Mesorat%20hashas for Yevamot 54:9

א"ל אחיות איני יודע מי שנאן ולימא ליה מאי חולצות נמי דקתני חולצת חדא חולצות קתני

-That statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of Rab, just quoted. ');">³⁰</span> applies only to the case where the woman is faced with the prohibition of 'a wife's sister', which is Pentateuchal;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case of three brothers two of whom were married to two sisters (infra 30a) in connection with which Rab made his statement. ');">³¹</span> here, however, [the prohibition due to] the levirate bond is only Rabbinical.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And is, therefore, removed as soon as one of the sisters dies. ');">³²</span> R. Jose b. Hanina raised the following objection against R. Johanan:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The same objection applies to Rab also (Rashi). Cf. however, Tosaf. s.v. [H] a.l. ');">³³</span> IN THE CASE OF FOUR BROTHERS, TWO OF WHOM WERE MARRIED TO TWO SISTERS, IF THOSE WHO WERE MARRIED TO THE SISTERS DIED, BEHOLD, THESE MUST PERFORM <i>HALIZAH</i> BUT MAY NOT BE TAKEN IN LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. But why? Let one of the brothers take on the duty of participating in the <i>halizah</i> with the second widow, and thus place the first widow, in relation to the second, in the category of a deceased brother's wife that was permitted- then forbidden, and then again permitted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 2 p. 169, nn. 7, 11. ');">³⁴</span>

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Yevamot 54:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.