Commentary for Yevamot 183:12

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> האשה שהלך בעלה ובנה למדינת הים ובאו ואמרו לה מת בעליך ואח"כ מת בנך ונשאת ואחר כך אמרו לה חילוף היו הדברים תצא והולד ראשון ואחרון ממזר

He, however, who stated, '[If being] a widow [she was married] to a High Priest' does not<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but not'. ');">³⁸</span> [subject her to a sin-offering if] she played the harlot. What is the reason? — Because she might plead, 'It is you who granted me the status of an unmarried woman'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And since she acted on a ruling of a court, she is not liable to a sin-offering. ');">³⁹</span> It was taught in agreement with the opinion of R. Johanan: If <i>Beth din</i> directed that she may be married again. and she went and disgraced herself, so that, for instance, [being] a widow [she was married] to a High Priest.[or being] a divorcee or a <i>haluzah</i> [she was married] to a common priest. she is liable to bring an offering for every single act of cohabitation;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is further explained in Ker. 15a. ');">⁴⁰</span> so R. Eleazar. But the Sages said: One offering for all. The Sages, however, agree with R. Eleazar that, If she was married to five men, she is liable to bring an offering for every one, since [here it is a case of] separate bodies.

Explore commentary for Yevamot 183:12. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.