I have to admit that daf TB Yevamot 8 is very difficult. I spent two hours studying this daf and I still don't have a good handle on the material. After finishing challenging and finally upholding Rabbi Elazar's rule that a positive commandment overrides a prohibition, the Gemara quotes Rava's cohost the complete opposite of Rabbi Elazar. "§ Rava said that this entire halakha must be understood differently. With regard to a forbidden relation herself, it is not necessary for a verse to teach that she cannot enter into levirate marriage, as a positive mitzva does not override a prohibition that includes karet. Rather, the verse “with her” is necessary to prohibit a rival wife, as a rival wife is not prohibited to the yavam as a forbidden relation." (Sefaria.org translation)
Does a positive commandment override a negative prohibition whose penalty is karet or does a negative prohibition whose penalty is karet override a positive commitment? The Gemara never settles this question and the rishonim are divided. Rambam's the language in the Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Shabbat, chapter 19 halakha 20 doesn't settle the matter.The Tosefot ד"ה ואלוappear that they agree that the halkha follows Rava. A negative prohibition with a penalty of keret overrides a positive commandment. The Meiri also agrees with Rava. Others like Rabbi Byad Malakhi holds that a positive commandment overrides a negative prohibition with the penalty of keret unless it is otherwise explicitly stated.
The bottom line doesn't change the actual halakha. Everybody agrees that if a man dies without children, his brother marries the widow. If she is a forbidden relative other than being his brother's wife, the surviving brother may not marry her nor any of her co-wives. Rabbi Elazar and Rava just use different derashot to get to the same answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment