Resources for Yevamos daf 27

מראה מקומות

1. The גמרא discusses the מחלוקת רב ושמואל whether we hold חליצה פּסולה צריכה לחזור על כל האחין or not. How do we pasken? One would assume that since this is a מחלוקת רב ושמואל we should pasken like רב since we go like רב against שמואל in cases of איסור והיתר. However, the ריטב"א says that in this case we pasken like שמואל andחליצה פּסולה אינה צריכה לחזור על כל האחין. The reason is simple—nobody holds otherwise! If you ask שמואל, we know he would say that חליצה פּסולה doesn’t need to be חוזר על כל האחין because that’s what he explicitly said. Even רב who disagreed only said it needs to be חוזר על כל האחין according to the opinion who holds יש זיקה. But רב himself holds אין זיקה! So neither רב nor שמואל who would argue in practice that חליצה פּסולה צריכה לחזור על כל האחין. The רמב"ם in פּרק ה׳ הל׳ י"ב has a unique psak. He says that if a יבמה receives a חליצה פּסולה it would be enough to פּטור her completely but not her צרה which sounds like שמואל according to the second answer. However, he adds that if the צרה wants to be פּטור as well, then the woman who got the חליצה פּסולה needs to get a חליצה from each of the other brothers. The רמב"ן and רשב"א are very bothered by this. The רשב"א asks that if all the brothers are equal then even a חליצה פּסולה should פּטור the צרה according to שמואל. Furthermore, if you hold the חליצה פּסולה was good enough to פּטור herself, how does it help פּטור the צרה by her receiving more חליצות now? Once she is מותרת לשוק any חליצות done subsequently shouldn’t be meaningful. (As an analogy, if you gave a woman a valid גט, giving her a second גט wouldn’t make her more divorced). The ברכת שמואל in סימן י"ב explains based on the גר"א that the רמב"ם learned that while it is possible to פּטור yourself with a חליצה פּסולה, it won’t get rid of the זיקה from the house without a חליצה מעולה. However, it is possible to make the original חליצה into a חליצה מעולה by having all three brothers doחליצה to her. So the original חליצה is considered מעולה, but just על תנאי the other brothers follow suit. However, if there is a person who could do a real חליצה מעולה then any type of חליצה פּסולה won’t help to פּטור a צרה.

2.  רב says that if two sisters (from two brothers) fall to one יבם and then the woman who fell first dies, the second woman can do יבום. The גמרא asks doesn’t רב hold of the concept of כל שנאסרה עליו בשעת נפילה נאסרה עולמית? The גמרא answers that if she was only נאסרה because of זיקה then that הלכה does not apply. תוספות inד"ה אבל says this is רב לשיטתו who holds אין זיקה. However, רש"י does not agree with the ר"ח as his שיטה on כ"ד ע"א ד"ה ואי דף is that even if you hold אין זיקה and the only issue with two sisters is ביטול מצות יבמין, we still say “נאסרה”. Moreover, the simple reading of רש"י here in our סוגיא is that רב is going according to the מ"ד יש זיקה since רש"י uses the term אחות זקוקתו. So how do we explain why רב held here that we should not say נאסרה? The קובץ הערות in סימן י"ב אות ג explains that we don’t say נאסרה by זיקה because זיקה does not create a permanent איסור as it is meant to come to יבום. A regular ערוה such as אשת איש is meant to stay forever, so we say כל שנאסרה שעה אחת נאסרה עולמית. However, זיקה only makes a woman אסור if she is זקוקה right now. If the זיקה isn’t there, the איסור isn’t there.

2b. תוספות learns the concept of נאסרה שעה אחת very differently. תוספות on דף ב׳ ד"ה ואחות אשתו learn that נאסרה is based on the concept of דרכיה דרכי נועם, meaning that it isn’t דרכי נועם to say a woman is פּטור from מצות יבום from a brother and then later say she is חייב. In the גליון הש"ס on our page, רבי עקיבא איגר ז"ל brings that תוספות as a question on our סוגיא. The חידושי ר׳ נחום in אות תס"ד explains that his question is that in our סוגיא the woman was never פּטור from this יבם since she still had to do חליצה, so why is there an issue of דרכי נועם? רב נחום answers based on רש"י in דף פּ"ז ע"ב that דרכי נועם is not a direct פּטור from יבום. Rather, the way it works is that because of דרכי נועם we interpret the פּסוק of יבמה יבא עליה to mean that anyone who couldn’t do יבום when she fell, will never have a היתר to do יבום. Therefore, even if there is a case where there isn’t an issue of דרכי נועם she would still be פּטור from יבום, such as our case where she was always חייב בחליצה but just couldn’t do יבום.

Rabbi Millman's Marei Mekomos Halacha

Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Mordechai Papoff - English Topics

Rabbi Azriel Katz - Meforshim Overview