.
(b) Answer #2 (Rav Ada): Really, Rebbi agrees with these
rules. He derided Levi because both rules cannot apply
(simultaneously) to Imo Anusas Aviv.
1. If Yakov raped two sisters (and Shimon and Yehudah
resulted, and the sisters married other sons of
Yakov), we can fulfill two sisters falling to Yibum,
but we cannot fulfill that each is permitted to a
different brother (she is the mother of one Yavam,
and Dodaso of the other (his mother's sister);
(c) Answer #3 (Rav Ashi): Rebbi disagrees with these rules.
The Mishnah discusses cases of dispute;
2. If he raped two unrelated women, we fulfill that
each is permitted to a different brother (the one
who is not her son), but they are not sisters.
1. Rebbi derided Levi for not deducing from the coming
Mishnah (#2) that the Tana is R. Yehudah (who
forbids a man to a woman raped by his father. We
assume that the same Tana taught the entire Perek.)
(d) Question (Ravina): Also according to R. Yehudah this may
be taught (in the first Mishnah), if he transgressed and
2. (Mishnah #2): Six Arayos are more severe than these
(of the first Mishnah). They can marry only others
(but not any of the brothers), therefore their
Tzaros are permitted: Imo (the Yavam's mother), his
father's wife, his father's sister...
3. Question: What is the case of Imo?
i. We cannot say that she was married to his
father, for that is listed second!
4. Answer: Rather, she was raped by his father, and the
Mishnah says that she can marry others, but not the
5 This is like R. Yehudah, who forbids Anusas Aviv. This is why
the first Mishnah omitted this case!
(e) Answer (Rav Ashi): The Tana does not list cases that come
through forbidden marriages.
(f) Question (Rav Ashi): The case can arise through permitted
1. If Yakov raped the wife of his son Reuven, and
Shimon was born, and Reuven died without children,
his widow falls to Yibum to her son.
(g) Answer (Rav Kahana): The Tana discusses only cases when
the brothers are not the product of Isur.
2. Since she is forbidden, her Tzarah is also
(h) Still, Levi included this is in his (version of the)
1. Sometimes Shimon's mother exempts her Tzarah,
sometimes not. If she was married to the father, she
does not exempt the Tzarah. If she was raped by the
father and married a brother, she exempts the
2. Even though we learned that 15 cases exempt the
Tzarah, we find this 16th case.
"2) KIDUSHIN "AFTER" CHALITZAH
"(a) Question (Reish Lakish): Levi holds that b'Di'eved cases are
listed. If so, the Mishnah should include one who did
Chalitzah to his Yevamah, then he was Mekadesh her and died
(b) Answer (R. Yochanan): This case is omitted, since there
cannot be the Tzarah of a Tzarah (since the Tzarah cannot
do Yibum with any brother).
1. Since she may not do Yibum, also her Tzarah is
(c) Question: Why didn't R. Yochanan answer that a Yevamah
after Chalitzah is Chayavei Lavin, so she does Yibum or
(d) Answer: R. Yochanan answered according to Reish Lakish's
1. I (R. Yochanan) hold that a Yevamah after Chalitzah
is Chayavei Lavin, so she does Yibum or Chalitzah.
You (Reish Lakish) hold that this is Chayavei
Kerisos. You can say that it was omitted because the
case of Tzaras Tzarah does not arise.
(e) (Reish Lakish): If one was Mekadesh his Yevamah after
Chalitzah, he is not forbidden to her with Kares, but the
brothers are. Both he and the brothers are forbidden to a
Tzarah with Kares;
(f) (R. Yochanan): There is not Kares for him or the
brothers, not for her nor for the Tzaros.
(g) Question: What is Reish Lakish's reason?
(h) Answer: "That will not build the house of his brother" -
once he decided not to build (did Chalitzah), he may not
1. This applies (only) to the Choletz (the Yavam who
did Chalitzah). His brothers are forbidden like they
used to be (there is Kares without a Mitzvah of
Yibum to permit it).
(i) R. Yochanan disagrees, for we never find that initially
any brother may do Chalitzah to any widow, and now (that
he did not do Chalitzah to her), he is forbidden to her
2. This applies only to the Choletzes (who did
Chalitzah). Her Tzaros are forbidden like they used
(j) Rather, the Choletz is a Shali'ach on behalf of all the
brothers, and the Choletzes is a Shali'ach on behalf of
(k) Question (R. Yochanan - Beraisa): If one did Chalitzah to
his Yevamah, then was Mekadesh her and he died, she must
do Chalitzah with the brothers.
1. This is like me. Since only a Lav forbids her to the
brothers, Chalitzah is needed.
(l) Counter-question (Seifa): If one of the brothers was
Mekadesh her, she has no claim against him (i.e. the
Kidushin did not take effect).
2. But you say that she is forbidden to the brothers by
Kares. If so, why is Chalitzah needed?
1. If it is only Chayavei Lavin, why is this?
(m) Answer #1 (Rav Sheshes): The Seifa is R. Akiva, who says
that Ein Kidushin Tofsin b'Chayavei Lavin (if a man is
Mekadesh a woman forbidden to him by a Lav, it does not
(n) Objection: If so, it should say that according to R.
Akiva, she has no claim against him! (The Reisha cannot
be R. Akiva, for if so Kidushin would not take effect
even if the Choletz was Mekadesh her.)
1. This is left difficult.
Index to Outlines for Maseches Yevamos