Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Halakhah for Yevamot 34:7

ואיצטריך למכתב אחים ואיצטריך למכתב יחדו דאי כתב רחמנא אחים ה"א לילף אחוה אחוה מלוט וכי תימא לא מפני לאיי אפנויי מפני מדהוה ליה למכתב רעים וכתיב אחים שמע מינה לאפנויי כתב רחמנא יחדו המיוחדים בנחלה

Let him, then, deduce this 'brotherhood'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The expression 'brethren' in Deut. xxv, 5 in relation to the levirate marriage. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> from the 'brotherhood' in the case of Lot, since it is written in the Scriptures. For we are brethren!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. Xlii, 8. Lot having been Abraham's nephew the deduction would establish a novel law of marriage with a deceased uncle's or nephew's widow. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> -It stands to reason that the deduction should be made from the sons of Jacob. because the [analogous expression] is available for the purpose;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'vacant'. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> for it could have been written, Thy servants are twelve sons of one man<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. XLII, 23. Cur. edd., read, in. stead of 'one man', 'our father', which occurs in v. 32. If the reference were to the latter verse 'thy servants' which does not occur there would have to be deleted here. Several MSS. support the reading here adopted. ');"><sup>22</sup></span>

Sefer HaChinukh

From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory blessed, said (Yevamot 17b), "'When brothers dwell together' - to exclude the wife of a brother who was not in his world"; meaning that [then] she does not have an obligation of levirate marriage and not of release - for example, [if] this brother was born after his brother [that was married and had no children] died. And that which they also inferred (Yevamot 17b), "'Brothers together' - that are together in inheritance, to exclude brothers [born only] from the mother," who are not obligated in levirate marriage and release. "'And has no (ein) son' - look into (ayen) him" (Yevamot 22b). [This is] meaning to say that if the brother did have a son or daughter from any place, or the son of a son or the son of a daughter or the daughter of a daughter or any one that came out from his 'thigh' - there is no commandment of levirate marriage or release there, for the reason that we mentioned concerning the commandment of levirate marriage.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse