Yevamot 193

Chapter 193

א שיאמרו דבר שמועה מפי בעוה"ז דאמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי כל ת"ח שאומרים דבר שמועה מפיו בעולם הזה שפתותיו דובבות בקבר אמר ר' יצחק בן זעירא ואיתימא שמעון נזירא מאי קראה (שיר השירים ז, י) וחכך כיין הטוב הולך לדודי למישרים דובב שפתי ישנים
1 that a traditional statement may be reported in my name in this world'; for R. Johanan<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or Jehozadak (cf. Sanh. 90b). ');"><sup>1</sup></span> stated in the name of R. Simeon b. Yohai: The lips of a [deceased] scholar, in whose name a traditional statement is reported in this world, move gently in the grave. Said R. Isaac b. Ze'ira, or it might be said, Simeon the Nazirite: What is the Scriptural proof of this? And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine that glideth down smoothly for my beloved, moving gently the lips of those who are asleep,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cant. VII. 10. [H] moving gently. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> like a heated mass of grapes. As a heated mass of grapes, as soon as a man places his finger upon it, exudes<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H]. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב ככומר של ענבים מה כומר של ענבים כיון שמניח אדם אצבעו עליו מיד דובב אף תלמידי חכמים כיון שאומרים דבר שמועה מפיהם בעוה"ז שפתותיהם דובבות בקבר:
2 immediately so with the scholars as soon as a traditional statement is made in their name in this world, their lips move gently<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra n. 5. The rt. [H] signifies both 'to exude' and 'to whisper'. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> in the grave. WHETHER HE IS OF THE AGE OF NINE YEARS etc. A contradiction was pointed out: If at the age of twenty he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A levir whose brother died without issue and whose duty it is to marry the widow of the deceased or to submit to her halizah. ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ג אחד בן ט' שנים וכו': ורמינהו בן עשרים שנה שלא הביא שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהוא בן עשרים והוא הסריס לא חולץ ולא מייבם
3 did not produce two [pubic] hairs,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The legal signs of maturity. ');"><sup>6</sup></span> they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The relatives of the widow, who are desirous of procuring her exemption from the levirate marriage and the halizah. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> must bring evidence that he is twenty years of age, and he [is then confirmed as a] <i>saris</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One incapable of procreation. V. Glos. He is no longer regarded as a minor for whose maturity the widow must wait. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ד בת עשרים שנה שלא הביאה שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהיא בת עשרים והיא האילונית לא חולצת ולא מתייבמת
4 he may neither submit to <i>halizah</i> nor may he perform the levirate marriage. If a woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A widow whose husband died childless. Cf. supra p. 661, n. 8. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> at the age of twenty did not produce two [pubic] hairs, they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The levir's relatives, cf. supra p. 661, n. 10 mutatis mutandis. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> must bring evidence that she is twenty years of age, and she [is then confirmed as a] woman who is incapable of procreation; she may neither perform <i>halizah</i> nor contract levirate marriage!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 80a, Ned. 57b, Cf, B.B. 155b. From this (cf. p. 661, n. 11) it follows that at the age of twenty a person is considered to have attained legal majority, though his body has not developed any signs of maturity, contrary to our Mishnah which gives such a person the status of a minor. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ה הא אתמר עלה א"ר שמואל בר יצחק אמר רב והוא שנולדו לו סימני סריס אמר רבא דיקא נמי דקתני והוא הסריס שמע מינה
5 — Surely in connection with this Mishnah it was stated: R. Samuel b. Isaac said in the name of Rab that this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law that he is regarded as a saris, ');"><sup>12</sup></span> applies only to the case where [other] symptoms<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Described supra 80b. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> of a <i>saris</i> also appeared on him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, however, these additional symptoms of a saris did not appear, he is as stated in our Mishnah regarded as a minor so long as he has not produced two pubic hairs. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ו וכי לא נולדו לו סימני סריס עד כמה תני דבי רבי חייא עד רוב שנותיו
6 Said Raba: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a boy is not regarded as a saris unless apart from the absence of pubic hairs, he has developed also other symptoms of a saris. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> may also be arrived at by deduction. For it was taught, 'And he [is confirmed as a] <i>saris</i>',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Implying that he had already other symptoms of a saris. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> from which this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a boy is not regarded as a saris unless apart from the absence of pubic hairs, he has developed also other symptoms of a saris. ');"><sup>15</sup></span>
ז כי אתו לקמיה דרבא אי כחוש אמר להו זילו אבריוהו ואי בריא אמר להו זילו אכחשוהו דהני סימנין זמנין דנתרי מחמת כחישותא וזמנין דנתרי מחמת בריותא:
7 may well be deduced. And where no symptoms of a <i>saris</i> developed, how long [is one regarded as a minor]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If two pubic hairs did not appear. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> — It was taught at the school of R. Hiyya: Until he has passed middle age.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'most of his years', i.e., until he is thirty-six years of age. Man's span of life is taken to be seventy years (cf. Ps. XC, 10). ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
ח <br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך האישה רבה</strong></big><br><br>
8 Whenever people came [with such a case]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of one who reached the age of twenty without having produced two hairs. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> before Raba,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or,'R. Hiyya'. Cf. B.B. 155b and Nid. 47b. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> he used to tell them, if [the youth was] emaciated, 'Let him first be fattened'; and if he was stout, he used to tell them, 'Let him first be made to lose weight'; for these symptoms disappear<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] (rt. [H] Pi'el, 'to fall off'). MS.M. reads, [H] (rt. [H] 'come', 'appear') a reading adopted by Tosaf. in B.B. 155b, s.v. [H]. ');"><sup>21</sup></span>
ט מתני׳ <big><strong>נושאין על האנוסה</strong></big> ועל המפותה האונס והמפתה על הנשואה חייב נושא אדם אנוסת אביו ומפותת אביו אנוסת בנו ומפותת בנו רבי יהודה אוסר באנוסת אביו ומפותת אביו:
9 sometimes as a result of emaciation and sometimes they disappear<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] (rt. [H] Pi'el, 'to fall off'). MS.M. reads, [H] (rt. [H] 'come', 'appear') a reading adopted by Tosaf. in B.B. 155b, s.v. [H]. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> as a result of stoutness. <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. A MAN IS PERMITTED TO MARRY [THE NEAR RELATIVE] OF A WOMAN [WHOM HE HAS] OUTRAGED OR SEDUCED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Only relatives of a married wife are subject to the law of incest. ');"><sup>22</sup></span>
י <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> תנינא להא דת"ר אנס אשה מותר לישא בתה נשא אשה אסור לישא בתה ורמינהו הנטען מן האשה אסור באמה ובבתה ובאחותה מדרבנן
10 HE, HOWEVER, WHO OUTRAGED OR SEDUCED [A RELATIVE] OF HIS MARRIED WIFE, IS GUILTY.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And must suffer the prescribed penalties. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> A MAN MAY MARRY THE WOMAN WHOM HIS FATHER HAS OUTRAGED OR SEDUCED OR THE WOMAN WHOM HIS SON HAS OUTRAGED OR SEDUCED. R. JUDAH FORBIDS [MARRIAGE] WITH THE WOMAN WHOM ONE'S FATHER HAS OUTRAGED OR SEDUCED. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In our Mishnah. ');"><sup>24</sup></span>
יא וכל היכא דאיכא איסורא מדרבנן תני נושאין לכתחלה כי תנן מתניתין לאחר מיתה
11 we learn what the Rabbis taught: 'A man who has outraged a woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By immoral intercourse, whether without, or with her consent. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> is permitted to marry her daughter; if, however, he married the woman, he is forbidden to marry her daughter'. A contradiction, however, may be pointed out: A man who is suspected of intercourse with a woman is forbidden to marry her mother, her daughter and her sister!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Yeb. IV and supra 262 q.v. for notes. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> — This [prohibition<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Tosefta cited. ');"><sup>27</sup></span>
יב מנא הני מילי דת"ר בכולן נאמר שכיבה וכאן נאמר קיחה לומר לך דרך ליקוחין אסרה תורה
12 is only] Rabbinical.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In order that illicit intercourse with the suspected woman may not be facilitated through a marriage with one of her near relatives. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> Would it be stated, however, where a Rabbinical prohibition exists, that A MAN IS PERMITTED TO MARRY even from the outset! — Our Mishnah refers only to [a marriage] after [the suspected woman's] death.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the woman outraged or seduced is dead the marriage with any one of her relatives would obviously provide no further facilities for illicit intercourse with her (cf. supra n. 7). Hence no preventive measure was instituted. ');"><sup>29</sup></span> Whence is this ruling deduced? — From what the Rabbis taught: In the case of all those [illicit relationships]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as, e.g., a father's wife, a daughter-in-law and an aunt (v. Lev. XX, 11ff). ');"><sup>30</sup></span>
יג א"ל רב פפא לאביי אלא מעתה גבי אחותו דכתיב (ויקרא כ, יז) איש אשר יקח את אחותו בת אביו או בת אמו הכי נמי דרך קיחה הוא דאסור דרך שכיבה שרי
13 Scripture used the expression of 'lying',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., lieth (Lev. XX, 11), lie (ibid. 12). ');"><sup>31</sup></span> but here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In respect of a woman and her mother, and similar relatives that are forbidden through one's wife. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> it made use of the expression of 'taking',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., take (lev. XVIII, 17, 18, ibid. XX, 14, 17). ');"><sup>33</sup></span>
יד א"ל ליקוחין כתיבי בתורה סתם הראוי לקיחה קיחה הראוי לשכיבה שכיבה
14 in order to tell you [that only when intercourse with a woman was in] the manner of 'taking'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when the man contracted with her a lawful marriage; cf. Deut. XXIV, 1: 'When a man taketh a wife'. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> did the Torah forbid [marriage with her relatives].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The relatives of a woman with whom he had illicit intercourse are, therefore permitted. ');"><sup>35</sup></span> Said R. Papa to Abaye: If that is so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but now'. ');"><sup>36</sup></span>
טו רבא אמר אנס אשה מותר לישא בתה מהכא כתיב (ויקרא יח, י) ערות בת בנך או בת בתך לא תגלה הא בת בנה דידה ובת בתה דידה גלי
15 then in respect of one's sister, concerning whom it is written, And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XX, 17 emphasis on take. Cf. supra n. 6. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> is [intercourse] here also forbidden only [if it is in] the manner of 'taking',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when the man contracted with her a lawful marriage; cf. Deut. XXIV, 1: 'When a man taketh a wife'. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> but permitted [if it is in] the manner of 'lying'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This would be absurd. ');"><sup>38</sup></span>
טז וכתיב ערות אשה ובתה לא תגלה את בת בנה ואת בת בתה לא תקח הא כיצד כאן באונסין כאן בנשואין
16 — The other replied: The word 'taking' is used in the Torah without being defined, [so that a text] to which 'taking' is applicable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case of a woman and her mother or two sisters, where marriage with the first is lawful. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> [signifies] 'taking'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lawful marriage. Only when legal marriage took place with the first is marriage with the second forbidden. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> while one to which only 'lying' is applicable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Intercourse, for instance, with one's sister. ');"><sup>41</sup></span>
יז איפוך אנא עריות שאר כתיב בהו בנשואין איכא שאר באונסין ליכא שאר:
17 [signifies] 'lying'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even illicit intercourse. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> Raba stated: [That a man who] outraged a woman is permitted to marry her daughter, [is deduced] from here: It is written, The nakedness of thy son's daughter, or of thy daughter's daughter, thou shalt not uncover;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVIII, 10. ');"><sup>43</sup></span> from which it follows<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'thus'. ');"><sup>44</sup></span>
יח רבי יהודה אוסר באנוסת אביו וכו': אמר רב גידל אמר רב מאי טעמא דרבי יהודה דכתיב (דברים כג, א) לא יקח איש את אשת אביו ולא יגלה כנף אביו כנף שראה אביו לא יגלה
18 that the daughter of her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A wife's. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> son and the daughter of her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A wife's. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> daughter may be uncovered; but it is also written in Scripture, Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; thou shalt not take her son's daughter, or her daughter's daughter!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVIII, 17. ');"><sup>46</sup></span>
יט וממאי דבאנוסה כתיב דכתיב מעילויה דקרא (דברים כב, כט) ונתן האיש השוכב עמה לאבי הנערה חמשים כסף
19 How then [are these to be reconciled]? The former<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here'. ');"><sup>47</sup></span> refers to cases of outrage and the latter to those of marriage. Might not [the application]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., applying the first text to cases of marriage and the second to those of outrage. ');"><sup>48</sup></span> be reversed? — In respect of forbidden relatives the expression kin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XVIII, 6. ');"><sup>49</sup></span>
כ ורבנן אי הוה סמיך ליה כדקאמרת השתא דלא סמיך ליה מיבעי ליה לכדרב ענן דאמר רב ענן אמר שמואל בשומרת יבם של אביו הכתוב מדבר ומאי כנף אביו כנף הראוי לאביו לא יגלה
20 is written, and kinship exists only by means of marriage; but no kinship exists by means of outrage. R. JUDAH FORBIDS MARRIAGE WITH THE WOMAN WHOM ONE'S FATHER HAD OUTRAGED etc. R. Giddal stated in the name of Rab: What is R. Judah's reason? Because it is written, A man shall not take his father's wife, and shall not uncover his father's skirt:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 1. ');"><sup>50</sup></span> the skirt which his father saw<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even through outrage. ');"><sup>51</sup></span>
כא ותיפוק ליה משום דודתו לעבור עליה בשני לאוין
21 he shall not uncover. Whence, however, is it inferred that Scripture speaks of an outraged woman? — From the preceding section of the text where it is written, Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsels father fifty <i>shekels</i> of silver.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXII, 29. a case of outrage. ');"><sup>52</sup></span> And the Rabbis?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How can they maintain their view in our Mishnah against the Scriptural text. ');"><sup>53</sup></span> — If one text had occurred in close proximity to the other your exposition would have been justified;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'as you said'. ');"><sup>54</sup></span>
כב ותיפוק ליה משום יבמה לשוק לעבור עליה בשלשה לאוין ואיבעית אימא לאחר מיתה
22 now, however, that it does not occur in close proximity, the text is required for [an exposition] like that of R. Anan. For R. Anan stated in the name of Samuel that the Scriptural text<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 1. ');"><sup>50</sup></span> speaks of a woman awaiting the levirate decision of his father; and the meaning of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and what'. ');"><sup>55</sup></span> his father's skirt<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 1. ');"><sup>50</sup></span> is: He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A son. ');"><sup>56</sup></span> shall not uncover the skirt which is designated for his father.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such a woman, unless she has performed halizah with his father, is permitted to marry no one but his father. ');"><sup>57</sup></span> [This prohibition,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To marry the widow who was subject to his father's Ievirate marriage. Cf. supra n. 9. ');"><sup>58</sup></span> however], might be deduced from the fact that she is his aunt!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Having been the wife of his father's brother. V. Lev. XX, 20. What need then was there for the additional text of Deut. XXIII, 1? ');"><sup>59</sup></span> — [The text<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 1. ');"><sup>50</sup></span> was necessary] to make him<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The son. v.. supra note 10. ');"><sup>60</sup></span> guilty of the transgression of two negative commandments.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prescribed in (1) Lev. XX, 20 and (2) Deut. XXIII, 1. ');"><sup>61</sup></span> [The prohibition,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra note 10. ');"><sup>62</sup></span> however] might be inferred from the fact [that the widow as a] sister-in-law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra note 9. ');"><sup>63</sup></span> [is forbidden] to marry any stranger!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to the market', i.e., any man other than the levir. Cf. supra n. 11 second clause. ');"><sup>64</sup></span> — [The text<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 1. ');"><sup>50</sup></span> was necessary] to make him guilty of the transgression of three negative commandments.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The two referred to supra p. 665, n. 13 as well as the one last mentioned. ');"><sup>65</sup></span> And if you prefer I might say:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In reply to the last objection. ');"><sup>66</sup></span> After [his father's] death.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When marriage with the widow is not subject to the last mentioned prohibition (that of a sister-in-law to a stranger) and only two prohibitions (v. supra p. 665, n. 13) remain. ');"><sup>67</sup></span>
Previous ChapterNext Chapter