Yevamot 108 - June 23, 24 Sivan

Presentation in PDF format

What is the text that they put in a mi'un document? Why was the original text shortened? The refusal of a minor can be done in many different ways - even if the girls somehow indicates that she is not interested in being married to him, without saying it directly, she is free from her marriage. several different examples of this are brought. According to Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira if she went ahead and married someone else, that would be an indication that she did mi'un. What about betrothal to another? Do the rabbis disagree with him? Would Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira permit this kind of 'weak' refusal only if she was betrothed to the first husband or even if she was married to him? The Gemara raises all these questions. In the end, they rule like Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira even in the case where she was married to the first husband. Rabbi Eliezer doesn't consider marriage to the first husband valid at all, however, he does require mi'un. Shmuel likes his approach as he is consistent and does not consider her married at all (other than requiring mi'un). How is this different from Rabbi Yehoshua who fully considered a minor married, other than the fact that she can get out with mi'un alone - that also seems to be a mostly consistent position? The Gemara brings two different explanations for Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov's statement in the Mishna that if there is any obstruction due to the man, she is married and and obstruction not from the man, she is not married. If she does mi'un, she is permitted to his relatives and he to hers, as it as if they were never married. This differs from divorce, by which she is prohibited to his relative and he to hers. If they were married, he gave her a get, then remarried her and she did mi'un. the mi'un uproots the original marriage as well. Therefore, if she marries someone else after that and gets divorced or widowed, she can go back to the original husband, as it is if they were not married before. But if she did mi'un with one man, they got a get from the next husband, then mi'un with the next, etc. she cannot return to the man she got a get from. The Gemara assumes that the reason the mi'un in the first case, uproots the marriage entirely is because the mi'un indicated she was too young and when her mother or brother married her off, the marriage was never a real marriage. If so, then why does it only uproot her marriage with the same person and not if she was married and divorced from someone else? Shmuel says that the two parts of the Mishna reflect two different opinions. Rava distinguishes between the cases - it really should uproot the first marriage, even if it was to someone else, but for a different reason, the rabbis forbid her to return to the first husband, as they want to prevent him from trying to seduce her back while she is married to another in an attempt to get her to 'refuse' the other man. The Gemara raises another contradiction in the Mishna. Rabbi Elazar says that the two parts of the Mishna reflect two different opinions. Ulla distinguishes between the cases. Where do we find two different opinions regarding this issue, as stated by Rabbi Elazar? A story is told of how they brought this question to be asked to Rabbi Akiva when he was jailed by the Romans.