1)

(a)Our Mishnah relates a case where a man was told that his wife had died, so he married her paternal sister; she too, died, and he married the second wife's maternal sister; when she died, he married the third wife's paternal sister, and when she died, he married his fourth wife's maternal sister. Which of these wives is he permitted to retain, if it is then discovered that his wife is still alive?

(b)Why does his intimacy with the second and fourth sisters not forbid him on the third and the fifth sisters respectively?

(c)What does the Tana mean when he says 'u'Potros Tzaroseihen'?

(d)And how will the Din change if he was intimate with the second woman after the death of his wife?

1)

(a)Our Mishnah relates a case where a man was told that his wife had died, so he married her paternal sister; she too, died, and he married the second wife's maternal sister; when she died, he married the third wife's paternal sister, and when she died, he married his fourth wife's maternal sister. If it is then discovered that his wife is still alive - he is permitted to retain her, the third wife and the fifth wives (seeing as they are all not related to each other.

(b)His intimacy with the second and fourth sisters does not forbid him on the third and the fifth sisters respectively - because (since they are related to the first and the third wives respectively) they are not considered married, and the close relative of a woman whom one raped but did not marry does not become forbidden.

(c)When the Tana says 'u'Potros Tzaroseihen' - he means that, should the husband then die, and the Yavam performs Yibum with any of these three wives, that Yibum will permit his other wives to marry l'Shuk.

(d)In the event that he was intimate with the second woman after the death of his wife - then it is the second and the fourth women who are permitted, whilst the third and fifth are forbidden.

2)

(a)From which age is the Bi'ah of a Katan considered Bi'ah as regards Yibum?

(b)To what extent does he acquire the Yevamah?

(c)What is the difference between the Bi'ah of a Katan vis-a-vis the brothers and the Bi'ah of the brothers vis-a-vis him, according to the Tana's words?

2)

(a)The Bi'ah of a Katan is considered Bi'ah as regards Yibum - from the age of nine.

(b)He is not Koneh the Yevamah completely - only to the extent that Ma'amar is Koneh by a grown-up.

(c)According to the Tana's words, the difference between the Bi'ah of a Katan vis-a-vis the brothers and the Bi'ah of the brothers vis-a-vis him is - that whereas the Bi'ah of the brothers prevent him from acquiring the Yevamah even if he performed Bi'ah first, his Bi'ah only prevents the brothers from acquiring the Yevamah if he performed it first, but not if it took place after them.

3)

(a)What does the Tana mean when he states that if the second brother was intimate with the second sister after the death of the first, then it is the second and the fourth sisters who become Asur? Did the Reisha not also speak when he married the second sister after he heard that the first one died?

3)

(a)When the Tana states that if the second brother was intimate with the second sister after the death of the first, then it is the second and the fourth sisters who become Asur - he did not mean after he heard that his wife had died (like in the Reisha) but after she had actually died.

4)

(a)How do we reconcile the statement 'Ela Hu Posel Techilah, v'Hen Poslin Techilah v'Sof' with the Beraisa of Rav Zevid bar Oshaya which states that the Bi'ah of a nine-year old does invalidate the Yevamah on the older brother who made Ma'amar before him?

(b)But does our Mishnah not follow its statement with the example of the latter brother performing Bi'ah?

(c)Then why does the Beraisa say that the Katan only invalidates the Yevamah in one way; with Bi'ah?

(d)Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel rules that a Katan invalidates the Yevamah with a Get. What does Rav Tachlifa bar Avimi say about Ma'amar?

(e)We substantiate these rulings with a statement by Rebbi Meir. What does Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa, say about this?

4)

(a)We reconcile the statement 'Ela Hu Posel Techilah, v'Hen Poslin Techilah v'Sof' with the Beraisa of Rav Zevid bar Oshaya, which states that the Bi'ah of a nine-year old does invalidate the Yevamah on the older brother who made Ma'amar before him - by establishing our Mishnah, not by Bi'ah (as we thought at first), but by Ma'amar.

(b)Our Mishnah does indeed follow its statement with the example of the latter brother performing Bi'ah - however, we emend this text by adding the phrase 'Bameh Devarim Amurim, b'Ma'amar, Aval b'Bi'ah Posel'.

(c)The Beraisa says that the Katan only invalidates the Yevamah in one way; with Bi'ah - because it is only through Bi'ah that the Katan invalidates the Yevamah both at the beginning and at the end.

(d)Rav Yehudah Amar Shmuel rules that a Katan invalidates the Yevamah with a Get. Rav Tachlifa bar Avimi rules - that he also invalidates her with Ma'amar

(e)Rebbi Meir says in a Beraisa - that a Katan invalidates the Yevamah both with a Get and with Ma'amar.

5)

(a)We query Rebbi Meir's previous ruling however, from another Beraisa, where the Tana Kama says 'Asu Bi'as ben Tesha k'Ma'amar b'Gadol'. What does Rebbi Meir say there about Chalitzah?

(b)Why did he not say that they made his Chalitzah like his own Get?

(c)In which regard is the Get of a Katan less effective than that of a Gadol according to ...

1. ... Raban Gamliel, who holds 'Ein Get Achar Get'?

2. ... the Rabanan, who hold 'Yesh Get Achar Get'?

5)

(a)We query Rebbi Meir's previous ruling however, from another Beraisa, where the Tana Kama says 'Asu Bi'as ben Tesha k'Ma'amar b'Gadol'. Rebbi Meir says there - that the Get of a ben Tesha invalidates the Yevamah on the brothers like the Get of a Gadol. What is the problem with that?

(b)He did not say that they made his Chalitzah like his own Get - because his Get is only partially effective (to invalidate the Yevamah on the brothers, because of 'Keivan she'Lo Banah Shuv Lo Yivneh'), but not completely (as we will now explain).

(c)The Get of a Katan is less effective than that of a Gadol according to ...

1. ... Raban Gamliel, who holds 'Ein Get Achar Get' - inasmuch as that only applies to the Get of a Gadol after a Gadol or that of a Katan after a Katan, but as far as the Get of a Gadol after that of a Katan is concerned, even he will agree that 'Yesh Get Achar Get'.

2. ... the Rabanan, who hold 'Yesh Get Achar Get' - inasmuch as that only applies to a Gadol after a Gadol or a Katan after a Katan, but as far as the Get of a Katan after that of a Gadol is concerned, even they will agree that 'Ein Get Achar Get'.

96b----------------------------------------96b

6)

(a)On what grounds does the Tana Kama of our Mishnah rule that if two nine-year old brothers both perform Bi'ah with the Yevamah one after the other, the second one invalidates the Yevamah (even) on the first one?

(b)If a ben Tesha performs Bi'ah first with one of the Yevamos and then with her Tzarah, both Yevamos become forbidden to him. Why is that?

(c)Why, according to Rebbi Shimon ...

1. ... in the Reisha, the Bi'ah of the second Katan does not forbid the Yevamah on the first one? Does it make any difference whether the Yevamah was Shogeg or Mezid?

2. ... in the Seifa, does the Bi'ah of the ben Tesha with the second Yevamah not forbid the first one on him?

(d)The author of our Mishnah, which holds 'Yesh Ma'amar Achar Ma'amar, regarding both two Yevamin with one Yevamah and two Yevamos with one Yavam, cannot be ben Azai. Why not? What does ben Azai say?

6)

(a)If, according to the Tana Kama, two nine-year old brothers both perform Bi'ah with the Yevamah one after the other, the second one invalidates the Yevamah (even) on the first one - because, since the Bi'ah of the first one is not completely Koneh (only like the Ma'amar of a Gadol), the second one's Bi'ah is partially Koneh too. Consequently, she requires a Get from the second one, and becomes Pasul on both of them (because of 'Keivan she'Lo Banah, Shuv Lo Yivneh'). She subsequently requires a Get from the first one, too.

(b)If a ben Tesha performs Bi'ah first with one of the Yevamos and then with her Tzarah, both Yevamos become forbidden to him - for the same reason (because, seeing as, due to the fact that he is not Koneh the first one completely, he is Koneh the second one too, the principle 'Bayis Echad Hu Boneh, v'Eino Boneh Shnei Batim' will apply here too).

(c)According to Rebbi Shimon ...

1. ... in the Reisha, the Bi'ah of the second Katan does not forbid the Yevamah on the first one - because a. in his opinion, the Bi'ah of a ben Tesha is not partially Koneh, but Safek completely Koneh; 2. because of the ruling 'Ein Bi'ah Achar Bi'ah. Consequently, if the Bi'ah of the first brother is Koneh, the second one is not; whereas, in the event that the first one's Bi'ah is not be Koneh, then the Bi'ah of the second one is not Koneh either.

2. ... in the Seifa, the Bi'ah of the ben Tesha with the second Yevamah does not forbid the first one on him - for exactly the same reason (because, if his Bi'ah with the first Yevamah is Koneh, then his Bi'ah with the second one is ineffective ... ). It is obvious however, that, in both instances, the second one remains forbidden (in case the first Bi'ah was Koneh).

(d)The author of our Mishnah, which holds 'Yesh Ma'amar Achar Ma'amar, regarding both two Yevamin with one Yevamah and two Yevamos with one Yavam, cannot be ben Azai - who concedes that there is no Ma'amar after Ma'amar by one Yevamah with two Yevamos, but who holds that there is Ma'amar after Ma'amar by two Yevamin and one Yevamah (even if they are both Gedolim - because the Rabanan instituted Ma'amar for each Yevamah, but for only one of the brothers.

7)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that if a ben Tesha performs Yibum with his Yevamah and died, leaving other brothers one of them is obligated to perform Chalitzah. Why not Yibum?

(b)Bearing in mind that the Bi'ah of a ben Tesha acquires his Yevamah (like Ma'amar), why is it that, if he married a woman and died, she is Patur from Yibum?

(c)What will be the Din if, after performing Yibum with the Yevamah, the ben Tesha grows up, marries a second wife and dies ...

1. ... regarding the first woman?

2. ... regarding the second woman?

(d)Under which condition, will this ruling not apply?

7)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that if a ben Tesha performs Yibum with his Yevamah and died, leaving other brothers one of them is obligated to perform Chalitzah; Not Yibum - because part of the Zikah from the first brother still remains, in which case, the principle of 'Mi she'Alehah Zikas Yavam Echad, v'Lo ... Zikas Shnei Yevamin' will apply.

(b)Despite the fact that the Bi'ah of a ben Tesha acquires his Yevamah (like Ma'amar), if he married a woman and died, she is Patur from Yibum - because it is only in the realm of Yibum, where there is already a Zikah, that Chazal validated the Bi'ah of a Katan. In matters of Kidushin, the Torah-law (that a Katan is not able to acquire) prevails.

(c)If, after performing Yibum with the Yevamah, the ben Tesha grows up, marries a second wife and dies ...

1. ... the first woman - requires Chalitzah (because of 'Zikas Shnei Yevamin', as we just explained).

2. ... the second woman - requires either Chalitzah or Yibum, whichever the Yavam prefers.

(d)This ruling will not apply however - if the ben Tesha was intimate with his first wife from the time that he became a Gadol, and then died, in which case one of them require Yibum or Chalitzah, and the other one, nothing (like the regular Din of two Yevamos falling to Yibum from one house).

8)

(a)Rebbi Shimon disagrees with the Tana Kama in the previous case. On what grounds does he permit Yibum with either of the two women even if he was intimate with his first wife from the time that he became a Gadol?

(b)Why, according to him, does the second wife require Chalitzah?

(c)Then why not Yibum?

(d)In which regard does the Tana equate the Din of a ben Tesha with that of a ben Esrim?

8)

(a)Rebbi Shimon disagrees with the Tana Kama in the previous case. He permits Yibum with either of the two (even if he was intimate with his first wife from the time that he became a Gadol) - because he does not agree with the Derashah 'Mi she'Alehah Zikas Yavam Echad, v'Lo ... Zikas Shnei Yevamin'

(b)According to him, the second wife nevertheless requires Chalitzah - because min ha'Torah, they are not Tzaros (seeing as the Bi'ah of a Katan does not acquire).

(c)But not Yibum - because, since the Rabanan instituted Ma'amar, he acquires her (mid'Rabanan) and it resembles 'Shnei Yevamin mi'Bayis Echad'.

(d)The Tana equates the Din of a ben Tesha with that of a ben Esrim - regarding the performing of Bi'ah with a Yevamah (in all of the areas dealt with in the last two Mishnas).

9)

(a)What does Rava extrapolate from our Mishnah, which requires the brother of a ben Tesha who performed Yibum and died, to make Chalitzah and not Yibum, even though she is the only wife?

(b)The Din or our Mishnah, which invalidates the Kidushin of a Katan, is repeated in a Beraisa. Which other category does the Tana of the Beraisa list together with a Katan?

9)

(a)Rava extrapolates from our Mishnah (which requires the brother of a ben Tesha who performed Yibum and died, to make Chalitzah and not Yibum, even though she is the only wife) - that 'Zikas Yavam Echad v'Lo Zikas Shnei Yevamin' is d'Oraisa (and applies even when there is only one Yevamah - or even if it is mid'Rabanan. See Tosfos 32a. DH 'mid'Rabanan'), and is not just a decree in case people will say that when there are two Yevamos who fall from one house, both require Yibum (in which case it might only apply when there are two Yevamos involved - like the case cited in Perek Arba'ah Achin [cited on 10b.]).

(b)The Din of our Mishnah, which invalidates the Kidushin of a Katan, is repeated in a Beraisa - where the Tana lists a Shoteh together with a Katan.

10)

(a)The Tana of our Mishnah permits the Tzarah to perform Yibum in spite of the Bi'ah of the ben Tesha with her Tzarah (before he became a Gadol). What does Rav extrapolate from there?

(b)Our Mishnah (which permits Yibum with the Tzarah), clashes with the Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin. What does the Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin say about three brothers who married three women who were not related?

(c)How do Shmuel and Rebbi Yochanan, who both hold 'Asu Bi'as ben Tesha k'Ma'amar b'Gadol', reconcile the two Mishnahs? Over which point are they arguing (see Tosfos end of 31b. DH 'mid'Rabanan')?

10)

(a)The Tana of our Mishnah permits the Tzarah to make Yibum in spite of the Bi'ah of the ben Tesha with her Tzarah (before he became a Gadol) - from which Rav extrapolates that 'Lo Asu Bi'as ben Tesha k'Ma'amar b'Gadol'.

(b)Our Mishnah (which permits Yibum with the Tzarah), clashes with the Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin - which states that if three brothers married three non-related women, one of them died and the second one made Ma'amar and died, both women require Chalitzah from the third brother, but not Yibum.

(c)To begin with, Shmuel and Rebbi Yochanan, who both hold 'Asu Bi'as ben Tesha k'Ma'amar b'Gadol', explain that neither Tana differentiates between a Gadol and a ben Tesha, but the Tana there happens to be talking about a Gadol, and the Tana here, about a Katan. The Mishnah in Arba'ah Achin, they explain, forbids the Ba'alas Ma'amar only because of the Tzarah (as the Gemara explains there - even when there is no Tzarah [since they decree because of when there is]). Our Tana on the other hand, forbids the Ba'alas Ma'amar to the brothers, not because of the Tzarah, but because of 'Eshes Shnei Mesim' (i.e. 'Zikas Shnei Yevamin').

11)

(a)Why was Rebbi Yochanan angry with Rebbi Elazar (ben Pedas)?

(b)Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi cited him an incident where a Sefer-Torah was torn in the Shul in Teverya, as a result of anger. What was the incident? What did Rebbi Yosi ben Kisma comment?

(c)What was Rebbi Yochanan's reaction at their attempt to pacify him?

(d)Why did Rebbi Yakov bar Idi quote the Pasuk in Yehoshua "Ka'asher Tzivah Hash-m es Moshe Avdo Kein Tzivah Moshe es Yehoshua ... "? What did he extrapolate from there?

11)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan was angry with Rebbi Elazar (ben Pedas) - because he explained the two Mishnas in the manner that we just explained them, but without saying it in his name.

(b)Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi cited him an incident where a Sefer Torah was torn in the Shul in Teverya, as a result of anger - when Rebbi Elazar (ben Shamua, the Tana) and Rebbi Yosi were engaged in a dispute about whether a bolt (that is not fitted to the door) which has a thick head (rendering it fit to be used for crushing garlic) is considered a Kli to use to lock a door or not. Rebbi Yosi ben Kisma commented - that he would be surprised if they would not subsequently worship idols in that Shul (see Agados Maharsha).

(c)Rebbi Yochanan's reaction at their attempt to pacify him - was to become even more angry (because they were comparing his relationship with Rebbi Elazar to that of Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Yosi, two colleagues; whereas in reality, he was Rebbi Elazar (ben Pedas') Rebbe.

(d)Rebbi Yakov bar Idi quoted the Pasuk "Ka'asher Tzivah Hash-m es Moshe Avdo Ken Tzivah Moshe es Yehoshua ... " - because it is obvious that Yehoshua did not find it necessary to state after each and every Halachah that he taught, that he had learned it from Moshe. What the Pasuk must therefore mean is that it is something that is so obvious, that it does not need to be said. So too, everyone knew that whatever Rebbi Elazar said, he learned from Rebbi Yochanan.

12)

(a)How did Rebbi Yochanan react to Rebbi Yakov bar Idi's attempt at pacifying him?

(b)The source of Rebbi Yochanan's anger lay in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Agurah v'Ohalcha Olamim". What was David ha'Melech saying?

(c)And the crux of that Derashah lies in the statement of Rebbi Yochanan himself. What did Rebbi Yochanan quoting Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai say?

(d)How does Rebbi Yitzchak bar Ze'iri or Shimon Nezira connect this with the Pasuk in Shir ha'Shirim "v'Chikech k'Yein ha'Tov ... Dovev Sifsei Yesheinim"?

12)

(a)Rebbi Yochanan's reaction to Rebbi Yakov bar Idi's attempt at pacifying him - was to ask Rebbi Ami and Rebbi Asi, in admiration, why they did not know how to pacify like Rebbi Yakov bar Idi.

(b)The source of Rebbi Yochanan's anger lay in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Agurah v'Ohalcha Olamim" - a prayer to Hash-m to let his Divrei Torah be repeated in this world (after his death), so that his lips would move in the grave as if he was alive.

(c)And the crux of that Derashah lies in the statement of Rebbi Yochanan himself quoting Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai - who said that whenever one quotes a deceased Talmid-Chacham, that Talmid-Chacham's lips move in the grave.

(d)Rebbi Yitzchak bar Ze'iri or Shimon Nezira connects this with the Pasuk "v'Chikech k'Yein ha'Tov ... Dovev Sifsei Yesheinim" - which compares the lips of the deceased Talmid Chacham to the wine bubbling in the vat.