Yevamos 30 ירושלמי יבמות דף ל

He had said that ain't mimer achar mimer.

That means that mimer isn't effective after another mimer.

For example, Ruvain dies leaving two wives, Shimon did mimer to one, and then did mimer to the other.

Well, the second mimer doesn't accomplish anything, and that's because mimer is a partial kinion, and the first mimer was cut into whatever it was able to, meaning nothing's left over for the second one.

The way to say this is, Whatever the Ma'at was able to accomplish, that first one accomplished, so now there's nothing left over for the second one.

So now coming from that, the Gemara tells us, Is there any validity to a B'yapsula after another B'yapsula? For example, if it's two Yavams falling to one Yavam, he gave Yavam a one again, then he was by all her then he was by all the other yavama so do we say that and the second bia did nothing or maybe not similar question do you say there's any validity to the bia of a nine-year-old yavam after another bia of his when we have the yavam who's a nine-year-old in one day and we know it's officially considered a halakhic bia but it's only a partial kenyan so if he did bia to one yavama and then to the other one does the second one have any validity Similar question, Do we say that Apostle Bia has any effect after the Bia of a nine-year-old or the Bia of a nine-year-old after Bia Pesula? I wouldn't have a clarity on all these questions.

Now, continuing with another level of discussion, Do we say that And they would hold with one Yavama.

They argue with him when there's two women falling to one man.

Over there, they hold a yes maimer, achar maimer, because we're talking about two different women.

So even though we're going to say that maimer was a partial kinion according to the chamim, still, the first one had a partial kinion done to her, but that has nothing to do with the second one.

Well, let's say there's only one yavama and one yavam, and he does maimer to her, and then he does maimer to her again.

Do we say the second one also has effect? or maybe not.

Maybe the Chum would agree to him, Gamaliel, the second one has no sheikhahs.

And we've got to clarify, hey, Chavita, what's the case over here? So Asa Meir Bivimtai, person did Meimer to Yeshiv Amah, then no son-in-law get, and then he gave her a get, but Asa Meimer, then he did Meimer again.

Simtai Meir, yesh Meimer, achar Meimer, if you want to say that one Meimer after another does accomplish something, it does have effect, even when we're dealing with just one Yavama, that means she wasn't potter with that get.

Again, he didn't mimer with her, and then he gave her a get.

Now, if you want to say the yes mimer, even with one woman, so that get only pottered whatever the first mimer was able to accomplish, but there's a whole second part of her, let's say, that wasn't touched, that was unaffected by that first mimer, so the second mimer did accomplish something, and that means she would need a second get.

Whereas im taimahar ein maimah achar maimah, if you want to say there's no maimah after maimah, with one yivamah, so niftar ba'is ha'aget.

That means she's completely potter with that get that she received for the first maimah, and the second maimah is nothing, and she could just go free.

He had said that ain't mimer achar mimer.

That means that mimer isn't effective after another mimer.

For example, Ruvain dies leaving two wives, Shimon did mimer to one, and then did mimer to the other.

Well, the second mimer doesn't accomplish anything, and that's because mimer is a partial kinion, and the first mimer was cut into whatever it was able to, meaning nothing's left over for the second one.

The way to say this is, Whatever the Ma'at was able to accomplish, that first one accomplished, so now there's nothing left over for the second one.

So now coming from that, the Gemara tells us, Is there any validity to a B'yapsula after another B'yapsula? For example, if it's two Yavams falling to one Yavam, he gave Yavam a one again, then he was by all her then he was by all the other yavama so do we say that and the second bia did nothing or maybe not similar question do you say there's any validity to the bia of a nine-year-old yavam after another bia of his when we have the yavam who's a nine-year-old in one day and we know it's officially considered a halakhic bia but it's only a partial kenyan so if he did bia to one yavama and then to the other one does the second one have any validity Similar question, Do we say that Apostle Bia has any effect after the Bia of a nine-year-old or the Bia of a nine-year-old after Bia Pesula? I wouldn't have a clarity on all these questions.

Now, continuing with another level of discussion, Do we say that And they would hold with one Yavama.

They argue with him when there's two women falling to one man.

Over there, they hold a yes maimer, achar maimer, because we're talking about two different women.

So even though we're going to say that maimer was a partial kinion according to the chamim, still, the first one had a partial kinion done to her, but that has nothing to do with the second one.

Well, let's say there's only one yavama and one yavam, and he does maimer to her, and then he does maimer to her again.

Do we say the second one also has effect? or maybe not.

Maybe the Chum would agree to him, Gamaliel, the second one has no sheikhahs.

And we've got to clarify, hey, Chavita, what's the case over here? So Asa Meir Bivimtai, person did Meimer to Yeshiv Amah, then no son-in-law get, and then he gave her a get, but Asa Meimer, then he did Meimer again.

Simtai Meir, yesh Meimer, achar Meimer, if you want to say that one Meimer after another does accomplish something, it does have effect, even when we're dealing with just one Yavama, that means she wasn't potter with that get.

Again, he didn't mimer with her, and then he gave her a get.

Now, if you want to say the yes mimer, even with one woman, so that get only pottered whatever the first mimer was able to accomplish, but there's a whole second part of her, let's say, that wasn't touched, that was unaffected by that first mimer, so the second mimer did accomplish something, and that means she would need a second get.

Whereas im taimahar ein maimah achar maimah, if you want to say there's no maimah after maimah, with one yivamah, so niftar ba'is ha'aget.

That means she's completely potter with that get that she received for the first maimah, and the second maimah is nothing, and she could just go free.