Commentary for Yevamot 115:16

דכוותה גבי שומרת יבם שבא עליה יבם בבית חמיה

it may be inferred that the bridal chamber alone constitutes <i>kinyan</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the absence of cohabitation. Had not the bridal chamber constituted the kinyan, which brought the woman within the category of marriage, she would not have been subject to the test to which a married woman only must submit. (Cf. Num. V, 19, being under thy husband). ');">²⁸</span> with ineligible women.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Among whom the Sotah is, of course, included. Cf. supra n. 5. ');">²⁹</span> Said Raba: Do you think that this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mishnah cited by R. Shesheth. ');">³⁰</span> is an authenticated statement?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] (rt. [H], 'to be right'), a version the correctness of which has been upheld by refuting all objections raised against it. ');">³¹</span> Surely when R. Aha b. Hanina<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra 57a where the reading is 'Hinena'. ');">³²</span> arrived from the South, he came and brought a Baraitha with him: Besides thy husband,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. V, 20. ');">³³</span> only when the cohabitation of the husband preceded that of the adulterer, but not when the cohabitation of the adulterer preceded that of the husband! Rami b. Hama replied: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Mishnah cited by R. Shesheth. ');">³⁴</span> is possible where, for instance, he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The husband. ');">³⁵</span> cohabited with her while she was only betrothed and still in the house of her father. Similarly in respect of the woman awaiting the decision of the levir<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since in her case also the cohabitation of the levir must precede that of the adulterer. Alternatively: Since she also is not subject to the test of the water. ');">³⁶</span> [it must obviously be a case] where the man cohabited with her in the house of her father-in-law!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that his cohabitation took place prior to that of the suspected adulterer, which was also preceded by the warning of the levir and followed by the bridal chamber but by no cohabitation; and the woman is submitted to the test of the water of bitterness in respect of her suspected act during her betrothal! Alternatively: Since in her case, unlike that of the betrothed, the kinyan of the bridal chamber is not applicable. ');">³⁷</span>

Explore commentary for Yevamot 115:16. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.