יבמות ד׳Yevamot 4

Mishnah

משנה: הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוְולָד שֶׁלְּקַיָימָא הוּא מוּתָּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא מוּתֶּרֶת בִּקְרוֹבָיו. וְלֹא פְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. אֵין הַוְולָד שֶׁלְּקַיָימָא הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִּקְרוֹבָיו. וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה.

MISHNAH: If somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant and gives birth, if it is a live birth her relatives are permitted to him and his relatives are permitted to her; he has not disabled her [from marrying into] priesthood. If it is a still birth, her relatives are forbidden to him and his relatives are forbidden to her; he has disabled her [from marrying into] priesthood.

Halakhah

הלכה: הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת כול׳. בְּשֶׁעָבַר. הָא כַתְּחִילָּה לֹא. דֵי מַתְנִיתָא הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ וְלֹא תִתְיַבֵּם עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא לָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִּׁים. וְתַחֲלוֹץ מִיָּד. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. אִם בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא לֹא נָגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה. אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא הֲרֵי חֲלִיצָתָהּ בְּיָדָהּ. רִבִּי זְעִירָה רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵּׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. רִבִּי בָּא רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. מֵאֵן יְבָמִי. אֶת שֶׁאוֹמְרִין לוֹ. יַיבֵּם. אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. יַיבֵּם. אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. מַה נְפַק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. הָיְתָה כְשֵׁירֵה וְנִתְחַלְּלָה. כְּגוֹן אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּגְרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. מָאן דְּאָמַר. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. וְזוּ הוֹאִיל וְאֵינָהּ צרִיכָה כְּרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה חוֹלֶצֶת. מָאן דְּאָמַר. אֶת שֶׁאוֹמְרִים לוֹ יַיבֵּם. אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant,” etc. If he transgressed, but not from the start. That follows the Mishnah: “The widow should not perform ḥalîṣah or have levirate until after three months.” Why can she not have ḥalîṣah immediately? As you take it, if she has a live birth, ḥalîṣah did not affect her. If she has a still birth, she holds ḥalîṣah in her hand. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jacob bar Idi, in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah, that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood. Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: “My levir refuses.” To the one to whom one says: perform levirate, to him one says: perform ḥalîṣah; but to the one to whom one cannot say: perform levirate, to him one cannot say: perform ḥalîṣah! What is the difference between them? If she had been acceptable and was desecrated, e. g., a widow for the High Priest or a divorcee or one who had performed ḥalîṣah for a common priest. According to him who says that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood; that one, who does not need a proclamation for the priesthood, should have ḥalîṣah. According to him who says that to the one to whom one says: perform levirate, to him does one say: perform ḥalîṣah?

חָלַץ בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים מַהוּ שֶׁתְּהֵא צְרִיכָה לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִים. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. קְטַנָּה שֶׁחָלְצָה תַחֲלוֹץ מִשֶׁתַּגְדִּיל. וְאִם חָלְצָה חֲלִיצָתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה. רִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר לָהּ סְתָם. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בְרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִיָיה מָטֵי בָהּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. אֵין חוֹלְצִין וְאֵין מְיַיבְּמִין אֶת הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁמָּא תִימָּצֵא אַיְילוֹנִית. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָלְצָה חוֹלֶצֶת. וְהָכָא נַמֵּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָלְצָה חוֹלֶצֶת.

If there was ḥalîṣah during these three months, does she need another one after three months? Let us hear from the following: “A minor who performed ḥalîṣah should perform ḥalîṣah after she grows up; if she performed [only one] ḥalîṣah, the ḥalîṣah she performed is valid.” Rebbi Mana said it anonymously, Rebbi Isaac the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya brought it in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; this is Rebbi Meïr‘s, since Rebbi Meïr says one does neither perform ḥalîṣah nor levirate with a minor: maybe she would turn out to be a she-ram. As you say there, even though she already performed ḥalîṣah, she again performs ḥalîṣah; so here also though she did perform ḥalîṣah, she performs ḥalîṣah.

רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. חָלַץ לָהּ מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְהִפִּילָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. הֲרֵי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעוּבֶּרֶת יָכוֹל תְּהֵא זְקוּקָה לְיָבָם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אֶת שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ מָחוּי. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר. לְהָקִים לְאָחִיו שֵׁם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. עַד שֶׁתֵּדַע אִם בֶּן קַיָימָה הוּא אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָה. יָכוֹל אַף אֵשֶׁת סָרִיס תְּהֵא צְרִיכָה לְיִיבּוּם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אֶת שֶׁאֵין שְׁמוֹ מָחוּי. יָצָא זֶה שֶׁ(אין) שְׁמוֹ מָחוּי.

Rebbi Yudan asked: If he performed ḥalîṣah with a pregnant woman and she had a miscarriage? Let us hear from the following: If somebody died and left a pregnant widow, should I think that she must have recourse to her levir? The verse says, “that his name should not be extinguished from Israel,” only one whose name is extinguished. The verse says, “to establish a name in Israel for his brother,” until you know whether there is a live child or not. I could think that the wife of an eunuch should need levirate, the verse says “that his name should not be extinguished from Israel,” only one whose name is not extinguished; this excludes this one whose name was already extinguished.

יָכוֹל אוֹמֵר. צָרָתָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְהִינָּשֵׂא. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר. צָרָתָהּ לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא עַד שֶׁתֵּדַע בְּמַה הִיא מוּתֶּרֶת אִם בְעִיבּוּר אִם בְּבִיאָה. אַף בַּחֲלוּצָה כֵן. חֲלִיצָה פְטוֹר וּבִיאָה פְטוֹר. כְּמַה דְתֵימַר בְּבִיאָה כָּךְ אַתְּ מָר בַּחֲלִיצָה.

Could I say, her co-wife may remarry? “ He who marries his sister-in-law and she turns out to be pregnant,” as you say, “her co-wife cannot marry until you know by which means she is permitted, whether by pregnancy or by intercourse” The same is valid for the one who performed ḥalîṣah. Ḥalîṣah frees and intercourse frees. As you said it for intercourse so it was said for ḥalîṣah.

שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. זָכִין בָּעוֹבָּרִין. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר. אֵין זָכִין בָּעוֹבָּרִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר זָכִין לָעוֹבָּרִין. מוֹדֵי הוּא שֶׁיָּצָא רֹאשּׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַחַיִים. דֵי מַתְנִיתָא הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוֹבֶּרֶת. כְּמָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר כָּאן. הוּא לְמַפְרֵעַ לֹא נָגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה. וְהָכָא בֵּ(י)ן הוּא לְמַפְרֵעַ וְהוּא שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הָאוֹמֵר. אִם יָלְדָה אִשְׁתִּי זָכָר יִטּוֹל מָנֶה. יָלְדָה זָכָר נוֹטֵל מָנֶה. אִם נְקֵיבָה מָאתַיִם. יָלְדָה נְקֵיבָה נוֹטֶלֶת מָאתַיִם. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר. לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בְנוֹ. הָא אַחֵר לֹא. רִבִּי יוֹסָה אָמַר. אֲפִילוּ אַחֵר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר וּבִלְבַד שְׁכִיב מְרַע. הָא בָרִיא לֹא. בִּלְבַד מְטַלְטְלִין. הָא קַרְקָעוֹת לֹא. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי לָעְזָר. גֵּר שֶׁמֵּת וּבִיזְבְּזוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת נְכָסָיו. וְנוֹדַע שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵן בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה עִיבְּרָה. הַכֹּל חַיָיבִין לְהַחֲזִיר. מַה עָבַד לָהּ רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא הָכָא שֶׁהוּא בְנוֹ. וְסֵיפָא פְלִיגָא עַל שְׁמוּאֵל מִן הָדָא דְרִבִּי יוֹסָה. הֶחֱזִירוּ הַכֹּל. אַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הַבֵּן אוֹ שֶׁהִפִּילָה. כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה זָכָה. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא זָכָה. אֲפִילוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא יִזְכֶּה. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. זָכִין לָעוֹבָּרִין. מוֹדֵי וְהוּא שֶׁיָּצָא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַחַיִים. הֲרֵי אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר אֶלְעָזָר. מִשּׁוּם יִיאוּשׁ. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיסָרִין רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר וָוא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר נָתָן. חָזַר בָּהּ רִבִּי נָתָן. מִן מַתְנִיתָא. אִם זָכָר מָנֶה. אִם נְקֵיבָה מָאתַיִם. וּנְקֵיבָה גַבָּהּ לֹא בְעִנְיָין כְּאַחֵר הוּא. תַּנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא. בֶּן יוֹמוֹ זָכִין לוֹ.

Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses; Rebbi Eleazar said, one cannot transfer benefits to fetuses. Rebbi Yose said, even though Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses, he agrees that most of [the fetus’s] head and body must come out alive. That is the Mishnah, “if somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant,” as you say here, retroactively ḥalîṣah did not touch her, so retroactively the child is a son and receives the benefit. There, we have stated: “If somebody says, if my wife gives birth to a male, he shall take a mina, if she gave birth to a male, [the male baby] will take a mina. If a female, 200 [drachmae], if she gave birth to a female, that one will take 200.” Rebbi Eleazar said, this is only for his son, but not for any other. Rebbi Yasa said, even any other. In the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar, only from a sick person, but not a healthy one; only movables but not real estate. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Eleazar. “ If a proselyte died and Jews plundered his estate, then it became known that he had a son overseas or that [his wife] was pregnant, everybody is required to return [what he took].” What does Rebbi Eleazar do with this? There is a difference because it is his child. The second part [of the Mishnah] disagrees with Samuel in the interpretation of Rebbi Yose: “If they returned everything and then the son died or she had a miscarriage, anybody who takes first after that acquires it.” The first group did not acquire. Even at the beginning they should not have acquired! Did not Rebbi Yose say, even though Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses, he agrees that most of [the fetus’s] head and body must come out alive. He was not living! Rebbi Isaac bar Eleazar said, because of abandoning. The rabbis of Caesarea, R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Abba bar Natan: Rebbi Natan changed his mind because of that Mishnah: “If a male, a mina, if a female, 200.” Is a female in this situation not like an outsider? Bar Qappara stated: “On transfers benefit to a one day old.”

Mishnah

משנה: הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוְולָד שֶׁל קַיָימָא יוֹצִיא וְחַיָיבִין בְּקָרְבָּן. וְאִם אֵין הַוְולָד שֶׁל קַיָימָא יְקַיֵים. סָפֵק בֶּן תֵּשַׁע לָרִאשׁוֹן סָפֵק בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן יוֹצִיא וְהַוְולָד כָּשֵּׁר וְחַיָיבִין בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי.

MISHNAH: If somebody marries his sister-in-law but she turned out to have been pregnant and gave birth. If the child is alive, [the levir] has to divorce her and they must bring a sacrifice. If the child is not alive, he may keep her. If it is doubtful whether [the child is] a nine-month child of the first [brother] or a seven-month of the second, he has to divorce her, the child is legitimate, and they are obligated to bring a reparation offering for an uncertain case.

Halakhah

הלכה: אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. כָּל שֶׁאֶיפְשַׁר לָךְ לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּאוֹ אֵין חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי זֵיתִים אֶחָד שֶׁלְּחֵלֶב וְאֶחָד שֶׁלְּשׁוּמָּן וְאָכַל אֶחָד מֵהֶן וַחֲבֵירוֹ מוּנָח בְּתוֹכָהּ. וְאָמַר. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאִילּוּ אֶמְצָא אֶת הַמַּפְתֵּחַ יָכוֹל אֲנִי לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּאוֹ מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִוָודַע לוֹ אִם בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָא מֵבִיא. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose said, in any case where the true fact can be ascertained, one does not have to bring a reparation offering because of doubt. How is that? If there were before him two olive-sized pieces, one of suet and one of fat, he ate one of them and the other is locked up.He says, since I could determine the true fact if I would find the key, does one have to bring a reparation offering in this case of doubt? Let us hear from the following: “If somebody marries his sister-in-law but she turned out to have been pregnant”, as long as it is not known whether the child lives or does not live, does he have to bring a reparation offering because of the doubt? This means that he does not bring.

רַב אָמַר. כָּל שֶׁאֵיפְשַׁר לוֹ לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודַּייוֹ אֵין חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי זֵיתִים אֶחָד שֶׁלְּחֵלֶב וְאֶחָד שֶׁלְּשׁוּמָּן וְאָכַל אֶחָד מֵהֶן. וּבָא עוֹרֵב וְאָכַל אֶת הַשֵּׁינִי. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודַּייוֹ אֵין חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אֲבָל אִם אָכַל עוֹרֵב תְּחִילָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ אָכַל הוּא. מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודַּייוֹ חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רַב. וְהוּא שֶׁיוֹכִיחַ לְפָנָיו חֵלֶב בָּרוּר. אַף עַל גַּב דְּרַב אָמַר. וְהוּא שֶׁיוֹכִיחַ לְפָנָיו חֵלֶב בָּרוּר. מוֹדֶה הוּא הָכָא. שֶׁיָּכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּאוֹ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. כְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר אוֹמֵר. חַיָיבִין עַל חֶלְבּוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. מַה עֲבַד רַב. פָּתַר לָהּ. חֲלוּקִין עַל דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. חֲתִיכָה שֶׁלְּחוּלִין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁלְּקוֹדֶשׁ. אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָיה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַודַּאי. אָכַל אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָיה זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. נִיחָא רִאשׁוֹן מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. שֵׁינִי לָמָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיְתָה חֲתִיכָה גְדוֹלָה וְאָכַל חֶצְיָיהּ וְהִנִּיחַ חֶצְיָיהּ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. סָפֵק בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן יוֹצִיא וְהַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר וְחַיָיבִין אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. הֲרֵי אֵיפְשַׁר לָךְ לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּייוֹ וְחַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. קִיֶימָהּ רִבִּי זְעִירָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר וָוא. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא. קִיְימָהּ רִבִּי זְעוּרָה קָמִינָן. מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לְהֶעָרוֹת וְלִפְרוֹשׁ וְלֵידַע אִם מִמֶּנּוּ הוּא אִם מֵאַחֵר הוּא. כְּמִי שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּייוֹ.

Rav said, in any case where the true fact can never be established, one does not have to bring a reparation offering for the doubt. How is that? If there were before him two olive-sized pieces, one of suet and one of fat, he ate one of them, and then a raven ate the other. Since he cannot ascertain the true fact, one does not have to bring a reparation offering for this doubt. But if the raven ate first and then he ate, since he could have ascertained the true fact, one has to bring a reparation offering for the doubt. But did not Rav say, only if he made sure that it certainly was suet? Even though Rav said, only if he made sure that it certainly was suet, he agrees here that he could have ascertained the true fact. A baraita disagrees with Rav: “As Rebbi Eleazar says, one must bring a reparation offering for the doubt of suet.” What does Rav do with that? They disagree with the words of Rebbi Eleazar. A baraita disagrees with Rav: “If there were both a piece of profane [meat] and a piece of sacrificial [meat], he ate one of them and it is not known which one, he brings a reparation offering for the doubt. If he [then] ate the second piece, he brings a reparation offering for a certain transgression. If he ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second, each one brings a reparation offering for the doubt.” One understands that the first brings a reparation offering for the doubt. Why the second? Rebbi Yose said, explain it that the piece was large, he ate half of it and left the other half. A Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “If it is doubtful whether [the child is] a nine-month child of the first [brother] or a seven-month of the second, he has to divorce her, the child is legitimate, and they are obligated for a reparation offering for the doubt.” Here it is impossible to ascertain the true fact and they are obligated for a reparation offering for the doubt! Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Ze‘ira explained it before Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba; Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Rebbi Ze‘ira explained it before us. Since he could just have touched her and then separated, he could have known whether it is his or the other’s, it is as if he could have ascertained the true fact!

מַה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם כְּשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ לְאַחַר מִיתַת בַּעֲלָהּ מִיָּד הוּכָּר עוּבְּרָהּ לְאַחַר שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים. נִיתְנֵי. בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לַזֶּה וְלַזֶּה בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לַזֶּה וְלַזֶּה. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין בְּשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ לְאַחַר שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים וְהוּכָּר עוּבְּרָהּ לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. נִיתְנֵי. הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ וְלֹא תִתְיַבֵּם עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ לָהּ חֲמִשָּׁה חֳדָשִׁים. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין. כְּשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ לְאַחַר אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וְהוּכָּר עוּבְּרָהּ לְאַחַר חֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם. הֲרֵי יֵשׁ כָּאן שְׁלֵימִין לָרִאשׁוֹן וּמְקוּטָעִין לַשֵּׁינִי. שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת לַחֳדָשִׁים שְׁלֵימִים. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהֵן שְׁתֵּי יְצִירוֹת. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת לַחֳדָשִׁים מְקוּטָעִין. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִִשָּׁה מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְחוֹזֶרֶת וּמִתְעַבֶּרֶת. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה אֵינָהּ מְעֻבֶּרֶת מִשְּׁנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם כְּאַחַת. וּפְלִיגָא עַל דְּרַבָּנִן דַאֲגַדְתָּא. דְּרַבָּנִן דַאֲגַדְתָּא אוֹמְרִים. וַיֵּצֵא אִישׁ הַבֵּינַיִים. מִמַּעַרְכוֹת פְּלִשְּׁתִּים. מִמֵּאָה עָרְלוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים. שֶׁהֶעֲרוּ בָהּ מֵאָה עָרְלוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָיה. וְלָא פְלִיגִין. עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִסְרַח הַזֶּרַע הָאִשָּׁה מְעוּבֶּרֶת מִשְּׁנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם כְּאַחַת. מִשֶּׁנִּסְרַח הַזֶּרַע אֵין הָאִשָּׁה מְעוּבֶּרֶת מִשְּׁנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם כְּאַחַת.

How do we hold? If he came to her immediately after her husband’s death, and the fetus was recognized after two months, one should have stated: A nine-month child of either one of them or a seven-month of either one of them! But it may be that he came to her after two months and the fetus was recognized after three months, one should have stated: The sister-in-law should not perform ḥalîṣah or be married in levirate until after five months! But it must be that he came to her after 40 days and the fetus was recognized after 50 days. That would be complete months for [a child of] the first [brother] and incomplete ones for the second. This implies that a woman may give birth after full months. This implies that there are two creations. This implies that a woman may give birth after incomplete months. This implies that a woman may become pregnant repeatedly. This implies that a woman cannot become pregnant simultaneously from two men. And it disagrees with the sermonizing rabbis, since the sermonizing rabbis say “the middleman” “from the orders of the Philistines”, from 100 prepuces of Philistines, that 100 prepuces of Philistines touched her. Rebbi Mattaniah said, there is no disagreement. As long as the semen is not spoiled, a woman can become pregnant from several men simultaneously. After the semen is spoiled, a woman cannot become pregnant from several men simultaneously.

מְנַיִין שְׁתֵּי יְצִירוֹת. רִבִי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוּנָא. וַיִיצֶר. יְצִירָה לְשִׁבְעָה וִיצִירָה לְתִשְׁעָה. נוֹצָר לְשִׁבְעָה וְנוֹלָד לִשְׁמוֹנָה חַיי. כָּל שֶׁכֵּן לְתִשְׁעָה. נוֹצָר לְתִשְׁעָה וְנוֹלָד לִשְׁמוֹנָה אֵינוֹ חַיָיה. נוֹצָר לְתִשְׁעָה וְנוֹלָד לְשִׁבְעָה. אִיתָא חֲמִי. אִם לִשְׁמוֹנָה אֵינוֹ חַיָיה לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן לְשִׁבְעָה. בָּעוּן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. מְנַיִין לְבֶן שִׁבְעָה שֶׁהוּא חַיָיה. אָמַר לוֹן מִדִּידְכוֹן אֲנָא יְהִב לְכוֹן. זוטא אבטא זוטא אבטא.

From where the two creations? Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Huna: “He created”, a creation for seven and a creation for eight. If he was created for seven but born at eight, he lives; so much more if [born] by nine. If he was created for nine and born at eight, he does not live. If he was created for nine and born at seven? Come and see, if he does not live at eight, so much less at seven! They asked before Rebbi Abbahu. From where that a seven-month baby lives? he said to them, from yours I am giving to you: ζῇ τὰ ἑπτὰ, ζῇ τὰ ἑπτὰ.

בָּא הַסָּפֵק לִיטּוֹל אֶת חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָבִיו. אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. הַנֵּי אָבִיךָ. בָּא הַיָּבָם לִיטוֹל חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָחִיו. אוֹמְרִים לֵיהּ. הַנֵּי בְּרֵיהּ. הָא כֵיצַד. עוֹשִׂין שִׁיפִיּוּת בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמְחַלְּקִין נִיכְסֵי הַמֵּת. נִמְצֵאת אוֹמֵר. שִׁיפִיּוּת לְאָחִיו הֶפְסֵד לָאַחִין. תַּחֲרוּת בָּאַחִין שֶׁבֶר בָּאַחִין. מֵת הַזָּקֵן הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בָּאִים בָּנִים בְּוַודַּאי וּבֶ(י)ן בֵּן בְּסָפֵק. מֵת הַסָּפֵק הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בֵּן אֲחִי אָב בְּוַודַּאי וְאֵם בְּסָפֵק. מֵת אֶחָד מַן הָאַחִין הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בֶּן בְּוַדַּאי וּבֵ(י)ן אָח בְּסָפֵק. מֵתָה אִמּוֹ שֶׁלְּסָפֵק הֲרֵי יֵשׁ כָּאן בֵּן בְּוַדַּאי וּבַעַל בְּסָפֵק. מֵת הַסָּפֵק וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵתָה אִמּוֹ הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בֶּן אֲחִי אֵם בְּוַדַּאי וּבַעַל בְּסָפֵק. מֵת הַיָּבָם וּבָא הַסָּפֵק לִיטּוֹל חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָבִיו. אִי הֲוָה קַדְמַיָיא מִיסְכֵּן אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. הַנֵּי אָבוּךְ. אִין הֲוָה עָתִיר אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. כּוּלָּן אַחִין בְּנֵי אַחִין. בּוֹאוּ וְנִירַשׁ חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָבִינוּ וְחֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלַּאֲחִי אָבִינוּ.

If the uncertain [son] comes to take his part in his father’s [inheritance]. one says to him, the other one is your father. If the levir comes to take his part in his brother’s [inheritance], one says to him, that one is his son. How is that? They compromise between themselves and split the property of the deceased. One finds, compromise with his brother is loss to the brothers; competition between the brothers is catastrophy for the brothers. If the old man dies, one finds that certain sons and an uncertain grandson come. If the uncertain [son] dies there exists a certain son of his father’s brother and an uncertain mother. If one of the brothers dies, there is a certain son and an uncertain son of a brother. If the mother of the uncertain [son] dies, there is a certain son and an uncertain husband. If first the uncertain [son] dies and after that his mother, a son of the mother’s brother is certain but the husband uncertain. If the levir dies and the uncertain [son] comes to take his part in his father’s inheritance, if the first one was poor, they tell him, that one is your father. If he was rich, the tell him, we all are brothers, sons of his brother. Come and let us inherit our father’s part and the part of our father’s brother.

תַּנֵּי הָרִאשׁוֹן רָאוּי לִהְיוֹת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל וְהַשֵּׁינִי מַמְזֵר בְּסָפֵק. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר. אֵין מַמְזֵר בְּסָפֵק. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב בִּסְפֵק כּוּתִים וּבִסְפֵק חַלָּלִים. כְּהַהִיא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. עֲשָׂרָה יוּחֲסִין עָלוּ מִבָּבֶל. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב שְׁמוֹנֶה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרַבָן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר תִּשְׁעָה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרִבָּנִן עֲשָׂרָה.

It was stated: “The first son could be High Priest, any second son possibly is a bastard. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, there is no such thing as a possible bastard.” Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob agrees in cases of doubt of Samaritans and desecrated persons. This refers to what we have stated there: “Ten classes returned from Babylonia.” In the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob, eight. In the opinion of Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer, nine. In the opinion of the rabbis, ten.