Yevamot 184

אמר רב מנין שאין קדושין תופסין ביבמה שנאמר (דברים כה, ה) לא תהיה אשת המת החוצה לאיש זר לא תהא בה הויה לזר

in the name of Rab: Whence is it deduced that betrothal with a sister-in-law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra note 5. ');">¹</span> is of no validity?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And no divorce is consequently required. ');">²</span> — From the Scriptural text,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'because it is said'. ');">³</span> The wife of the dead shall not be married<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'she shall not be', [H]. ');">⁴</span>

ושמואל אמר בעניותינו צריכה גט מספקא ליה לשמואל האי לא תהיה אשת המת אי ללאו הוא דאתא אי דלא תפסי בה קדושין הוא דאתא

outside unto one who is not of his kin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXV, 5. ');">⁵</span> there shall be no validity in the betrothal<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'being'. [H], i.e., 'betrothal'. ');">⁶</span> of her by a stranger.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'a stranger shall have no being in her'. [H] (supra n. 15) is of the same rt. vhv, as that of vhv, (supra. 13). ');">⁷</span> Samuel, however, stated: Owing to our [intellectual] poverty<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Inability to understand the meaning of the Scriptural text mentioned. ');">⁸</span>

אמר ליה רב מרי בר רחל לרב אשי הכי אמר אמימר הלכה כוותיה דשמואל אמר רב אשי השתא דאמר אמימר הלכתא כוותיה דשמואל אם היה יבמה כהן חולץ לה ושריא ליה

it is necessary [that she be given] a letter of divorce; Samuel having been in doubt as to whether the expression,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that'. ');">⁹</span> The wife of the dead shall not be,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. xxv, 5. ');">¹⁰</span> served the purpose of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that it came'. ');">¹¹</span> a negative precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And, as is the case with other unions that are forbidden by negative precepts, the betrothal is valid. ');">¹²</span>

איתגורי איתגר א"כ מצינו חוטא נשכר אלא אם היה יבמה ישראל נותן לה שני גט והותרה לו

or rather indicated<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that it came'. ');">¹¹</span> that betrothal with such a woman is invalid. R. Mari b. Rachel said to R. Ashi: Thus said Amemar, 'The law is in agreement with Samuel'. Said R. Ashi: Now that Amemar has said that the law is in agreement with Samuel, her levir,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The brother-in-law of the widow, spoken of in the first case of our Mishnah, who married a stranger and from whom, according to Samuel, she requires a divorce. ');">¹³</span> if he was a priest,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To whom the sister-in-jaw would thus be forbidden even after she had been divorced by the stranger. A priest is forbidden to marry a divorced woman. V. Lev. XXI, 7. ');">¹⁴</span>

אמר רב גידל אמר רב חייא בר יוסף אמר רב יבמה קדושין אין בה נשואין יש בה אי קדושין אין בה נשואין נמי אין בה אימא קדושין ונשואין אין בה

submits to her <i>halizah</i> and she is permitted to her second husband.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to him', the stranger whom she married. ');">¹⁵</span> He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The second husband. v. supra n. 7. ');">¹⁶</span> surely benefits<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is permitted to continue to live with his wife. ');">¹⁷</span> thereby.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the halizah of the levir. ');">¹⁸</span>

ואיבעית אימא מאי נשואין יש בה בזנות כדרב המנונא דא"ר המנונא שומרת יבם שזינתה אסורה ליבמה

and thus the sinner<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who contracted a union before instituting the necessary enquiries as to the circumstances of his wife's first husband's death. ');">¹⁹</span> is at an advantage!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'gains'. ');">²⁰</span> — Rather [this is the reading]: If her levir<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra note 5. ');">²¹</span> was an Israelite, the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The second husband. Cf. supra note 7. ');">²²</span>

ואי בעית אימא לעולם כדאמרן מעיקרא קדושין אין בה נשואין יש בה דמיחלפא באשה שהלך בעלה למדינת הים

gives her a letter of divorce and she is permitted to the levir.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to him'. ');">²³</span> R. Giddal stated in the name of R. Hiyya b. Joseph in the name of Rab: While betrothal with a sister-in-law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who, before she performed halizah with the levir had married a stranger. ');">²⁴</span> is invalid, marriage with her is valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This validity, it is at present assumed, subjects the woman to the necessity of a letter of divorce. ');">²⁵</span> If betrothal, however, is invalid, marriage also should be invalid! — Read: Both betrothal and marriage with her are invalid. And if you prefer I might say. What is meant by 'marriage with her is valid'? — It constitutes an act of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'In'. ');">²⁶</span>

א"ר ינאי בחבורה נמנו וגמרו אין קדושין תופסין ביבמה אמר ליה רבי יוחנן רבי לא משנתנו היא זו דתנן האומר לאשה הרי את מקודשת לי לאחר שאתגייר לאחר שתתגיירי לאחר שאשתחרר לאחר שתשתחררי לאחר שימות בעליך לאחר שתמות אחותיך או לאחר שיחלוץ ליך יבמיך אינה מקודשת א"ל אי לאו דדלאי לך חספא מי משכחת מרגניתא תותיה

harlotry<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By such a marriage she becomes forbidden to marry the levir as if she had played the harlot; but no letter of divorce is required. ');">²⁷</span> in accordance with the ruling of R. Hamnuna.For R. Hamnuna stated: A woman who, while awaiting the decision of the levir, played the harlot, is forbidden to marry the levir. And if you prefer I might say: [The reading is]. in fact, as has been originally stated, that betrothal with her is invalid but marriage with her is valid,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the sense that she requires a letter of divorce. Cf. p. 630, n. 17. and the following note. ');">²⁸</span> since her case might be mistaken for that of a woman whose husband went to a country beyond the sea.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And she married in accordance with the decision of a court on the evidence of one witness who testified that her first husband was dead. As the woman in this case requires a letter of divorce, it was ordained, as a preventive measure, that in the case spoken of in our Mishnah also a letter of divorce shall be required. the validity spoken of extending, however, to this requirement and no further. In the case of betrothal no preventive measure was enacted since in this case also no letter of divorce is required. ');">²⁹</span> R. Jannai said: A vote was taken at the college and it was decided that betrothal with a sister-in-law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 630, n. 16. ');">³⁰</span>

א"ל ריש לקיש אי לאו דקלסך גברא רבה הוה אמינא לך אנא מתניתין רבי עקיבא היא דאמר אין קידושין תופסין בחייבי לאוין

has no validity. Said R. Johanan to him: O Master, is not this [law contained in] a<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'our'. ');">³¹</span> Mishnah? For we have learnt: If a man said to a woman, 'Be thou<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'behold thou art'. Cf. P.B. p. 298. ');">³²</span> betrothed unto me after I shall have become a proselyte'. 'after thou shalt have been a proselyte'. 'after I shall have been emancipated'. 'after thou shalt have been emancipated'. 'after thy husband shall have died', 'after thy sister shall have died' or 'after thy brother-in-law shall have submitted to thy halizah', the betrothal is invalid!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kid. 62a, Keth. 58b. B.M. 16b. Betrothal cannot take effect at once owing to his stipulation and it cannot take place in the future because that which is not yet in existence may not be acquired. From this it follows that before the levir has submitted to halizah betrothal by a stranger is invalid, which is in effect the law reported by R. Jannai. ');">³³</span> — The other replied: Had I not lifted up the sherd, would you have found the pearl beneath it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., had not R. Jannai stated his ruling it might never have occurred to R. Johanan that the reason for the invalidity of the betrothal in the case of the sister-in- law was the law that betrothal with a sister-in-law by a stranger is never valid before the levir has submitted to halizah. He might have assumed the invalidity in this particular case also to be due to the fact that the man distinctly desired it to take place in the future, and no one can acquire that which is not yet in existence. ');">³⁴</span>

ואי ר"ע כי אמר לה לאחר שיחלוץ ליך יבמיך ליתפסי בה קידושי דהא שמעינן ליה לרבי עקיבא דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם דתנן

Resh Lakish said to him:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Johanan. ');">³⁵</span> Had not a great man praised you. I would have told you that the Mishnah [you cited represents the view] of R. Akiba who maintains that betrothal with those who are subject to the penalties of a negative precept is invalid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Marriage of a sister-in-law by a stranger before she has performed halizah with the levir is forbidden by such a negative precept. This Mishnah, therefore, provides no proof, like the statement of R. Jannai, that the Rabbis also admit invalidity in such a case. ');">³⁶</span> If [this Mishnah, however, represents the view of] R. Akiba, betrothal [with the sister-in-law]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'with', or 'in her'. ');">³⁷</span> should be valid where [the stranger] said to her, 'after thy brother-in-law shall have submitted to thy halizah', since R. Akiba has been heard to state that one may transfer possession of that which is not yet in existence;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Consequently. the betrothal here, though it was dependent on a future event which had not yet taken place. should also be valid. ');">³⁸</span> for we learned: