Yevamos - Daf 107
- Machlokes Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel whether there is mi’un with nisu’os.
The opening Mishnah of the thirteenth perek brings four machlokisim between Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel regarding mi’un. Beis Shammai say: אין ממאנין אלא ארוסות – We may only arrange mi’un for arusos, but Beis Hillel say: ארוסות ונשואות – mi’un may be arranged for arusos and nisu’os. Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel that Beis Shammai’s reason is לפי שאין תנאי בנשואין – because no tannai is binding with a nisuin involving an adult woman. Rashi explains that if one made a tannai at the time of kiddushin, and that tannai remained unfulfilled at the time of biah and chuppah, we assume that that the tannai was forgiven and is no longer in effect, and the nisuin is valid. If a minor who is fully married is permitted to perform mi’un, people will come to think יש תנאי בנשואין – that a tannai is still binding with regard to marriage of an adult woman, since it looks as if the minor’s marriage is being annulled because of some tannai that was not fulfilled. Beis Hillel are not concerned for they say מידע ידעי דנישואי קטנה דרבנן נינהו – people know that the marriage of a minor girl is only a d’Rabbanon, and that is annulled through mi’un. The Gemara brings three more interpretations of the machlokes.
- Machlokes if a minor yevamah who did mi’un to one brother is permitted to the other brother
Rav said: מיאנה בזה אסורה לזה – If a minor yevamah did mi’un to one brother, she is prohibited to the other brother. This is comparable to when a yevamah received a get from one brother, she becomes prohibited to all of the brothers. But Shmuel said: מיאנה בזה מותרת לזה – If a minor yevamah did mi’un with one brother, she is permitted to the other brother. This is not similar to a yevamah who receives a get for in that case, it is the yavam who is giving the get, whereas here, in regard to mi’un, it is the minor who is doing the action and saying, "לא רעינא בך ולא צבינא בך" – “I do not want you and I do not desire you.” This implies that she is saying, I do not want you, but I do want your brother. Rav Assi said: מיאנה בזה מותרת אפילו לו – that if she did mi’un to the yavam, she is still permitted to him. This is not because he holds that her mi’un cannot refuse his zikah, and that the zikah still remains intact after she did mi’un. Rather, it is a case of two yevamin, and the reason why mi’un is not effective is דאין מיאון לחצי זיקה – because mi’un cannot be effected by refusing half a zikah. Doing a mi’un to one of the two yevamin constitutes a mi’un for half a zikah, and it is not valid.
- How the Rabbanon treated Pishon the camel driver
The third machlokes in the Mishna was regarding whether mi’un must be done before the husband. Beis Shammai say it must be done before him and Beis Hillel say it can also be done not in his presence. It was taught in a Baraisa: Beis Hillel said to Beis Shammai: והלא פישון הגמל מיאנה אשתו שלא בפניו – Did not the wife of Pishon the camel driver perform mi’un not in his presence and it was valid? Beis Shammai answered: פישון הגמל במדה כפושה מדד – Pishon the camel driver measured with an upside-down measure, meaning he was destroying his wife’s melog property. לפיכך מדדו לו במדה כפושה – Therefore, the Rabbanon measured for him in an upside-down measure, meaning they dealt with him the same way. Since Pishon did not follow halachah and destroyed his wife’s property, the Rabbanon accepted his wife’s mi’un even though it was not done properly. When the Gemara asks how she could perform mi’un since a husband only has rights to the נכסי מלוג after nisuin, and Beis Shammai does not permit a nesuah to do mi’un, the Gemara answers, תרי קיטרי עבדו ביה – they knotted him with two knots, meaning they granted a double dispensation to his wife.
