Yevamos - Daf 108
- אי זהו מיאון
It was taught in a Baraisa: אי זהו מיאון – What is considered mi’un? אמרה אי אפשי בפלוני בעלי – She said, “I do not want Ploni, my husband.” אי אפשי בקידושין שקידשוני אמי ואחי – “I do not want the kiddushin that my mother or my brothers arranged for me.” Rebbe Yehudah said, it is mi’un even if she said this while being carried in the bridal chair from her father’s home to her husband’s home to go to the chuppah. Rashi explains that we accept her words even though she could have simply gotten down from the chair and left. Rebbe Yehudah said it is even mi’un if she said it while serving guests who were reclining in her husband’s home, and she is serving them drinks. Rashi explains that it is valid even though it was not said in front of Beis Din, and the guests she told might have not shared it with anybody, assuming it was said confidentially. Rebbe Yehudah said it is even mi’un if she said it to the storekeeper that her husband had sent her to in order to bring an item. אין לך מיאון גדול מזה – There is no greater mi’un than this. Rashi explains that it is valid even though it was only said to the storekeeper, and one might have thought she is just complaining that her husband sent her.
- קטנה שלא מיאנה ועמדה ונשאת או נקדשה
It was taught in a Baraisa: קטנה שלא מיאנה ועמדה ונשאת – If a ketanah who did not do mi’un arose and remarried, they said in the name of Rebbe Yehudah ben Beseira that נישאויה הן הן מיאוניה – her marriage is her mi’un. When the Gemara asks whether her accepting kiddushin from another man would be regarded as a form of mi’un, it brings a Baraisa where it was said in the name of Rebbe Yehudah ben Beseira that קידושיה הן הן מיאוניה – her kiddushin is her mi’un. The Gemara begins a series of questions to determine whether the Rabbanon agree with Rebbe Yehudah ben Beseira, and if so, to what degree, and concludes that since Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel that the halachah is in accordance with Rebbe Yehudah ben Beseirah, this implies that the Rabbanon disagree with him and hold that with regard to both kiddushin and nisuin, the ketanah must first verbally refuse her husband.
- מיאון אחר גט וגט אחר מיאון
The next Mishnah states: נתן לה גט והחזירה – If her husband gave her a get and then remarried her, מיאנה בו ונשאת לאחר ונתארמלה או נתגרשה – and she then did mi’un and married another man, and was widowed or divorced by the second husband, מותרת לחזור לו – she is permitted to return to her first husband. Rashi explains that even though if she had not initially returned to her first husband before doing mi’un, and she had become divorced from a second husband, she would have remained assur to her first husband, the fact that she did mi’un reveals that in fact she is a ketanah who is not subject to kiddushin, and nullifies the get, so that he is not viewed as remarrying his divorcee after she married someone else. However, if she had done mi’un with her first husband, who then remarried her, and then he gave her a get and she married another man, and was subsequently widowed or divorced from him, אסורה לחזור לו – she is forbidden to return to her first husband. זה הכלל – This is the rule: גט אחר מיאון אסורה לחזור לו מיאון אחר גט מותרת לחזור לו – In a case where a get follows mi’un, she is forbidden to return to him. In a case where mi’un follows a get, she is permitted to return to him.
