Yevamot 16

Chapter 16

א למישרי צרה שלא במקום מצוה מאי טעמא אמר קרא עליה במקום עליה הוא דאסירא שלא במקום עליה שריא

1 it was for the purpose of permitting a rival where the precept1 is not applicable. What is the reason?2 — Scripture stated, ''aleha',3 to indicate that only in the case of 'unto her'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'in the place of [H] with reference to the verse 'Her husband's brother shall go in unto her' (v. supra p. 8, n. 9) i.e., where the command of levirate marriage would otherwise apply. ');">4

ב א"ל רמי בר חמא לרבא אימא ערוה גופיה שלא במקום מצוה תישתרי ולאו קל וחומר הוא במקום מצוה אסירא שלא במקום מצוה שריא

2 is she5 forbidden,6 where the other, however, may not, she is permitted. Said Rami b. Hama to Raba: Might it not be suggested7

ג אמר ליה צרה תוכיח דבמקום מצוה אסירא ושלא במקום מצוה שריא אמר ליה עליך אמר קרא בחייה כל שבחייה

3 that the forbidden relative8 herself is permitted9 where the precept10 is not applicable? — Is not [such an argument contrary to the principle of inference] a minori ad majus? Being forbidden where the precept10

ד האי בחייה מיבעי ליה למעוטי לאחר מיתה ההיא (ויקרא יח, יח) מואשה אל אחותה נפקא

4 is applicable, would she be permitted where the precept is not applicable? — ['The case of a] rival', the first replied, 'could prove it, since she is forbidden9 where the precept10 is applicable, and is permitted9 where the precept10

ה אי מואשה אל אחותה ה"א נתגרשה שריא ת"ל בחייה כל שבחייה דאע"ג דנתגרשה לא

5 is not applicable'. 'It is for your sake,' the other replied, 'that Scripture states, In her life-time,11 so long as she12 lives'.13 But is not the expression,14

ו אלא אמר רב הונא בר תחליפא משמיה דרבא תרי קראי כתיבי כתיב אשה אל אחותה לא תקח לצרור וכתי' לגלות ערותה דחדא משמע הא כיצד במקום מצוה שתיהן אסורות שלא במקום מצוה היא אסורה וצרתה מותרת

6 In her life-time,11 required for the exclusion [of the prohibition of marriage] after her12 death?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that the prohibition of a wife's sister which on the present assumption is limited to cases where the precept of levirate marriage is applicable, applies only during the lifetime of one's wife. ');">15 — This is deduced from the text, And a woman to her sister.11

ז איפוך אנא במקום מצוה היא אסורה וצרתה מותרת ושלא במקום מצוה שתיהן אסורות א"כ לא יאמר עליה

7 If [the deduction were only] from the text. 'And a woman to her sister',11 it might have been said that if she16 was divorced the sister would be permitted, hence it was expressly stated, 'In her life-time.'11 So long as she16

ח א"ל רב אשי לרב כהנא ממאי דהאי עליה לאיסורא דלמא להתירא וה"ק רחמנא אשה אל אחותה לא תקח לצרור לא היא ולא צרתה שלא במקום עליה אבל במקום עליה שתיהן מותרות

8 is alive, even though she has been divorced, [her sister must] not [be married]!17 — But, said R. Huna b. Tahlifa in the name of Raba, two Scriptural texts are available; it is written, Thou shalt not take a woman to her sister, to be a rival to her18 [implying two],19 and it is also written, To uncover her nakedness,20

ט א"כ לגלות ערוה דחדא היכי משכחת לה אי במקום מצוה שתיהן מותרות אי שלא במקום מצוה שתיהן אסורות:

9 which implies that only one is forbidden; how then [are the two texts to be reconciled]? Where the precept21 is applicable both are forbidden;22 where the precept21 is not applicable she23

י גופא רבי אומר ולקח ולקחה ויבם ויבמה לאסור צרות ועריות מידי צרות כתיבא הכא ועוד צרות מלצרור נפקא

10 is forbidden but her rival is permitted. Might not the deduction be reversed: Where the precept21 is applicable she23 is forbidden but her rival is permitted, but where the precept is not applicable both are forbidden!22 — If so, ''aleha' should not have been stated.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since even without this additional phrase the two contradictory texts would have been naturally reconciled by applying the former (prohibition of both) to a case where the precept of the levirate marriage is inapplicable, and the latter (permission of the rival) to a case where it is applicable. The addition of the phrase must consequently have been intended to impart a new law, viz. that a rival is forbidden, like the forbidden relative herself, where the precept of the levirate marriage is applicable. ');">24

יא לצרור מפיק ליה רבי לכדרבי שמעון

11 Said R. Ashi to R. Kahana: Whence is it derived that the expression ''aleha'25 indicates prohibition? Is it not possible that it implies permission, and that it is this that the All Merciful meant to imply: Thou shalt not take a woman to her sister, to be a rival to her,25 neither herself nor her rival where 'unto her'26 is not applicable,27

יב צרה הכא כתיב ה"ק א"כ לימא קרא ולקח מאי ולקחה כל היכא דאיכא תרי לקוחין דאי בעי נסיב האי ואי בעי נסיב האי שריא ואי לא תרוייהו אסירין

12 but where 'unto her'26 is applicable28 both are permitted!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The concluding part of the verse [H] meaning where he has to go 'unto her', the sister of his wife who is the widow of his brother, he may do so even in her (his wife's) life-time. ');">29 — If so, how could the 'uncovering of the nakedness' of one30

יג ויבמה במקום ייבום הוא דאסירא צרה שלא במקום ייבום שריא צרה ורבנן האי ולקחה מאי עבדי ליה

13 be possible? If in the case where the precept31 is applicable, both are permitted;32 and if where the precept is not applicable both are forbidden!33 [Reverting to] the [above] text, Rabbi said: Instead of And take, Scripture stated, 'And take her' and instead of 'And perform the duty of a husband's brother', Scripture stated, 'And perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her', in order to prohibit [the levirate marriage of] forbidden relatives and their rivals. Are, then, rivals mentioned here at all? And, furthermore, the law of rivals has been derived from the expression To be her rival!34

יד מיבעי להו לכדרבי יוסי בר חנינא דאמר רבי יוסי בר חנינא ולקחה מלמד שמגרשה בגט ומחזירה ויבמה על כרחה

14 — The expression To be her rival is employed by Rabbi for R. Simeon's deduction.35 Where,36 however, is the rival mentioned?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Deut. XXV, 5, the text cited by Rabbi. Clearly, it was not mentioned at all; how then could Rabbi derive from the text a law concerning a subject of which no mention was made? ');">37 — What he meant is this: If so,38

טו ורבי דרבי יוסי בר חנינא מלאשה נפקא על כרחה מיבמה יבא עליה נפקא

15 Scripture should have stated, And take; why then did it state, 'And he shall take her'?39 To indicate that wherever there are two to be taken,40 he41 having the choice of marrying whichever he prefers42

טז ורבי האי עליה מאי עביד ליה מיבעי ליה לכדתניא אין חייבין ב"ד אלא על דבר שזדונו כרת ושגגתו חטאת וכן המשיח

16 both are permitted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The emphasis on 'her' in And take her implies that there is a choice between two, and the phrase 'and take her' is taken to imply that the levir is in a position to choose whichever he pleases, since either of them must be capable of having the phrase 'and take her applied to her. ');">43 but if not,44 both are forbidden; And perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her,45 indicates that where levirate marriage is applicable there is the rival forbidden, where, however, levirate marriage is not applicable the rival is permitted. As to the Rabbis,46 to what do they apply the verse 'And he shall take her'? — They require it for the deduction of R. Jose b. Hanina. For R. Jose b. Hanina said: 'And he shall take her'45 teaches that he47 may divorce her with a letter of divorce48 and that he may remarry her;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the precept of the levirate marriage has been fulfilled and she might have been assumed to be forbidden to him as a brother's wife. The text is interpreted as follows: And he takes her to him to wife, as soon as he has taken her, she is regarded henceforth in all respects as his wife, i.e., as if she had never been forbidden to him as a brother's wife. ');">49 And he shall perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her, even against her will.50 And Rabbi?51 — The law of R. Jose b. Hanina is deduced from To a wife,45 and that the marriage may take place against her will is deduced from Her husband's brother shall go in unto her.45 What does Rabbi do with [the expression], ''aleha'? — He requires it [for another deduction], as we learnt: The Beth din52 are under no obligation53 unless [they ruled] concerning a prohibition the punishment for which is kareth, if the transgression was wilful, and a sin-offering if the transgression was unwitting; and so it is with the anointed High priest.

Previous Chapter Next Chapter