Yevamot 103

האי גט אחר גט הוא אמר רב יהודה הכי קאמר גט אחר הגט ומאמר אחר מאמר כדאמרן יבם אחד ויבמה אחת כיצד התרתן עשה מאמר ביבמתו ונתן לה גט צריכה הימנו חליצה:

Is this an illustration of a letter of divorce after a letter of divorce?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Sages speak of a letter of divorce another letter of divorce, while the illustration which follows describes a ma'amar that was followed by a letter of divorce! ');">¹</span> Rab Judah replied it is this that was meant: [The illustration of] A LETTER OF DIVORCE AFTER ANOTHER LETTER OF DIVORCE and OF A MA'AMAR AFTER AN OTHER MA'AMAR is as stated;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Baraitha supra 51a, 'Our Rabbis taught: How&nbsp;… R. Gamaliel's statement etc.' The Mishnah, however, provides no explanation of illustration of these cases, and proceeds to another point. ');">²</span> but<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is the meaning of what follows. ');">³</span>

עשה מאמר ובעל הרי זו כמצותה: לימא מסייע ליה לרב הונא דאמר רב הונא מצות יבמה מקדש ואח"כ בועל אימא אף זה כמצותה

HOW IS THE RELEASE [FROM THE LEVIRATE BOND EFFECTED] where there is one levir and one sister-in-law? — IF A LEVIR ADDRESSED A MA'AMAR TO HIS SISTER-IN-LAW AND SUBSEQUENTLY GAVE HER A LETTER OF DIVORCE, IT IS NECESSARY FOR HER TO PERFORM THE <i>HALIZAH</i> WITH HIM.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 325, n. 4. ');">⁴</span> IF HE ADDRESSED TO HER A MA'AMAR AND THEN COHABITED WITH HER, BEHOLD THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRESCRIBED PRECEPT. Might it be suggested that this provides support for R. Huna? For R. Huna stated: The precept of marriage with a sister-in-law is properly performed when the levir first betroths, and then cohabits with her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And ma'amar and betrothal are essentially the same form of kinyan ');">⁵</span> — One might read,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In our Mishnah. ');">⁶</span>

פשיטא סד"א כיון דאמר מר העושה מאמר ביבמתו פרחה הימנו זיקת יבמין וחלה עליו זיקת ארוסין ונשואין אימא לאו מצוה קעביד קמ"ל

THIS IS also IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRESCRIBED PRECEPT. Is not this obvious? — It might have been presumed that since a Master stated, 'If the levir addressed a ma'amar to his sister-in-law, the levirate bond disappears, and he comes under the bond of betrothal and marriage',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 29b. It will be noted that the text there slightly differs from the text here. ');">⁷</span> he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because of the ma'amar he had addressed. ');">⁸</span> is not performing the commandment,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the levirate marriage, even though cohabitation had taken place subsequently. ');">⁹</span>

גופא אמר רב הונא מצות יבמין מקדש ואחר כך בועל ואם בעל ועשה מאמר קנה אם בעל ועשה מאמר פשיטא דהא קניה בביאה אלא אימא אם בעל בלא מאמר קנה

hence we were taught [that he does]. [To turn to] the main text. 'R. Huna said: The precept of marriage with a sister-in-law is properly performed when the levir first betroths and then cohabits with her. If he cohabited with her, and then addressed to her a ma'amar a <i>kinyan</i> is nevertheless constituted.' 'If he cohabited with her and then addressed to her a ma'amar is so obvious,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a kinyan had been effected. ');">¹⁰</span> since he had acquired her by the cohabitation!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' What need then was there to state the obvious? ');">¹¹</span>

והתניא לוקה מכת מרדות מדרבנן

— Read, rather, 'If he cohabited with her without previously addressing to her a ma'amar a <i>kinyan</i> is nevertheless constituted'. But was it not taught that the penalty of flogging<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Malkoth (v. Glos.) inflicted for the transgression of Pentateuchal negative precepts. ');">¹²</span> is inflicted upon him?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the omission of the ma'amar, prior to his cohabitation, A ma'amar is consequently (v. supra n. 9) a Pentateuchal requirement. How, then, could it be said that a kinyan may be constituted though the ma'amar had been omitted! ');">¹³</span> — Chastisement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Makkath marduth, v. Glos. ');">¹⁴</span>

דרב מנגיד מאן דמקדש בביאה ומאן דמקדש בשוקא ומאן דמקדש בלא שדוכי

was meant, which is a Rabbinical penalty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For offences that are not Pentateuchal. ');">¹⁵</span> For Rab ordered the chastisement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Makkath marduth, v. Glos. ');">¹⁶</span> of any person who betrothed by cohabitation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Regarding such a practice as immoral. ');">¹⁷</span>

ומאן דמבטל גיטא ומאן דמסר מודעא אגיטא

who betrothed in the open street,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra note 3, even if in a legal manner, ');">¹⁸</span> or who betrothed without previous negotiation;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Regarding such a practice as immoral. ');">¹⁹</span> who annulled a letter of divorce,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such an act might lead a divorced woman, who was unaware of the annulment, to an illegal marriage. ');">²⁰</span>

ומאן דפקיר שליחא דרבנן ומאן דשהי שמתא דרבנן עליה תלתין יומין ולא אתי לבי דינא ותבע לשמתיה

or who made a declaration against a letter of divorce;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it was invalid. If he stated, e.g., that he gave it under compulsion. ');">²¹</span> who was insolent<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Rashi a.l. Or, 'who offends'. V. Tosaf. s.v. [H] a.l. ');">²²</span> towards the representative of the Rabbis,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A messenger (a) of the Beth din (Rashi); (b) of any Rabbi (Tosaf.). ');">²³</span>

ועל חתנא דדאיר בבי חמוהי דדאיר אין דחליף לא והא ההוא דחליף אבבא דבי חמוהי ונגדיה רב ששת ההוא מידם הוה דיים מחמתיה

or who allowed a Rabbinical ban upon him to remain for thirty days and did not come to the <i>Beth din</i> to request the removal of that ban; and of a son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law's house. [You say,] only if he lives,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At his father-in-law's. ');">²⁴</span> but not if he only passes by? Surely, a man once passed by the door of his father-in-law's house, and R. Shesheth ordered his chastisement! — That man was suspected of immoral relations with his mother-in-law. The Nehardeans stated: Rab ordered the chastisement of none of these<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cases, enumerated supra. ');">²⁵</span> except him who betrothed by cohabitation without preliminary negotiation. Others say: Even with preliminary negotiation; because [such a practice is sheer] licentiousness.

נהרדעי אמרי בכולהו לא מנגיד רב אלא למקדש בביאה ובלא שדוכי ואיכא דאמרי אפילו בשדוכי נמי משום פריצותא

Our Rabbis taught: How is betrothal effected with a ma'amar? — If he gave her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The levir to the sister-in-law. ');">²⁶</span> some money or anything of value.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And addressed to her the ma'amar in the prescribed form: 'Be thou betrothed unto me by this levirate ma'amar. Though betrothal with money in the case of an ordinary union constitutes perfect kinyan, in the case of betrothal by a levir (to whom a sister-in-law is ordinarily forbidden, and betrothal with whom is consequently invalid) betrothal alone, even when it concerns a levirate union, is not sufficient to constitute a kinyan until consummation of the marriage has taken place. ');">²⁷</span> And how is it effected by a deed? — 'How is it effected by a deed'? Surely as has been stated:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the case of any other betrothal that is effected by means of a deed. ');">²⁸</span>

ת"ר כיצד מאמר נתן לה כסף או שוה כסף ובשטר כיצד בשטר כיצד כדאמרן כתב לה על הנייר או על החרס אע"פ שאין בו שוה פרוטה הרי את מקודשת לי אמר אביי ה"ק שטר כתובת יבמין כיצד

If he wrote for her on a piece of paper or on a sherd, although it was not worth even a <i>perutah</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">²⁹</span> 'Behold thou art be trothed unto me'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kid. 9a. As betrothal by money in the case of a levirate union takes the same form as that of an ordinary betrothal so should betrothal by deed! ');">³⁰</span> Abaye replied, It is this that was meant: How is the deed of the <i>kethubah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By 'deed' the kethubah (v. Glos.) was meant and not the 'deed of the ma'amar'. ');">³¹</span>

כתב לה אנא פלוני בר פלוני קבילית ית פלונית יבמתי עלי לזון ולפרנסה כראוי ובלבד שתהא כתובתה על נכסי בעלה הראשון ואי לית לה מראשון תקינו לה רבנן משני כדי שלא תהא קלה בעיניו להוציאה

in a levirate marriage [to be drawn up]? He writes for her. 'I, So-and-so, son of So-and-so, undertake to feed and maintain in a suitable manner my sister-in-law So-and-so, provided that her <i>kethubah</i> remains a charge upon the estate of her first husband'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The deceased brother (supra 38a) because 'a wife has been given to him from heaven' (v. supra 39a and notes). ');">³²</span> If, however, she is unable to obtain it from her first husband, provision was made by the Rabbis [that she is to receive it] from the second,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The levir who married her. ');">³³</span> in order that it may not be easy for him to divorce her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 39a. ');">³⁴</span>

בעא מיניה אביי מרבה נתן לה גט ואמר הרי את מגורשת הימני ואי את מותרת לכל אדם מהו גט יבמה דרבנן הוא גט דמהני באשת איש מהני ביבמה גט דלא מהני באשת איש לא מהני ביבמה או דלמא אתי לאחלופי בגיטא

Abaye enquired of Rabbah: What is the law if he gave her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The levir to the sister-in-law. ');">³⁵</span> a letter of divorce and said, 'Behold thou art divorced from me, but thou art not permitted to any other man'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Does such a qualified divorce effect the prohibition of the widow to the levir and to his brother as if an unqualified divorce had been given to her? In the case of a married woman no divorce can release her unless it was free from all qualifying conditions. ');">³⁶</span> The divorce of a sister-in-law being Rabbinically valid, [shall I say that] only a divorce which is valid in the case of a married woman is valid in the case of a sister-in-law, but a divorce which is invalid in the case of a married woman is also invalid in the case of a sister-in-law,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence there is no validity in this divorce, and the sister-in-law remains permitted to the levirs as if no divorce had ever been given. ');">³⁷</span>

[א"ל חיישינן דלמא אתי לאחלופי בגיטא] מתקיף לה רבה בר חנן אלא מעתה יהיב לה ניירא בעלמא ה"נ דפסלה א"ל התם לא פסיל בכהונה הכא קפסיל בכהונה

or [had provision to be made here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the divorce is valid despite its qualification (v. supra n. 7). ');">³⁸</span> against] the possibility of mistaking it for an unqualified divorce?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Were the widow to be permitted to the levir after a qualified divorce she might erroneously be permitted even after an unqualified, and valid, divorce. ');">³⁹</span> — The other replied: Provision has to be made against the possibility of mistaking it for an unqualified divorce.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 39a. ');">³⁴</span>

דתניא (ויקרא כא, ז) ואשה גרושה מאישה לא יקחו אפילו לא נתגרשה אלא מאישה לא יקחו והיינו ריח הגט שפוסל בכהונה

Rabbah b. Hanan demurred: Now then,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If provision has to be made against mistaking a valid, for an invalid document. ');">⁴⁰</span> had he given her a mere scrap of paper would he also have disqualified her?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From subsequently marrying the levir. ');">⁴¹</span> The other replied: There [the scrap of paper] does not cause the woman to be unfit for a priest;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Having no validity whatsoever it could never be mistaken for a proper divorce. ');">⁴²</span>

אמר רמי בר חמא הרי אמרו אמר אחד ללבלר כתוב גט לארוסתי לכשאכנסנה אגרשנה הרי זה גט מפני שבידו לגרשה

here, however, [the qualified divorce] does cause the woman to become unfit for a priest,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A priest causes his wife to be forbidden to him even if the divorce he gave her was only a qualified one. ');">⁴³</span> for it was taught, Neither shall they take a woman put away from her husband,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 7. ');">⁴⁴</span> even if she was only divorced from her husband<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if she was given a qualified divorce which does not set her free to marry any other man. ');">⁴⁵</span> they may not take her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since such a divorce has the validity of causing the woman's prohibition to her husband who is a priest it might easily be mistaken for a valid divorce. Hence the provision mentioned. ');">⁴⁶</span> and that is what was meant by the 'scent of the divorce' that causes a woman's unfitness for a priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Git. 82b, infra 94a. ');">⁴⁷</span> Rami b. Hama said: It has been definitely<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'behold'. ');">⁴⁸</span> stated that if a man said to a scribe, 'Write a letter of divorce for my betrothed so that when I have married her I may divorce her' the letter of divorce is valid,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If he gave it to her after marriage. ');">⁴⁹</span> because it was in his power<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the time the letter of divorce was written. ');">⁵⁰</span> to divorce her;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As his betrothed. ');">⁵¹</span>