יבמות ב׳Yevamot 2

Mishnah

משנה: כֵּיצַד אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ. שְׁנֵי אַחִים וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶם וְנוֹלַד לָהֶן אָח וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִבֵּם הַשֵּׁנִי אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וָמֵת. הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹצֵאת מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ וְהַשְּׁנִיָיה מִשּׁוּם צָרָתָהּ. עָשָׂה בָהּ מַאֲמָר וָמֵת שְׁנִיָיה חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת.

MISHNAH: In which way “the wife of his brother who did not live in his world”? There were two brothers, one of them died, then a brother was born to them, and after that the second brother took his brother’s wife in levirate, and died. The first woman leaves as widow of his brother who did not live in his world and the second one because she is her co-wife. If he had “bespoken” her, the second performs ḥalîṣah but not levirate.

Halakhah

הלכה: כֵּיצַד אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ כול׳. יַחדָּיו. פְּרָט לְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ. דִּלֹא כֵן מַה אֲנָן אָמְרִין. מֵת בְּלֹא בָנִים תְּהֵא אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה לְהִינָּשֵׂא. שֶׁמָּא יוֹלִיד אָבִיו בֵּן וּתְהֵא אִשְׁתּוֹ זְקוּקָה לְיִיבּוּם. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ מֵתָה אִמּוֹ תְּהֵא אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה לְהִינָּשֵׂא. שֶׁמָּא יֵלֵךְ אָבִיו וְיִשָּׂא לוֹ אִשָּׁה אֲחֶרֶת וְיוֹלִיד בֵּן וּתְהֵא אִשְׁתּוֹ זְקוּקָה לְיִיבּוּם. וְיֹאמֶר קִרְיָיה וּבֵן וְאַב אֵין לוֹ. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין כְּשֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעוּבֶּרֶת. שֶׁלֹּא תֹאמַר. אִילּוּ מֵת וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעוּבֶּרֶת שֶׁמָּא אֵינָה צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין וְלֵידַע אִם בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא וְאִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָא. אַף הָכָא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין וְלֵידַע אִם בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא וְאִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָא. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרַךְ מֵימַר יַחדָּיו. פְּרָט לְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ.

HALAKHAH: Why “the wife of his brother who did not live in his world”? “Together”, this excludes the wife of his brother who did not live in his world. Because if it were not so, what would we say? If he died childless, his widow would be forbidden to remarry, for maybe his father would have another son and his widow would then be a candidate for the levirate! Even if [the deceased’s] mother had died, his widow would be forbidden to remarry, [because] maybe the father would go and marry a new wife who could have a son and the widow would then be a candidate for the levirate! Then the verse would have to read: “He has neither father nor son”! One would compare this to the case that he left his widow pregnant; does she not have to wait to know whether the child is viable or not? Here also, should she not have to wait to know whether the child is viable or not? Therefore it was necessary to say “together”; this excludes the wife of his brother who did not live in his world.

יְבָמָהּ יָבֹא עָלֶיהָ. זֶה הַבִּיאָה. וּלְקָחָהּ לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה. זֶה הַמַּאֲמָר. יָכוֹל יְהֵא כְשֵׁם שֶׁהַבִּיאָה גוֹמֶרֶת בָּהּ כָּךְ יְהֵא מַאֲמָר גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר וְיִבְּמָהּ. עוּרָה אֶת כָּל הַפָּרָשָׁה כּוּלָּהּ לְיִיבּוּם. הַבִּיאָה גוֹמֶרֶת בָּהּ וְאֵין הַמַּאֲמָר גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ. אִם כֵּן מַה הוֹעִיל בָּהּ מַאֲמָר. לְאוֹסְרָהּ לָאַחִין.

“Her levir shall come upon her”, that is cohabitation. “And take her as wife for himself”, that is “bespeaking”. I might think that just as cohabitation is final so “bespeaking” is final; the verse says “and act as levir towards her.” This directs the entire paragraph towards levirate. Cohabitation is final, “bespeaking” is not final. Then what is “bespeaking” good for? To forbid her to the brothers.

רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. הַמַּאֲמָר אוֹ קוֹנֶה אוֹ לֹא קוֹנֶה. מַה טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. יְבָמָהּ יָבֹא עָלֶיהָ. זוֹ הַבִּיאָה. וּלְקָחָהּ לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה. זֶה הַמַּאֲמָר. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁהַבִּיאָה גוֹמֶרֶת בָּהּ כָּךְ הַמַּאֲמָר גּוֹמֵר בָּהּ. אוֹ יְבָמָהּ יָבֹא עָלֶיהָ וַהֲרֵי הִיא לְקוּחָה לוֹ וְהַמַּאֲמָר לֹא הוֹעִיל בָּהּ. כְּלוּם.

Rebbi Simeon says, “bespeaking” either acquires or does not acquire. What is the argument of Rebbi Simeon? “Her levir shall come upon her”, that is cohabitation. “And take her as wife for himself”, that is “bespeaking”. Just as cohabitation is final so “bespeaking” is final. Or “her levir shall come upon her”, then she has been acquired by him and “bespeaking” was of no use to her.

רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ אוֹמֵר. הַמַּאֲמָר קוֹנֶה קִנְיָין גָּמוּר בִּיבָמָה. מַה טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ. וּלְקָחָהּ לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה. הֲרֵי הִיא כְקִידּוּשֵׁי אִשָּׁה. מַה קִידּוּשֵׁי אִשָּׁה קוֹנִין קִנְיָין גָּמוּר. אַף הַמַּאֲמָר קוֹנֶה קִנְיָין גָּמוּר בִּיבָמָה. אֵי זוֹ הִיא מַּאֲמָר בִּיבָמָה. הֲרֵי אַתְּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת לִי בְּכֶסֶף וּבְשָׁוֶה כֶסֶף.

Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh says, “bespeaking” acquires a sister-in-law completely. What is the argument of Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh? “And take her as wife for himself”, the same expression is used as for qiddushin of a woman. Just as qiddushin acquire completely, so “bespeaking” acquires a sister-in-law completely. What is the formula for “bespeaking” a sister-in-law? “You are betrothed to me by money or money’s worth.”

בֵּין רַבָּנִין בֵּין רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מוֹדֵיי בָהּ. כְּרַבָּנִין. צַד שֶׁקָּנָה בָהּ מַאֲמָר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ אָסוּר בְּצָרָה. וְצַד שֶׁלּא קָנָה בָהּ מַאֲמָר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ הֵיתֵר בְּצָרָה. לְפִיכָךְ חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. קָנָה מַאֲמָר שְׁתֵּיהֶן מוּתָּרוֹת. לא קָנָה מַאֲמָר הָרִאשׁוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה וְהַשְּׁנִיָיה מוּתֶּרֶת. מִסָּפֵק חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. מַה נְפִיק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. בָּא עַל הַשְּׁנִיָיה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין בִּיאוֹת עֶרְוָה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעָשָׂה בָּהּ מַאֲמָר. הָא אִם לֹא עָשָׂה בָהּ מַאֲמָר מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת וְאֵין לוֹ זִיקָה בָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַיי. קִיַימְתָּהּ בְּהַהוּא דָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בְּאִמָּהּ. זִיקָה הְָיְתָה לוֹ בָהּ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּתָה בָטְלָה זִיקָתָהּ. וְהָכָא כֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּת בָּטְלָה זִיקָתוֹ.

Both the rabbis and Rebbi Simeon agree to the following. According to the rabbis, the aspect which “bespeaking” acquires is forbidden in the co-wife, the aspect which “bespeaking” does not acquire is permitted in the co-wife; therefore, the latter has to have ḥalîṣah but not levirate. According to Rebbi Simeon, if “bespeaking” acquires, both are permitted. If “bespeaking” does not acquire, the first one is forbidden but the second one permitted. Out of doubt, she has to have ḥalîṣah but not levirate. What is the difference between them? If he slept with the second one. In the opinion of the rabbis, an incestuous intercourse because he had “bespoken”. Therefore, if he had not “bespoken” she may have levirate and there is no candidacy at all. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, I explained that following what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If a woman waiting for her levir died, her mother is permitted to him. He had in her an interest of candidacy. When she died, the candidacy was eliminated. And here, when he died, the candidacy was eliminated.

Mishnah

משנה: שְׁנֵי אַחִים וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְיִיבֵּם הַשֵּׁנִי אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד לָהֶן אָח וָמֵת. הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹצֵאת מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ וְהַשְּׁנִיָיה מִשּׁוּם צָרָתָהּ. עָשָׂה בָהּ מַאֲמָר וָמֵת שְׁנִיָיה חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר מְיַיבֶּם לְאֵיזוֹ שֶׁיִּרְצֶה אוֹ חוֹלֵץ לְאֵיזוֹ שֶׁיִּרְצֶה.

MISHNAH: There were two brothers, one of them died and the second took his brother’s widow in levirate; afterwards a brother was born to them, and he died. The first woman leaves as wife of his brother who did not live in his world and the second one as her co-wife. If [the second brother] had bespoken [the widow of the first] when he died, the second performs ḥalîṣah but cannot have levirate. Rebbi Simeon says, he may take in levirate any one he wants or performs ḥalîṣah with any one he wants.

Halakhah

הלכה: שְׁנֵי אַחִים וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶן כול׳. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. הַמַּאֲמָר אוֹ קוֹנֶה אוֹ לֹא קוֹנֶה וְאַתְּ אָמַר אָכֵין. וּמְיַיבְּמִין לְבַעֲלַת מַאֲמָר. וְחָשׁ לוֹמַר שֶׁמָּא לֹא קָנָה מַאֲמָר וְנִמְצָא מִתְחַיֵיב עָלֶיהָ מִשֵּׁם אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ. וְחוֹלְצִין לְבַעֲלַת מַאֲמָר. וְחָשׁ לוֹמַר שֶׁמָּא קָנָה מַאֲמָר וְנִמְצֵאת הַשְּׁנִיָיה זְקוּקָה לוֹ. הֲוֵויי מַה דְאָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן עַל רֵישֵׁיהּ.

HALAKHAH: “If there were two brothers, one of them died”, etc. Rebbi Simeon says, “bespeaking” either acquires or does not acquire, and you say so? May one permit levirate with the “bespoken” woman? One should suspect that “bespeaking” does not acquire; then he would be guilty because of “wife of his brother who did not live in his world.” Can the “bespoken” one perform ḥalîṣah? Should one not suspect that “bespeaking” does acquire; then the second {widow] is a candidate for [the third brother]. It must be that Rebbi Simeon refers to the first case.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה. אַשְׁכָּח תַּנֵּי. עוֹד הִיא בְּמַחֲלוֹקֶת. מַה בֵּין רִאשׁוֹנָה וּמַה בֵּין שְׁנִיָיה. רִאשׁוֹנָה בָּא וּמְצָאָהּ בְּאִיסּוּר. וְהַּשְּׁנִיָיה בָא וּמְצָאָהּ בְּהֵיתֵר. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בָּעֵי. אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ לִפְנֵי אֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק מַה אָמַר בָּהּ רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ בְּהֵיתֵר מוּתֶּרֶת. לֹא אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אֶלָּא עַל יְדֵי אַחִין מִן הָאַב. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֵּן לָקִישׁ בָּעֵי. אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו מֵאִמּוֹ שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ לִפְנֵי אֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק מַה אָמַר בָּהּ רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ בְּהֵיתֵר מוּתֶּרֶת. לֹא אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אֶלָּא עַל יְדֵי אַחִים מֵאָב. רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. צָרַת אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ שֶׁמְּצָאָהּ לִפְנֵי אֶחָד מִן הַשּׁוּק. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּצָאָת בְּהֵיתֵר מוּתֶּרֶת. רִבִּי אָבִין בָּעִין. גְּרוּשָׁה שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית אַלְמָנָה. אַתְּ אָמַר מַה דְאָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן עַל רֹאשָׁהּ.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Simeon agrees in the first case. It was found stated, that also is in disagreement. What is the difference between the first and second cases? In the first case he came and found her forbidden, in the second he came and found her permitted. Rebbi Joḥanan asked, if he found his father’s wife married to an outsider, what does Rebbi Simeon say about her? Because he came and found her permitted, is she permitted? Rebbi Simeon said that only relative to paternal brothers. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked: His maternal halfbrother’s wife which he found married to an outsider, what does Rebbi Simeon say about her? Because he came and found her permitted, is she permitted? Rebbi Simeon said that only relative to paternal brothers. Rebbi Yudan asked, a co-wife of his maternal aunt which he found married to an outsider? Because he came and found her permitted, is she permitted? Rebbi Abin asked, if a divorcee became a widow? You have to say that Rebbi Simeon referred to the first case.

מַה אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּבַעֲלַת מַאֲמָר. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. בִּיאָתָהּ וַחֲלִיצָה שֶׁלְּאַחַת מֵהֶן פּוֹטֶרֶת צָרָתָהּ. וְאִם חָלַץ לְבַעֲלַת מַאֲמָר אַף הַשְּׁנִיָיה צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה. אַתְּ אָמַר. בִּיאָתָהּ אוֹ חֲלִיצָתָהּ שֶׁלְּאַחַת מֵהֶן פּוֹטֶרֶת צָרָתָהּ. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. קָנָה מַאֲמָר שְׁתֵּיהֶן נָשָׁיו. נִפְטְרָה בַּחֲלִיצַת חֲבֵירָתָהּ. לֹא קָנָה מַאֲמָר אֵין הָרִאשׁוֹנָה צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה. וְאִם חָלַץ לְבַעֲלַת מַאֲמָר אַף הַשְּׁנִיָיה צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה. שֶׁמָּא לא קָנָה מַאֲמָר וְלֹא נָגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה וְיִיבּוּם שֶׁמָּא קָנָה מַאֲמָר וְנִפְטְרָה בַּחֲלִיצַת חֲבֵירָתָהּ. מַה נְפִיק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. חָלַץ לָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא עַל הַשְּׁנִיָיה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִין בִּיאַת עֶרְוָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אֵינָהּ בִּיאַת עֶרְוָה. בָּא עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא עַל הַשְּׁנִיָיה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרַבָּנִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה בִּיאַת עֶרְוָה וְהַשְּׁנִיָיה צְרִיכָה גֵט וַחֲלִיצָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁתֵּיהֶן צְרִיכוֹת גֵּט. הָרִאשׁוֹנָה צְרִיכָה גֵט שֶׁמָּא קָנָה מַאֲמָר. וְהַשְּׁנִיָיה צְרִיכָה גֵט שֶׁמָּא קָנָה יִיבּוּם שֶׁמָּא קָנָה מַאֲמָר נִפְטֶרֶת מֵחֲלִיצַת חֲבֵירָתָהּ.

What does Rebbi Simeon say about the “bespoken” woman? Let us hear from the following: “Rebbi Simeon says, the cohabitation or the ḥalîṣah of one of them frees her co-wife but if he performed ḥalîṣah with the “bespoken” woman, her colleague also needs ḥalîṣah. You say, the cohabitation or the ḥalîṣah of one of them frees her co-wife. However one argues, if “bespeaking” acquires, both are his wives and any one of them becomes free by her colleague’s ḥalîṣah. If “bespeaking” does not acquire, the first one does not need ḥalîṣah, but if he performed ḥalîṣah with the “bespoken” one, the second one also needs ḥalîṣah. Maybe “bespeaking” does not acquire, then ḥalîṣah or levirate do not apply to her. Maybe “bespeaking” does acquire; then she is freed by her colleague’s ḥalîṣah. What is the difference between them? If he performed ḥalîṣah with the first and cohabited with the second. In the opinion of the rabbis it was an incestuous cohabitation. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon it was not an incestuous cohabitation. If he cohabited both with the first and the second widow, in the opinion of the rabbis with the first it was incest and the second needs a bill of divorce and ḥalîṣah. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon, both need a bill of divorce. The first one needs a bill of divorce; perhaps the “bespeaking” did acquire. The second one needs a bill of divorce; perhaps levirate did acquire; if “bespeaking” did acquire, she was freed by her colleague’s ḥalîṣah.

רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בְשֵׁם רַב שֵׁשֶׁת. תַּנֵּי תַּמָּן. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שְׁתֵּיהֶן אֲסוּרוֹת. וְקַשְׁיָא. קָנָה מַאֲמָר שְׁתֵּיהֶן מוּתָּרוֹת. לֹא קָנָה מַאֲמָר אֶלָּא זִיקָה. וְקַשְׁיָא. קָנָה זִיקָה שְׁתֵּיהֶן מוּתָּרוֹת. לֹא קָנָה זִיקָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה אֲסוּרָה וְהַשְּׁנִיָיה מוּתֶּרֶת. שֶׁמָּא זִיקַת רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן כְּמַאֲמָר דְּרַבְּנָן. כְּמַה דְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי. הַמַּאֲמָר קָנָה וּמְשַׁיֵיר. כֵּן אָמַר. זִיקָה קוֹנָה וּמְשַׁיֶירֶת. וְקַשְׁיָא. צַד שֶׁקּוֹנָה זִיקָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ אָסוּר בַּצָּרָה. צַד שֶׁלֹּא קָוֹנָה זִיקָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ הֵיתֵר בַּצָּרָה. אָמַר שַׁמַּי. וְכִי וּמַה נַפְשֵׁךְ בָּעֲרָיוֹת. מַהִיא בְּהוֹן. כְּהִיא דְאָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה. כָּל יְבָמָה שֶׁאֵין כּוּלָּהּ לִפְנִים צַד הַקָּנוּי שֶׁבָּהּ נִידוֹן לְשֵׁם עֶרְוָה. וְעֶרְוָה פוֹטֶרֶת צָרָתָהּ.

Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rav Sheshet: There, one stated: The words of Rebbi Simeon are that both are forbidden. This is difficult. If “bespeaking” acquires, are not both permitted? This is a question of acquiring not by “bespeaking” but by candidacy. This is difficult. If candidacy acquires, both are permitted. If candidacy does not acquire, the first one is forbidden but the second permitted. Maybe candidacy for Rebbi Simeon is like “bespeaking” for the rabbis. Just as the rabbis say, “bespeaking” acquires but leaves a remainder, so Rebbi Simeon says, candidacy acquires but leaves a remainder. This is difficult. That aspect which is acquired by candidacy implies a prohibition of an equal part of the co-wife, that part which is not acquired by candidacy implies permission of an equal aspect of the co-wife! Shammai said, is this kind of argument applicable to incest prohibitions? What does he mean? As Rebbi Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya, the aspect acquired in any sister-in-law which is not totally inside [the family] is considered to be under the incest prohibition and an incest prohibition frees her co-wife.

Mishnah

משנה: כְּלָל אָמְרוּ בַּיְבָמָה כָּל שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה אִיסּוּר עֶרְוָה לֹא חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. אִיסּוּרָהּ אִיסּוּר מִצְוָה וְאִיסּוּר קְדוּשָּׁה חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. אֲחוֹתָהּ שֶׁהִיא יְבִמְתָּהּ אוֹ חוֹלֶצֶת אוֹ מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת.

MISHNAH: They formulated a principle about a sister-in-law: Any woman forbidden by an incest prohibition has neither ḥalîṣah nor levirate. If she is forbidden by a commandment prohibition or one of sanctity, she has ḥalîṣah but not levirate. Her sister who is also her sister-in-law has either ḥalîṣah or levirate.

Halakhah

הלכה: כְּלָל אָמְרוּ בַּיְבָמָה כָּל שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. עַד דַּאֲנָן תַּמָּן אַפְקִינָן אַרְבַּע עֶשְׂרֵה מִן דְּעַד אֲחוֹתָהּ שֶׁהִיא יְבִמְתָּהּ מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת חוּץ מִבִּתּוֹ. דְּסַלְקִינָן לְהָכָא שְׁמָעִינָן הָכָא דְתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. דְתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. בִּתּוֹ מֵאֲנוּסָתוֹ נְשׂוּאָה לְאָחִיו מֵאָבִיו וְלָו אָחוֹת מֵאֵם מֵאִישׁ אַחֵר נְשׂוּאָה לְאָחִיו הַשֵּׁינִי וּמֵת בְּלֹא בָנִים. הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר בְּבִתּוֹ וּמוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. הָדָא הִיא אֲחוֹתָהּ כְּשֶׁהִיא יְבִמְתָּהּ מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת.

HALAKHAH: “They formulated a principle about a sister-in-law: Any woman forbidden,” etc. Rebbi Ze‘ira said: When I was still there, we extracted fourteen cases from “her sister which is also her sister-in-law has levirate”, except his daughter. When we came up here, we heard what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, since Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: His daughter from a woman he raped was married to a paternal halfbrother; she also has a maternal sister from a different father married to a second brother who died childless. His daughter is forbidden to him but her sister, who is her sister-in-law, is permitted to him. That is, “her sister which is also her sister-in-law has levirate”.

פְּשִׁיטָא הָדָא מִילְתָא. אִיסּוּר מִצְוָה וְאִיסּוּר קְדוּשָׁה חָלַץ נִפְטְרָה צָרָתָהּ. וּבָא עָלֶיהָ. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה אָמַר. אִיתְפַּלְּגוּן רִבִּי לָעְזָר וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. לֹא נִפְטְרָה צָרָתָהּ. רִבִּי שַׁמַּי מַחְלִף שְׁמוּעָה. מִסְתַּבְּרָא עַל דְּרִבִּי שַׁמַּי דִּבְכָל אָתָר רִבִּי לָעְזָר סָמַךְ לְרִבִּי חִיָיה רַבָּה. דְּתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. אִיסּוּר מִצְוָה אִיסּוּר קְדוּשָׁה חָלַץ לָהּ וּבָא עָלֶיהָ נִפְטְרָה צָרָתָהּ.

It is obvious that if somebody had ḥalîṣah with a woman forbidden by a commandment or because of sanctity, the co-widow was freed. When he had intercourse with her? Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Joḥanan disagree; they say the co-widow was not freed. Rebbi Shammai switches the [names] of this tradition. The position of Rebbi Shammai is reasonable since everywhere Rebbi Eleazar seeks support from the great Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Ḥiyya stated for women forbidden by a commandment or because of sanctity, if he had ḥalîṣah or intercourse with her, the co-widow was freed.

Mishnah

משנה: אִיסּוּר מִצְוָה שְׁנִיּוֹת מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. אִסּוּר קְדוּשָּׁה אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל. וּבַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְנָתִין וּלְמַמְזֵר.

MISHNAH: Commandment prohibition: Secondary prohibitions instituted by the Sopherim. Holiness prohibiton: A widow for the High Priest, a divorcee or one who had ḥalîṣah for a simple priest, a bastard or a Gibeoness to an Israel, a Jewish woman to a Gibeonite or a bastard.

Halakhah

הלכה: אִיסּוּר מִצְוָה עֲרָיוֹת מִדִּיבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים מִצְוָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה לִשְׁמוֹעַ אֶת דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. וְאִיסּוּר קְדוּשָּׁה. אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. אֵלֶּה הַמִּצְוֹת. כָּל שֵׁם מִצְוָה אַחַת. וְקִדַּשְׁתּוֹ כִּי אֶת לֶחֶם אֱלֹהֶיךָ הוּא מַקְרִיב. וְאִית דִּמְחַלְּפִין. אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. אֵלֶּה הַמִּצְוֹת וְכָל שֵׁם מִצְוָה אַחַת. וְאִיסּוּר קְדוּשָּׁה. עֲרָיוֹת מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים.

HALAKHAH: Commandment prohibition: Incest prohibitions instituted by the Sopherim; it is a biblical commandment to listen to the words of the Sopherim. And Holiness prohibition: A widow for the High Priest, a divorcee or one who had ḥalîṣah for a simple priest. “These are the commandments,” all commandments are one. “ You should sanctify him, for he brings the bread of your God.” But some do switch: A widow for the High Priest, a divorcee or one who had ḥalîṣah for a simple priest, “you should sanctify him, for he brings the bread of your God.” “These are the commandments,” all commandments are one. And holiness prohibitions, incest prohibitions instituted by the Sopherim.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן פָּזִי. וְלָמָּה סָמַךְ הַכָּתוּב פָּרָשַׁת עֲרָיוֹת לְפָרָשַׁת קִידּוּשִׁין. לְלַמְּדָךְ שֶׁכָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא פּוֹרֵשׁ מִן הָעֲרָיוֹת נִקְרָא קָדוֹשׁ. שֶׁכֵּן שׁוּנַמִּית אוֹמֶרֶת לְאִישָׁהּ הִנֵּה נָא יָדַעְתִּי כִּי אִישׁ אֱלֹהִים קָדוֹשׁ הוּא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה קָדוֹשׁ הוּא. וְאֵין תַּלְמִידוֹ קָדוֹשׁ. רִבִּי אָבִין אָמַר. שֶׁלֹּא הִבִּיט בָּהּ. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרִין. שֶׁלֹּא רָאָה טִיפַּת קֶרִי מִיָּמָיו. אַמָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק אָמְרָה. מִן יוֹמוֹי לָא חָמַת מִילָּה בִּישָׁא עַל מָנוֹי דְמָרִי. כְּתִיב וַיִגַּשׁ גֵּיחֲזִי לְהָדְפָהּ. מַהוּ לְהָדְפָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה בֶּן חֲנִינָה. שֶׁנָּתַן יָדוֹ בְּהוֹד שֶׁבְּיוֹפְיָהּ. בֵּין דַּדֶּיהָ.

Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, why did Scripture put the incest chapter next to the holiness chapter? To teach you that every one who shies away from incest is called “holy”. In this sense, the woman of Shunem said to her husband: “ Lo, I know that he is a holy man of God”. Rebbi Jonah said, “he is holy”, but not his student. Rebbi Abin said, that he never looked at her. But the rabbis say that he he never had an involuntary emission. {The slave girl of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, I never saw a bad thing on my master’s garments.} It is written “Geḥazi drew near to push her away”. What is לְהָדְפָהּ? Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, he put his hand on her beauty spot, between her breasts.

מְנַיִין לִשְׁנִיּוֹת. רִבִּי חוּנָה אָמַר. הָאֵל. קָשׁוֹת. מִיכָּן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְמַטָּה מֵהֶן. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן הַשְּׁנִיּוֹת. אֵם אָבִיו. אֵם אִמּוֹ. אֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אָבִיו. וְאֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ. אֵשֶׁת בֶּן בְּנוֹ. וְאֵשֶׁת בֶּן בִּתּוֹ. אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אִמּוֹ. וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו מֵאִמּוֹ.

How can one prove secondary prohibitions? Rebbi Ḥuna said: “These”, the strong ones. This implies that there are weaker ones. The following are the secondary prohibitions: His paternal grandmother and his maternal grandmother, his paternal grandfather’s wife and his maternal grandfathers wife, his grandson’s wife whether from son or daughter, the wife of his mother’s brother and the wife of his father’s maternal brother.

תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי חָנִין אוֹמֵר. כּוֹלְהוֹן אֵין לָהֶן הֶפְסֵק חוּץ מֵאֵשֶׁת אָבִיו מֵאִמּוֹ. בַּר קַפָּרָא אָמַר. כּוֹלְהוֹן יֵשׁ לָהֶן הֶפְסֵק. דְּבַר קַפָּרָא מוֹסִיף אֵם אֲבִי אִמּוֹ וְאֵם אֲבִי אָבִיו. רַב אָמַר. כַּלַּת בְּנוֹ יֵשׁ לָהּ הֶפְסֵק. מַה פַּלִּיג. כַּלַּת בְּנוֹ מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר בָּאָת. רַב אָמַר. זֶרַע הַיּוֹצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ אָסוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. טַעֲמָא דְרַב. אַבְרָהָם אָסוּר בְּכָל נְשֵׁי יִשְׂרָאֵל. שָׂרָה אֲסוּרָה בְכָל אַנְשֵׁי יִשְׂרָאֵל.

It was stated: Rebbi Ḥanin said, all of them have no limit except for the wife of his maternal grandfather. Bar Qappara said, all of them have a limit, since Bar Qappara added the mother of his maternal grandfather and the mother of his paternal grandfather. Rav said, his son’s daughter-in-law is the limit. Why does he disagree? His son’s daughter-in-law comes under a different category. Rav said, his [grandson’s] issue from her is forbidden. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the reason of Rav is that all Jewish women are forbidden for Abraham and all Jewish men are forbidden for Sarah.

רַב אָמַר. כָּל שֶׁאִילּוּ נְקֵיבָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֲסוּרָה כְּיוֹצֵא בוֹ זָכָר אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. אֲחוֹת אָבִיו נְקֵיבָה אֲסוּרָה. אֲחִי אָבִיו זָכָר אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ נְקֵיבָה אֲסוּרָה. אֲחִי אִמּוֹ זָכָר אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. בַּת בְּנוֹ נְקֵיבָה אֲסוּרָה. בֶּן בְּנוֹ זָכָר אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. בַּת בִּתּוֹ נְקֵיבָה אֲסוּרָה. בֶּן בִּתּוֹ זָכָר אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲסוּרָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב דְּרוֹמַיָיא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אִית לָךְ אַף תַּרְתֵּי. אִמּוֹ תּוֹרָה. אֵם אִמּוֹ שְׁנִיָיה לָהּ. אָסְרוּ אֵם אָבִיו מִפְּנֵי אֵם אִמּוֹ. אֵשֶׁת בְּנוֹ תוֹרָה. אֵשֶׁת בֶּן בּנְוֹ שְׁנִיָיה לָהּ. אָסְרוּ אֵשֶׁת בֶּן בִּתּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אֵשֶׁת בֶּן בְּנוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי מַּתַּנְיָיא. אִית לָךְ אַף תַּרְתֵּי. אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו תּורָה. אֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אָבִיו שְׁנִיָּה לָהּ. אָסְרוּ אֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אָבִיו. אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו מֵאָבִיו תּוֹרָה. אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו מֵאִמּוֹ שְׁנִיָיה לָהּ. אָסְרוּ אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אִמּוֹ מֵאִמּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו מֵאִמּוֹ.

Rav said: In all cases where the female is forbidden by the Torah, the wife of the corresponding male is forbidden. The father’s sister is forbidden as female; the wife of the father’s brother, the corresponding male, is forbidden. The mother’s sister is forbidden as female; the wife of the mother’s brother, the corresponding male, is forbidden His son’s daughter is forbidden as female; the wife of his son’s son, the corresponding male, is forbidden His daughter’s daughter is forbidden as female; the wife of his daughter’s son, the corresponding male, is forbidden Rebbi Jacob the Southerner said before Rebbi Yose, there are another two. His mother is biblical. His mother’s mother is secondary to her. They forbade his father’s mother because of his mother’s mother. His son’s wife is biblical. His son’s son’s wife is secondary to her. They forbade his daughter’s son’s wife because of his son’s son’s wife. Rebbi Mattaniah said, there are another two. His father’s wife is biblical. His paternal grandfather’s wife is secondary to her. They forbade his maternal grandfather’s wife because of his paternal grandfather’s wife. His father’s paternal brother’s wife is biblical. His father’s maternal brother’s wife is secondary to her. They forbade his mother’s maternal halfbrother’s wife because of his father’s maternal brother’s wife.

רִבִּי חוּנָה שָׁמַע כּוֹלְהוֹן מִן הָדָא קִרְיָיא עֶרְוַת אִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ לֹא תְגַלֵּה אֶת בַּת בְּנָהּ וְאֶת בַּת בִּתָּהּ. זִימָּה זִימָּה לִגְזֵירָה שָׁוָה. מַה לְמַטָּן שְׁלֹֹשָׁה דוֹרוֹת. אַף לְמַעֲלָן שְׁלֹשָׁה דוֹרוֹת. מַה לְמַטָּן בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. אַף לְמַעֲלָן בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. מַה לְמַעֲלָן דֶּרֶךְ נִישּׂוּאִין. אַף לְמַטָּן דֶּרֶךְ נִישּׂוּאִין. מַה לְמַעֲלָן בִּשְׂרֵיפָה. אַף לְמַטָּן בִּשְׂרֵיפָה. מַה לְמַטָּן עָשָׂה בַת זָכָר כְּבַת נְקֵיבָה. אַף לְמַעֲלָן עָשָׂה אֵם זָכָר כְּאֵם נְקֵיבָה. מָה אִית לָךְ לִמֵימָר. אֵם חָמִיו וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ. לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵם אָבִיו כְּאֵם חָמִיו. לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵם אִמּוֹ כְּאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ. אָסְרוּ אֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אָבִיו מִפְּנֵי אֵם אָבִיו. אָסְרוּ אֵשֶׁת אֲבִי אִמּוֹ מִפְּנֵי אֵם אִמּוֹ. לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת בֶּן בְּנוֹ כְּבַת בֶּן אִשֶׁתּוֹ. לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת בֶּן בִּתּוֹ כְּבַת בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ.

Rebbi Ḥuna understood all of them from this verse: “The genitals of a woman and her daughter you should not uncover; her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter.” Taboo - taboo, for an equal cut. Since there are three generations downwards, so there are three generations upwards. Since there is a prohibition downwards, so there is a prohibition upwards. Since upwards one requires marriage, so downwards one requires marriage. Since upwards they are burned, so downwards they are burned. Since downwards, He gave the male’s daughter the same status as the female’s daughter, so upwards He gave the male’s mother the same status as the female’s mother. What is this about? His father-in-law’s mother and his mother-in-law’s mother. Should not his father’s mother be like his father-in-law’s mother? Should not his mother’s mother be like his mother-in-law’s mother? They forbade his father’s father’s wife because of his father’s mother. They forbade his mother’s father’s wife because of his mother’s mother. Should not his son’s son’s wife be like his wife’s son’s daughter? Should not his daughter’s son’s wife be like his wife’s daughter’s daughter?

הָתִיב רִבִּי חַגַּיי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְהָא מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. מוּתָּר הוּא אָדָם בְּאֵשֶׁת חוֹרְגוֹ וְאָסוּר בְּבִתּוֹ. אֶלָּא חוֹרְגָתוֹ שֶׁמָּא אֵינוֹ אָסוּר בָּהּ. הֲרֵי חוֹרְגוֹ זָכָר וְאִשְׁתּוֹ מוּתֶּרֶת.

Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose: Does not a baraita contradict Rav? “A person’s stepson’s wife is permitted to him but the latter’s daughter is forbidden.” Is his stepdaughter not forbidden to him? The stepson is the corresponding male but his wife is permitted!

רִבִּי זְרִיקָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. אֵשֶׁת חָמִיו אֲסוּרָה מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן. אִי תֵימָר תּוֹרָה. הֲרֵי דָוִד שֶׁנָּשָׂא רִצְפָּה בַּת אַיָּה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַאֶתְּנָה לְךָ אֶת בֵּית אֲדוֹנֶיךָ וְאֶת נְשֵׁי אֲדוֹנֶיךָ בְּחֵיקֶיךָ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שְׁנֵי חוֹרְגִים שֶׁגָּדְלוּ בְבַיִת אֶחָד אֲסוּרִין לְהִינָּשֵׂא מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן. אָתָא עוֹבְדָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. אָמַר. יִסְבּוֹן בְּאָתָר דְּלָא חָכְמִין לְהוֹן.

Rebbi Zeriqan in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: His father-in-law’s wife is forbidden because of the bad impression. If you want to say it is biblical, did not David marry Riṣpah bat Ayyah? As it was said: “I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives in your bosom.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Two stepchildren who grow up in the same house are forbidden to marry because of the bad impression. A case came before Rebbi Ḥanina ben Rebbi Abbahu. He said, they should marry in a place where they are not known.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. אִם עָבַר הַזָּקֵן וּנְשָׂאָהּ. מַה עָבַר. עָבַר עַל דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הָדָא אָמְרָה. שְׁנִיּוֹת אֵין לָהֶן הֶפְסֵק. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְכִי שְׁנִיָיה לִשְׁנִיּוֹת שָׁנִינוּ לֹא שְׁנִיָיה לְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה. וְכוּלְּהוֹן מִשּׁוּם כַּלַּת בְּנוֹ. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּהּ בְשֵׁם יוֹנָה. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ לֹא אָמַר כֵּן אֶלָּא רִבִּי לָעְזָר שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שְׁמוֹנֶה שְׁנִּיּוֹת שָׁנִינוּ וְזֶה הֲרֵי תֵשַׁע וְכוּלְּהוֹן מִשּׁוּם כַּלַּת בְּנוֹ.

There, we have stated: “Rebbi Yose says, if the grandfather transgressed and married her.” What did he transgress? He transgressed the words of the Sopherim. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, he asked Rebbi Joḥanan: Does this mean that secondary prohibitions have no limit? He said to him, did we learn “secondaries to secondaries”? No. Secondaries to the words of the Torah, and all of them because of his son’s daughter-in-law. Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Abbahu did not say so, but Rebbi Eleazar asked Rebbi Joḥanan, did we not learn of eight secondaries, and here they are nine! But all of them because of his son’s daughter-in-law.

Mishnah

משנה: מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אָח מִכָּל מָקוֹם זוֹקֵק אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו לַיִיבּוּם וְאָחִיו לוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר חוּץ מִמִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַשִּׁפְחָה וּמִן הַנָּכְרִית.

MISHNAH: Any [male] who has a brother anywhere makes his brother’s wife a candidate for levirate and he is his brother in every respect, except if he were from a slave woman or a non-Jew.

Mishnah

משנה: מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵּן מִכָּל מָקוֹם פּוֹטֵר אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו מִן הַיִיבּוּם וְחַיָיב עַל מַכָּתוֹ וְעַל קִלְלָתוֹ וּבְנוֹ לוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר חוּץ מִמִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַשִּׁפְחָה וּמִן הַנָּכְרִית.

MISHNAH: Any person who has a child anywhere frees [the child’s] father’s wife from levirate; [the child] would be guilty for wounding or cursing [the father]; he is his child in every respect except if he were from a slave woman or a non-Jew.

Halakhah

הלכה: מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵּן מִכָּל מָקוֹם כול׳. רִבִּי אָבִין בָּעֵי וּבְנוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר. אֲפִילוּ לְפִירְיָיה וְרִבְיָיה. וְלֹא שַׁנְיָיה בֵּן גוֹי שֶׁבָּא עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיָלְדָה. בֵּן יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבָּא עַל גוֹיָה וְיָלְדָה. משום בת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיָלְדָה. בְּכוֹר לְנַחֲלָה וְאֵינוֹ בְּכוֹר לַכֹּהֵן.

HALAKHAH: “Any person who has a child anywhere”, etc. Rebbi Avin asked: “His child in every respect”, even for being fruitful and multiplying? Is there no difference between a Gentile who came to a Jewish woman and she gave birth and a Jew who came to a Gentile woman and she gave birth? “When she became Jewish and gave birth it is a first-born for inheritance but not a first-born for the Cohen.”

גּוֹי שֶׁבָּא עַל גּוֹיָה וְיָלְדָה. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. גוֹיִם יֵשׁ לָהֶם יְחָסִים. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. גוֹיִם אֵין לָהֶן יְחָסִין. וְהָא כְתִיב בָּעֵת הַהִיא שָׁלַח מְרוֹדָךְ בַּלְאֲדָן בֶּן בַּלְאֲדָן מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל סְפָרִים וּמִנְחָה אֶל חִזְקִיָּהוּ. עַל יְדֵי שֶׁכִּיבֵּד זְקֵינוֹ זָכָה לְהִתְיָחֵס. וְהָא כְתִיב וַיִּשְׁלַח הַמֶּלֶךְ אָסָא אֶל בֶּן הֲדַד בֶּן טַבְרִימוֹן בֶּן חֶזָיוֹן מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם הַיּוֹשֵׁב בְּדַמֶשֶׂק לֵאמֹר. קוֹצֵץ בֶּן קוֹצֵץ. כְּמָה דְּאַתּ אָמַר כִּי הָמָן בֶּן הַמְדָתָא. וְכִי בֶּן הַמְדָתָא הָיָה. אֶלָּא צוֹרֵר בֶּן צוֹרֵר. אוּף הָכָא קוֹצֵץ בֶּן קוֹצֵץ. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. כָּךְ מֵשִׁיב רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אֶת רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. וְהָא כְתִיב וּלְצִיבָא שִׁשָּׁה עָשָׂר בָּנִים וְעֶשְׂרִים עֲבָדִים. וַעֲבָדִים יֵשׁ לָהֶן יִיחוּס. בָּא לִמְנוֹת שׁוֹמְטִין שֶׁלִּמְפִיבוֹשֶׁת.

A Gentile came to a Gentile woman and she gave birth. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Gentiles have family relationships. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, Gentiles have no family relationships. But is it not written: “At that time, Merodakh-Baladan, son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a gift to Ḥizqiah.” Since he honored his elder, he was honored with a family relationship. But is it not written: “At that time, king Asa sent to Ben-Hadad, son of Tabrimon, son of Ḥezayon, king of Damascus, as follows.” Destroyer son of a destroyer. As you say: “For Haman ben Hamedata was”. Was he the son of Hamedata? That means, oppressor son of an oppressor. So here also, destroyer son of a destroyer. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, so did Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish answer Rebbi Joḥanan, but is there not written: “Ṣiba had sixteen sons and twenty slaves.” Do slaves have family relationships? It is to enumerate those who served Mephiboshet together.

שִׁפְחָה. הָאִשָּׁה וִילָדֶיהָ תִּהְיֶה לַאדוֹנֶיהָ. נָכְרִית. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. כְּתִיב לֹא תִּתְחַתֵּן בָּם וּכְתִיב כִּי יָסִיר אֶת בִּנְךָ מֵאַחֲרַי. בִּנְךָ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵלִית קָרוּי בִּנְךָ. וְאֵין בִּנְךְ מִגּוֹיָה קָרוּי בִּנְךָ אֶלָּא בְּנָהּ.

A slave woman: “The woman and her children shall belong to her owner.” A Gentile woman. Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Sineon ben Ioḥai, it is written: “You shall not conclude marriage with them”. And it is written: “For he will divert your son from after Me.” Your son from a Jewish woman is called your son; but your son from a Gentile woman is not called your son but her son.

יַעֲקֹב אִישׁ כְּפַר נַבּוֹרַיָּה אֲזַל לְצוֹר. אַתּוֹן שָׁאֲלִין לֵיהּ. מַהוּ מִיגְזָר בְּרֵיהּ דַּאֲרָמִיָיתָא בְּשׁוּבְתָּא וְסָבַר מִישְׁרֵי לוֹן מִן הָדָא וַיִתְיַלְּדוּ עַל מִשְׁפְּחוֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבוֹתָם. שָׁמַע רִבִּי חַגַּיי אָמַר. יֵיתֵי. אַיְיתוּנֵיהּ דְּיִלְקֵי. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מֵאֵיכָן אַתָּה מַלְקֵינִי. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִן הָדָא דִכְתִיב וְעַתָּה נִכְרוֹת בְּרִית לֵאלֹהֵינוּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִן הַקַּבָּלָה אַתְּ מַלְקֵינִי. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְכַתּוֹרָה יֵעָשֶׂה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִן הֵדָא אוֹרַיָיה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִן הַהִיא דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. כְּתִיב לֹא תִּתְחַתֵּן בֶּם וּכְתִיב כִּי יָסִיר אֶת בִּנְךָ מַאַחֲרַיי. בִּנְךָ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵלִית קָרוּי בִּנְךָ. וְאֵין בִּנְךְ מִגּוֹיָה קָרוּי בִּנְךָ אֶלָּא בְּנָהּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. חֲבוֹט חַבְטָךְ דְּהוּא טָבָא בְּקֻלְטָא.

Jacob from Kefar Naboraia went to Tyre. They came to ask him, may one circumcise the son of a Gentile woman on the Sabbath? He wanted to permit it from the verse: “They determined their genealogies for their families according to their fathers’ houses.” Rebbi Ḥaggai heard it and said, he shall come. They brought him in order to be whipped. He said to him, for what reason do you whip me? He said, from what is written: “Now we shall make a covenant for our God”. He said, you want to whip me based on tradition? He said, “and it should be done according to the Torah.” He said to him, from which teaching? He said, from that which Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai, it is written: “You shall not conclude marriage with them”. And it is written: “For he will divert your son from after Me.” Your son from a Jewish woman is called your son; but your son from a Gentile woman is not called your son but her son. He said to him, whip your whipping, because it is good to impress.

Mishnah

משנה: מִי שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ אַחַת מִשִִּׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן קִידֵּשׁ נוֹתֵן גֵט לָזוֹ וְגֵט לָזוֹ. מֵת ולוֹ אָח אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן. הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנַיִם אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ וְאֶחָד מְיַיבֵּם. קָדְמוּ וְכָנְסוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדָם.

MISHNAH: If somebody gave qiddushin to one of two sisters but he does not know to which one of them, he gives a bill of divorce to each. If he died and has one brother, that one has to perform ḥalîṣah with both sisters. If he had two [brothers], one performs ḥalîṣah and one may marry in levirate. If both married without asking, one does not remove [the women] from them.

Halakhah

הלכה: מִי שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ אַחַת מִשְּׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מֵהֶן קִידֵּשׁ נוֹתֵן גֵט לָזוֹ וְגֵט לָזוֹ. מֵת ולוֹ אָח אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן. בְּכָל אָתָר אַתְּ אָמַר. אֵין חֲלִיצָה אַחַר חֲלִיצָה. וְהָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר הָכֵין. כָּאן בְּוַודַּאי כָּאן בְּסָפֵק. הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנַיִם אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ וְאֶחָד מְיַיבֵּם. בְּכָל אָתָר אַתְּ אָמַר. בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁאוֹמְרִים לוֹ. יַיבֵּם. אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. וְהָכָא אָמַר אָכֵין. כָּאן בְּוַדַּאי כָּאן בְּסָפֵק. קָדְמוּ וְכָנְסוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדָן.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody gave qiddushin to one of two sisters but he does not know to which one of them, he gives a bill of divorce to each. If he died and has one brother, that one has to perform ḥalîṣah with both sisters.” Everywhere else you say “there cannot be ḥalîṣah after ḥalîṣah” but here you say so? There if it is certain, here one is in doubt. “If he had two [brothers], one performs ḥalîṣah and one may marry in levirate.” Everywhere else you say, in any case one asks him to perform the levirate one does not say perform ḥalîṣah; but here you say so? There if it is certain, here one is in doubt. “If both married without asking, one does not remove [the women] from them.”

Mishnah

משנה: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁקִידְּשׁוּ שְׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת זֶה אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ קִידֵּשׁ וְזֶה אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ קִידֵּשׁ. זֶה נוֹתֵן שְׁנֵי גִיטִּין וְזֶה נוֹתֵן שְׁנֵי גִיטִּין. מֵתוּ לָזֶה אָח וְלָזֶה אָח זֶה חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן וְזֶה חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן. לָזֶה אֶחָד וְלָזֶה שְׁנַיִם. הַיָּחִיד חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן וְהַשְׁנַיִים אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ וְאֶחָד מְיַיבֶּם. קָדְמוּ וְכָנְסוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדָן.

MISHNAH: If two [men] gave qiddushin to two sisters and neither of them knows to which one he gave his, each one of them gives two bills of divorce. If they died and each one had a brother, each [brother] performs ḥalîṣah with both [sisters]. If one had one [brother] but the other had two, the single one performs ḥalîṣah with both [sisters], but of the two brothers one performs ḥalîṣah and the other may marry in levirate. If both married without asking, one does not remove [the women] from them.

Halakhah

הלכה: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁקִידְּשׁוּ שְׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת כול׳. תַּנֵּי. אֶחָד יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶחָד כֹּהֲנִים כְּסֶדֶר הַזֶּה. הָדָא דְּאַתְּ אָמַר בְּשֶׁחָלַץ וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִיבֵּם. אֲבָל אִם יִיבֵּם בַּתְּחִילָּה אָסוּר. שֶׁמָּא יָמוּת אָחִיו וְנִמְצָא כְּבָא עַל אֲחוֹת יְבִמְתּוֹ. אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא. הָדָא אָמְרָה הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹת יְבִימְתּוֹ לֹא פְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר בָּא. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹת חֲלוּצָתוֹ לֹא פְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָה.

HALAKHAH: “If two [men] gave qiddushin to two sisters,” etc. It was stated: These rules apply both for Israel and for Cohanim. That is, if ḥalîṣah was performed first and the levirate afterwards. But to perform levirate first is forbidden; maybe his brother will die and it will turn out that he cohabited with the sister of his sister-in-law. Rav Ḥisda said, that means that having relations with the sister of his sister-in-law does not make her unfit for [marriage into] priesthood. Rebbi Yose bar Abba said, Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: He who cohabited with the sister of a woman for whom he had performed ḥalîṣah did not make her unfit for [marriage into] priesthood.

מֵתוּ לָזֶה אָח וְלָזֶה אָח זֶה חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן וְזֶה חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן. בְּכָל אָתָר אַתְּ אָמַר. אֵין חֲלִיצָה אַחַר חֲלִיצָה. וְהָכָא אָמַר אָכֵין. כָּאן בְּוַודַּאי כָּאן בְּסָפֵק. לָזֶה אֶחָד וְלָזֶה שְׁנַיִם. הַיְּחִידִי חוֹלֵץ לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן וְהַשְּׁנַיִם אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ ואֶחָד מְיַיבֶּם. בְּכָל אָתָר אַתְּ אָמַר. כָל מָקוֹם שֶׁ(אֵין) אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. יַיבֵּם. אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. וְהָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר אָכֵין. כָּאן בְּוַודַּאי כָּאן בְּסָפֵק. קָדְמוּ וְכָנְסוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדָן.

“If they died and each one had a brother, each [brother] performs ḥalîṣah with both [sisters]. Everywhere else you say “there cannot be ḥalîṣah after ḥalîṣah” but here you say so? There if it is certain, here one is in doubt. “If one had one [brother] but the other had two, the single one performs ḥalîṣah with both [sisters], but of the two brothers one performs ḥalîṣah and the other may marry in levirate. Everywhere else you say, in any case one asks him to perform the levirate one does not say perform ḥalîṣah; but here you say so? There if it is certain, here one is in doubt. “If both married without asking, one does not remove [the women] from them.”

Mishnah

משנה: לָזֶה שְׁנַיִם וְלָזֶה שְׁנַיִם אָחִיו שֶׁלָּזֶה חוֹלֵץ לָאַחַת וְאָחִיו שֶׁלָּזֶה חוֹלֵץ לָאַחַת. אָחִיו שֶׁל זֶה מְיַיבֵּם חֲלוּצָתוֹ שֶׁלָּזֶה. וְאָחִיו שֶׁל זֶה מְיַיבֵּם חֲלוּצָתוֹ שֶׁלָּזֶה. קָדְמוּ הַשְּׁנַיִם וְחָלְצוּ לֹא יְיַבְּמוּ הַשְּׁנַיִם אֶלָּא אֶחָד חוֹלֵץ וְאֶחָד מְיַיבֵּם. קָדְמוּ וְכָנְסוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדָם.

MISHNAH: If each [of the deceased] had two brothers, one brother of each [of the deceased] performs ḥalîṣah with one [of the sisters] and the other brother takes the other [sister] in levirate. If two [brothers] both performed ḥalîṣah, the other two should not [both] marry in levirate but one of them performs ḥalîṣah and the other one may take in levirate. If both married without asking, one does not remove [the women] from them.

Halakhah

הלכה: לָזֶה שְׁנַיִם וְלָזֶה שְׁנַיִם כול'. הָדָא דְאַתְּ אָמַר בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל אֲבָל בְּכֹהֲנִים אָסוּר.

HALAKHAH: “If each [of the deceased] had two brothers”. That is, for Israel, but for Cohanim they are forbidden.

Mishnah

משנה: מִצְוָה בַגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֶּם וְאִם קָדַם הַקָּטָן זָכָה. הַנִּטְעָן עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה וְנִשְׁתַּחְרְרָה אוֹ עַל הַנָּכְרִית וְנִתְגַּיְירָה הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִכְנוֹס וְאִם כָּנַס אֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדוֹ. הַנִּטְעָן עַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְהוֹצִיאוּהָ מִתַּחַת יָדוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּנַס יוֹצִיא.

MISHNAH: The obligation of levirate is on the oldest [brother] but if a younger one got the start on him, he acquired. If somebody is accused in matters of a slave woman and she was manumitted, or of a Gentile and she converted, he should not marry her but if he married her one does not remove her from him. If somebody is accused in matters of a married woman and she was forcibly divorced from [her husband], even if he married her he must divorce her.

Halakhah

הלכה: מִצְוָה בַגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֶּם וְאִם קָדַם הַקָּטָן זָכָה כול׳. מִצְוָה בַגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֶּם. שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר אֲשֶׁר תֵּלֵד. מַה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּנוֹלָד. יֹאמַר קִרְיָיא יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָבִיו הַמֵּת. אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא הַנּוֹלָד בְּכוֹר. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ הָיוּ לוֹ בָנִים וּמֵתוּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הוּא לֹא תִהְיֶה אִשְׁתּוֹ זְקוּקָה לְיִיבּוּם. וְיֹאמַר קִרְיָיה וּבָנִים לֹא הָיוּ לוֹ. אֶלָּא אִם אֵינוֹ עִנְיָין לַנּוֹלָד תְּנֵיהוּ עִנְיָין לַמְיַיבֶּם. מִצְוָה בַגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֶּם.

HALAKHAH: “The obligation of levirate is on the oldest [brother] but if a younger one got the start on him, he acquired, etc.” “The obligation of levirate is on the oldest,” since it is said, “the firstborn she will bear shall …”. How do we hold? If about the newborn, the verse should read “he should rise in the name of his dead father.” But it must be that the newborn is a firstborn. In that case, even if he had children and they died before he died, his widow should not be a candidate for levirate! Then the verse should have said, “he never had children”. But if it cannot refer to the newborn; let it refer to the levir, “the obligation of levirate is on the oldest.”

הַנִּטְעָן עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה וְנִשְׁתַּחְרְרָה אוֹ עַל הַנָּכְרִית וְנִתְגַּיְירָה הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִכְנוֹס. קִידֵּשׁ כְּמִי שֶׁכָּנַס. אָמַר [מִדִּין] שֶׁלֹּא לִכְנוֹס וְכָנַס מוֹצִיאוֹ מִיָּדוֹ. גֵּירַשׁ מַהוּ שֶׁיַּחֲזִיר. אִם אוֹמֵר אַתְּ כֵּן לֹא נִמְצֵאת מוֹצִיא לִיזָה עַל בָּנֶיהָ. הַנִּטְעָן עַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ. רַב אָמַר בְּנִטְעָן בְּעֵדִים. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בָּעֵי. אִם בְּנִטְעָן בְּעֵדִים בְּהָא תַנֵּי [וְהוֹצִיאָהּ] מִתַּחַת יָדוֹ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּנַס יוֹצִיא. וּמִתַּחַת יְדֵי אַחֵר יְקַיֵים. אִם נִטְעָן בְּעֵדִים אֲפִילוּ מִתַּחַת יְדֵי אַחֵר יוֹצִיא. אֶלָּא כֵּן אֲנָן קַיָימִין בְּנִטְעָן שֶׁלֹּא בְעֵדִים [וְהוֹצִיאָהּ] מִתַּחַת יְדֵי אַחֵר יְקַיֵים.

“If somebody is accused in matters of a slave woman and she was manumitted, or of a Gentile and she converted, he should not marry her but if he married her one does not remove her from him.” If he agreed lawfully not to marry her and [nevertheless] married her, she is forcibly removed from him. If he divorced her, may he take her back? If you would say that, would you not defame her children? “If somebody is accused in matters of a married woman,” Rav said, that is, he was accused by witnesses. Rebbi Yose asked, if he was accused by witnesses, is that what was stated: If he divorced her, even if he married her, he must divorce her? If somebody else divorced her, he can keep her! If he was accused by witnesses, even if somebody else divorced her, he must divorce her! But that is what we deal with: If he was accused not by witnesses, if somebody else divorced her, he may keep her.

Mishnah

משנה: הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְאָמַר בְּפָנַי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַי נֶחְתַּם לֹא יִשָּׂא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. מֵת הֲרַגְתִּיו אוֹ הֲרַגְנוּהוּ לֹא יִשָּׂא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר הֲרַגְתִּיו לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא אִשְׁתּוֹ הֲרַגְנוּהוּ תִּינָּשֵׂא אִשְׁתּוֹ.

MISHNAH: If somebody brings a bill of divorce from overseas and says “it was written and signed in my presence”, he shall not marry the wife. “He died”, “I killed him”, or “we killed him”, he shall not marry the wife. Rebbi Jehudah said, “I killed him”, the wife cannot be married, “we killed him”, the wife can be married.

Halakhah

הלכה: הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְאָמַר. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתַּם כול׳. מַהוּ נֶאֱמָן. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. נֶאֳמָן לִיתֵּן גֵּט. אַסִּי אָמַר נֶאֱמָן לִכְנוֹס. רַב הוּנָא אָמַר בְּשֵׁם רַב. נֶאֱמָן לִכְנוֹס. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר נֶאֱמָן לִכְנוֹס וְאֵין לְמֵידִין הִימֶּינּוּ דָבָר אַחֵר. מַהוּ אֵין לְמֵידִין הִימֶּינּוּ דָבָר אַחֵר. אַחַת מִשָּׂדוֹתַיי מָכַרְתִּי וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ לְמִי מָכַרְתִּיהָ. וּבָא אֶחָד וְאָמַר. אֲנִי הוּא שֶׁלְּקַחְתִּיהָ. לֹא כָל הֵימֵינוֹ. אַף בְּקִידּוּשִׁין כֵּן. אַחַת מִבְּנוֹתַיי קִידַּשְׁתִּי וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ לְמִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. וּבָא אֶחָד וְאָמַר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְתִּיהָ. לֹא כָל הֵימֵינוֹ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. הַמֵּבִיא גֵט מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וְאָמַר. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתַּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתַּם. לֹא יִשָּׂא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. תַּמָּן הוּחְזְקָה אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ בִּפְנֵי הַכֹּל. בְּרַם הָכָא לֹא הוּחְזְקָה אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ אֶלָּא בִּפְנֵי שְׁנַיִם. לִכְשֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ שְׁנַיִם וְיֹאמְרוּ. זֶה הוּא שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. זֶה אוֹמֵר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. שְׁנֵיהֶן נוֹתְנִין גֵּט. וְאִם רָצוּ אֶחָד נוֹתֵן גֵּט וְאֶחָד כּוֹנֵס. פָּתַר לָהּ בְּאוֹמֵר. לְאֶחָד מִשְּׁנֵי אֵילּוּ קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵי זֶה הוּא. רִבִּי זְעִירָא רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. קָדַם אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְכָנַס (אֵין) מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדוֹ. הָדָא דְאַתְּ אָמַר. בְּשֶׁזֶּה אוֹמֵר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. וְקָדַם אֶחָד מֵהֶן וְכָנַס. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. וּכְנָסָהּ. וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָמַר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. לֹא כָל הֵימֵינוֹ. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. אִם מִשֶּׁכְּנָסָהּ בָּא אַחֵר וְאָמַר. אֲנִי קִידַּשְׁתִּיהָ. לֹא כָל הֵימֵינוֹ.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody brings a bill of divorce from overseas and says”, etc. About what is he trustworthy? Samuel says, he is trusted to give a bill of divorce. Assi said, he is trusted to marry. Rav Huna said in the name of Rav: He is trusted to marry. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he is trusted to marry but one does not infer from this ruling anything for another case. What means, one does not infer from this ruling anything for another case? I sold one of my fields but I do not remember to whom I sold it. If someone comes and says, I bought it, he is not trusted in any way. In qiddushin, the same holds. “ I betrothed one of my daughters but I do not remember to whom I betrothed her. If someone comes and says, I gave her qiddushin,” he is not trusted in any way. The Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “If somebody brings a bill of divorce from overseas and says, it was written and signed in my presence, he shall not marry the wife.” There, she is considered by everybody to be a married woman. Here, she is considered to be a married woman only by two persons. One waits until these two come and say, this is the man who gave her qiddushin. The Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “ This one says, I gave her qiddushin, and that one says, I gave her qiddushin. Both of them give a bill of divorce, but if they agree, one gives a bill of divorce and the other one marries.” He explains this, if [the father] says, I did betroth her to one of these two but I do not remember which one it was. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Yasa, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If one of them jumped the gun and married her, one does remove her from him. That is, if this one says, I gave her qiddushin, and that one says. I gave her qiddushin and one of them jumped the gun and married her. But if he said, I gave her qiddushin and married her, and another one comes and says, I gave her qiddushin, he is not trusted in any way. It was stated thus: If after the marriage another man comes and says, I gave her qiddushin, he is not trusted in any way.

מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. קְטָלֵיהּ. הֶחָשׁוּד עַל הַדָּבָר לֹא דָנוֹ וְלֹא מֵעִידוֹ. לֹא קְטָלֵיהּ. בַּחַיִים הוּא.

As you take it, if he killed him, a suspect in a case can neither judge nor testify in it. If he did not kill him, the person is alive.

הָרַגְנוּהוּ. מֵעַתָּה קְטָלֵיהּ. תִּינָּשֵׂא לַאֲחֵרִים וְלֹא לוֹ. אָמְרוּ לִפְנֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּלֵיסְטֵיס אֶחָד שֶׁנִּתְפַּס בְּקַיְסָרִין שֶׁבְּקַפַּדוֹקִיָיא. עִם כְּשֶׁהוּא יוֹצֵא לִיהָרֵג אָמַר לָהֶן. צְאוּ וְאִמְּרוּ לְאִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁלְּשִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן כָּהֲנָא שֶׁהָרַגְתִּיו בִּכְנִיסָתוֹ לְלוֹד. וּבָא מַעֲשֶׂה לִפְנֵי חֲכָמִים וְקִיְימוּ אֶת דְּבָרָיו. אָמַר לָהֶן רִבִּי יוּדָה. מִשָּׁם רְאָיָיה. וַהֲלֹא לֹא אָמַר אֶלָּא הָרַגְנוּהוּ.

“We killed him,” she should be married to others but not to him. “They said before Rebbi Jehudah, it happened that a robber was caught in Kappadokian Caesarea. When he went out to be executed, he said to them, go and tell the wife of Simeon ben Cahana that I killed him when he was coming into Lydda. The case came before the Sages and they confirmed his words. Rebbi Jehudah said to them: Is that a proof? He only said, we killed him.”

Mishnah

משנה: הֶחָכָם שֶׁאָסַר אֶת הָאִשָּׁה בְּנֶדֶר עַל בַּעֲלָהּ הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִשָּׂאֶנָּה. מֵיאֵינָה אוֹ שֶׁחָלְצָה בְּפָנָיו יִשָּׂאֶנָּה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בֵּית דִּין. וְכוּלָּן שֶׁהָיוּ לָהֶן נָשִׁים וָמֵתוּ מוּתָּרוֹת לְהִינָּשֵׂא לָהֶן וְכוּלָּן שֶׁנִּישְּׂאוּ לַאֲחֵרִים וְנִתְגָּרְשׁוּ אוּ שֶׁנִּתְאַלְמְנוּ מוּתָּרוֹת לְהִינָּשֵׂא לָהֶם. וְכוּלָּן מוּתָּרוֹת לִיבְנֵיהֶם וְלַאֲחֵיהֶם.

MISHNAH: A rabbi who forbade a woman to her husband because of a vow cannot marry her. If she repudiated or performed ḥalîṣah before him he may marry her since he acts as a court. And all who had wives who [subsequently] died may marry them. And to all who were married to others and were divorced or widowed, they can be married. All are permitted to their sons or brothers.

Halakhah

הלכה: הֶחָכָם שֶׁאָסַר אֶת הָאִשָּׁה בְּנֶדֶר עַל בַּעֲלָהּ כול׳. הֶחָכָם שֶׁאָסַר אֶת הָאִשָּׁה בְּנֶדֶר עַל בַּעֲלָהּ הֲרֵי זֶה לֹא יִשָּׂאֶנָּה. אוֹמֵר אֲנִי. לְכָךְ מִתְכַּוֵּין מִתְּחִילָּה. מֵיאֵנָה אוֹ שֶׁחָלְצָה בְּפָנָיו יִשָּׂאֶינָּה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בֵּית דִּין. שֶׁאֵין שְׁנַיִם מְצוּיִין לַחֲטוֹא מִפְּנֵי אֶחָד. תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן. הַמַּפְקִיד פֵּירוֹת אֵצֶל חֲבֵירוֹ אֲפִילוּ הֵן אוֹבְדִין לֹא יִגַּע בָּהֶן. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר. יִמְכּוֹר בִּפְנֵי בֵית דִּין מִפְּנֵי הָשֵׁב אֲבֵידָה לַבְּעָלִים. אָמַר [רִבִּי] אַבָּא בַּר יַעֲקֹב בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. מַה יְהֵא בְדָמִים. רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר. מַחֲלוֹקֶת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה וְרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. תְּנַיי בֵּית דִּין. לֹא יִקְחוּ. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אָמַר. רִבִּי חִיָיה בֵּירִבִּי שַׁבָּתַי מַקְשֶׁי. הָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר מֵיאֵנָה אוֹ שֶׁחָלְצָה בְּפָנָיו יִשָּׂאֶינָּה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בֵּית דִּין. וְהָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר הָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. תַּמָּן הַמִּקָּח דַּרְכּוֹ לְהִשְׁתַּלֵּשׁ. בְּרַם הָכָא אֵין שְׁנַיִם מְצוּיִין לַחֲטוֹא מִפְּנֵי אֶחָד.

HALAKHAH: “A rabbi who forbade a woman to her husband because of a vow”, etc. “A rabbi who forbade a woman to her husband because of a vow cannot marry her.” I would say, that was his intention from the start. “If she repudiated or performed ḥalîṣah before him he may marry her since he acts as a court”, because two will not usually sin for the benefit of a third. There, we have stated: “If somebody deposits fruit with another person, that one should not touch it even if it spoils. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, he shall sell it under the supervision of a court because one is obliged to return a find to its owners.” Rebbi Abba bar Jacob said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. What does one do with the money? Rav Jehudah said, the disagreement of Rebbi Aqiba and Rebbi Ṭarphon. It is a condition that the members of the court cannot buy. Rebbi Aqiba said, Rebbi Ḥiyya ben Rebbi Sabbatai asked: Here, you say, “if she repudiated or performed ḥalîṣah before him he may marry her since he acts as a court,” and here, you say so? Rebbi Yose said, there, the buy could be in thirds, but here, two will not usually sin for the benefit of a third.

וְכוּלָּן שֶׁהָיוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים וָמֵתוּ מוּתָּרוֹת לְהִינָּשֵׂא לָהֶן. לֹא אָמַר אֶלָּא מֵתוּ. הָא אִם נִתְגָּרְשׁוּ לֹא. וְכוּלָּן שֶׁנִּשְּׂאוּ לַאֲחֵרִים וְנִּתְאַלְמְנוּ אוּ נִתְגָּרְשׁוּ מוּתָּרוֹת לְהִנָּשֵׂא לָהֶן. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מָצוּי לַחֲטוֹא לְאַחַר זְמָן. וְכוּלָּן מוּתָּרוֹת לִיבְנֵיהֶן וְלַאֲחֵיהֶן. שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מָצוּי לַחֲטוֹא לֹא מִפְּנֵי בְנוֹ וְלֹא מִפְּנֵי אָחִיו.

“ “And all who had wives who [subsequently] died may marry them.” It only says “who died”; therefore, not if they were divorced. “And to all who were married to others and were divorced or widowed, they can be married”, since usually nobody sins for an uncertain future. “All are permitted to their sons or brothers,” since usually nobody sins for the benefit of either his son ot his brother.