Oraysa Chaburah | Yevamos 24a | “Yakom al Shem Achiv”: Bechor, Nachalah, & Pishnayim скачать в хорошем качестве

Oraysa Chaburah | Yevamos 24a | “Yakom al Shem Achiv”: Bechor, Nachalah, & Pishnayim

This shiur on Yevamos 24a (1/27/26) begins by tying back to the prior Mishnah’s safek-sister scenario and the rule that b’dieved we don’t unravel certain yibum outcomes—even if the brothers are kohanim—once the required steps were done in a way that resolves the safek. The main sugya then pivots to the pasuk “וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר אֲשֶׁר תֵּלֵד יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו הַמֵּת” and the Gemara’s core question: Who is “bechor” here? Not the newborn child, and not a requirement to name the child after the deceased. Rather, the pasuk is read as describing the yavam—the senior/eldest brother is approached first for the mitzvah of yibum (“mitzvah b’gadol”). The Gemara stresses that the “naming” reading is not the operative halacha, and works through why the plain grammatical read still doesn’t establish a formal naming obligation. From there, the Gemara tries multiple “attempts” to preserve a more literal bechor reading (e.g., limiting yibum to cases involving a bechor, or making the bechor uniquely obligated), and rejects them based on broader rules that all paternal brothers are eligible for yibum and the structured practice of going down the line (next-eldest, next-eldest) and even circling back—showing that “bechor” functions as priority/honor, not an exclusivity gate. Finally, the sugya lands on a major nafka mina: inheritance mechanics. “Yakom al shem achiv” is taken to mean nachalah—the yavam “stands in” for the deceased regarding what he inherits. That launches the comparison to a bechor’s pishnayim: A bechor receives double only from what the father is mukzak in, not what is merely ra’uy (expected/owed but not yet in hand). Similarly, the Gemara explores whether the yavam inherits only what the deceased brother already held, and not property that would have come to the deceased later (e.g., if the father dies after the brother, and the brother would have inherited—does the yavam “step into” that future share?). The discussion frames this as a key limitation: the yavam does not receive “ra’uy” portions that were only destined to reach the deceased later. OraysaChaburah Yevamos 24a Gemara RabbiSegal yakom_al_shem_achiv yibum bechor gadol_brother mitzvah_of_yibum inheritance nachalah shem_lo_nimchak naming_child not_name_issue hekesh brothers_equal kohen yibum_case chalitzah pishnayim double_portion mukzak ra'uy estate father_dies_later yerusha yavam_gets_brother_assets