פירוש על יבמות 5:1

רבן גמליאל. אין גט אחר גט – two widows without children from a deceased husband awaiting a levirate connection of one levir from one brother, and he gave a Jewish bill of divorce to the first, and then returned and gave a Jewish bill of divorce to the second [woman], the female relatives of the second are not prohibited to him , for that would be like his divorced wife. For when he gives a Jewish bill of divorce to the first [woman], the levirate relationship has no legal effect on both of them from him for the Jewish bill of divorce is beneficial for the widow without children from a deceased husband to maintain her [with the Biblical verse] (Deuteronomy 25:9): “who will not build up [his brother’s house],” and furthermore, he will not perform levirate marriage, neither him nor his other brothers not for the Yevamah/widow whose husband died without issue nor her co-wife. Therefore, when he returns and gives a second Jewish bill of divorce to the second [widow], there is nothing in his actions, and it is like he is giving a Jewish bill of divorce to a mere stranger. And similarly, two levirs to one widow without children whose husband is deceased and this one [levir] gave a Jewish bill of divorce and that [levir] gave a Jewish bill of divorce, the latter is not anything and he is permitted to her female relatives.

Introduction In order to understand this chapter we should review a few general issues of yibbum. 1) According to the Torah the shomeret yavam becomes the yavam’s wife only through sexual intercourse. However, the Sages decreed that the yavam should first perform “ma’amar”, an act whereby he betroths her, either by money or by a document, the same way betrothal is enacted with other women. After ma’amar then the couple would have yibbum, enacted by sexual intercourse. 2) A shomeret yavam’s ties to her yavam are biblically severed only through halitzah. However, the Sages decreed that if the yavam gives her a get, while it does not exempt her from halitzah, it makes the performance of yibbum forbidden. In other words it does in some sense sever the tie, thereby making her forbidden due to the prohibition of marrying a brother’s wife. Furthermore, after giving her a get he is forbidden to marry her rival wives, as are the rest of the brothers. He is also forbidden to marry any of her relatives. She is forbidden to marry a priest, as are all divorcees. 3) If the yavam performed ma’amar and then changes his mind and doesn’t want to have yibbum with her, he must give her a get and perform halitzah. The get severs the ties created by ma’amar and the halitzah performs its usual function of exempting her from yibbum.

ולא מאמר אחר מאמר -.between two levirs and one widow whose husband died without children, or with one levir and two widows. The latter is nothing and she doesn’t require from him a Jewish bill of divorce and he is permitted to her female relatives.

This mishnah is formulated in classic mishnaic style. It is terse, somewhat cryptic, easy to remember, and most importantly, it packs a lot of information into only a few words. Our job in explaining the mishnah will be to “unpack” it and decipher each clause. There is no [validity] to a get given after a get: If two women are widowed from one brother and both become liable for yibbum with one yavam and he gives the first one a get and then the second one a get, the get that was given to the second woman is meaningless and she is not considered to be a divorcee. As we stated in the above introduction, according to biblical law, a shomeret yavam does not receive a get. However the Sages decreed that a get is sufficient to make the other rival wives forbidden to the yavam and to make yibbum forbidden with the one who received the get. Since the second woman to receive the get is not a divorcee, the yavam may subsequently marry her relatives, and she may subsequently marry a priest. Nor to a ma’amar after a ma’amar: If one yavam does ma’amar to both of the women who become liable to him for yibbum, or two yavamim do ma’amar with one women who became liable for yibbum with either of them, the second ma’amar is meaningless. Although ma’amar is only of rabbinic origin, its strength is sufficient to render the acquisition of the yevamah as final. The second wife then received a meaningless ma’amar, for she was no longer liable for yibbum. Similarly, the second yavam performed a meaningless ma’amar for the woman was no longer available. Nor to an act of sexual intercourse after another act of sexual intercourse: If one yavam had intercourse, that is, an act of yibbum, with two yevamoth, the second act does not make that yevamah his wife. It is merely licentious sexual relations, for the woman is no longer liable for yibbum after her rival wife has had yibbum. She would not need a get in order to remarry. Nor to a halitzah after another halitzah: Whether one yavam performed halitzah for two yevamoth, or two yevamim performed halitzah for one yevamah, the second act of halitzah is meaningless, for the first act already severed all ties. The result is that the second woman to receive halitzah is not considered to be a halutzah.

יש גט אחר גט – the first [Jewish bill of divorce] did not supersede her levirate relationship completely for she requires Halitzah; therefore, there is still one-half of her levirate relationship and the second Jewish bill of divorce to the second [widow] is beneficial for his divorced wife and he is prohibited to her relatives, and such is the Halakha.

However, the Sages say: There is [validity] to a get given after a get, and to a ma’amar after a ma’amar but not to an act of sexual intercourse after another act of sexual intercourse, or to a halitzah after another halitzah. The Sages disagree with the first two parts of Rabban Gamaliel’s statement. They hold that a yevamah who receives a get is not like one who has had halitzah. Since the one who receives a get still needs halitzah, the second get also has some validity. The fact that the second woman to receive a get is in some sense his divorcee, means that he cannot marry her relatives. She also could not subsequently marry a kohen. Similarly, the Sages hold that ma’amar does not acquire like yibbum. Since one who has been given ma’amar still needs yibbum to complete her becoming his wife, the second ma’amar does have some validity. The second woman to receive ma’amar would need a get to remarry, and the one who gave her ma’amar is subsequently forbidden to marry her relatives. In brief, we can see in this mishnah a debate concerning the power of rabbinic decrees. According to Rabban Gamaliel, the rabbinically decreed ma’amar and get for the yevamah are almost as strong as the biblically ordained yibbum and halitzah. According to the Sages, they are substantially weaker.