<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Zev Sero <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:zev@sero.name" target="_blank">zev@sero.name</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><a href="mailto:rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com" target="_blank">rabbirichwolpoe@gmail.com</a> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
Extreme Example:<br>
Given that bigamy was an issue for R Gershom's era due to people still<br>
fulfilling yibbum it was banned.<br>
<br>
But since we subsequently abandoned yibbum in favor of halitza - therefore<br>
other bigamy is now OK!<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Waitaminnit, where did you get the idea that ChDrG was motivated by a<br>
problem related to chalitzah? If it had been, then ein hochi nami.</blockquote></div><br>I agree with RZS's challenge on RRW's example. EhE 1:21 even states (despite the opposition of the Rema) that yibbum is an exception to the takanah!<br>
<br>However, Beis Shmuel, citing Hagahos Maimoniyos, states that the reason for the takanah was due to economic reasons, so perhaps RRW's point would still hold.<br>
<br>- Joshua Meisner<br>