Yevamot 228:1

משום דאיסורן במשהו אבל דם דעד דאיכא רביעית אימא לא ואי אשמעינן דם משום דאיכא כרת אבל שרצים אימא לא

it might have been assumed [that the law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which included minors in the prohibition. ');">¹</span> applies to them], because their prohibition applies<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To adults. ');">²</span>

ואי אשמעינן הני תרתי משום דאיסורן שוה בכל אבל טומאה אימא לא ואי אשמעינן טומאה כהנים שאני משום דריבה בהן מצות יתרות אבל הני אימא לא צריכא

to even the minutest [objectionable creature]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So according to Tosaf. (s.v. [H] a.l.) contrary to Rashi. ');">³</span> but not to blood the minimum quantity of which<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Involving a penalty. ');">⁴</span>

תא שמע שני אחין אחד פקח ואחד חרש נשואין שתי אחיות פקחות מת חרש בעל פקחת מה יעשה פקח בעל פקחת תצא משום אחות אשה

must be no less than<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until there is'. ');">⁵</span> a quarter [of a <i>log</i>].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">⁶</span>

מת פקח בעל פקחת מה יעשה חרש בעל פקחת מוציא את אשתו בגט ואשת אחיו אסורה לעולם

And if we had been informed concerning blood only, it might have been assumed [that the law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which included minors in the prohibition. ');">⁷</span> applies to this] because [the eating of it] involves the penalty of <i>kareth</i>, but not to reptiles. And if we had been informed concerning these two,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Reptiles and blood. ');">⁸</span>

אמאי מוציא את אשתו בגט תיתיב גביה קטן אוכל נבלות הוא משום איסורא דידה

it might have been assumed [that the law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which included minors in the prohibition. ');">⁷</span> applies to these] because their prohibition applies equally to all but not to uncleanness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which applies to priests only. Cf. Lev. XXI, 1ff. ');">⁹</span>

תא שמע שני אחין פקחין נשואין שתי אחיות אחת פקחת ואחת חרשת מת פקח בעל חרשת מה יעשה פקח בעל פקחת תצא משום אחות אשה מת פקח בעל פקחת מה יעשה פקח בעל חרשת מוציא את אשתו בגט ואשת אחיו בחליצה

And had we been informed concerning uncleanness it might have been assumed [that the law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which included minors in the prohibition. ');">⁷</span> applies only here because] priests are different [from other people], since more commandments have been imposed upon them,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As their adults were more restricted than others, greater restriction may have been imposed upon their minors also. ');">¹⁰</span>

ואמאי מוציא את אשתו בגט תיתיב גביה קטן אוכל נבלות הוא משום איסורא דידיה

but not to these.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Reptiles and blood. ');">⁸</span> [Hence the three Scriptural texts were] required.

אמר רבא תא שמע שני אחין אחד חרש ואחד פקח נשואין לשתי אחיות אחת פקחת ואחת חרשת מת חרש בעל חרשת מה יעשה פקח בעל פקחת תצא משום אחות אשתו מת פקח בעל פקחת מה יעשה חרש בעל חרשת מוציא את אשתו בגט ואשת אחיו אסורה לעולם

Come and hear: IF TWO BROTHERS ONE OF WHOM WAS OF SOUND SENSES<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The order in our Mishnah is slightly different. ');">¹¹</span> AND THE OTHER DEAF WERE MARRIED TO TWO SISTERS WHO WERE OF SOUND SENSES, AND THE DEAF BROTHER, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, DIED, WHAT SHOULD THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF THE SISTER OF SOUND SENSES, DO? — [NOTHING; SINCE HIS SISTER-IN-LAW] IS EXEMPT AS BEING HIS WIFE'S SISTER. IF THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, DIED, WHAT SHOULD THE DEAF BROTHER, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, DO? HE MUST RELEASE HIS WIFE BY A LETTER OF DIVORCE WHILE HIS BROTHER'S WIFE IS FORBIDDEN FOREVER [TO MARRY AGAIN]. Now, why should he RELEASE HIS WIFE BY A LETTER OF DIVORCE? Let her continue to live with him [since he is only like] a minor who eats <i>nebelah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. A deaf-mute is no more responsible for his actions than a minor, and no more punishable than a minor. An objection against R. Pedath (cf. supra p. 801, n. 7)! ');">¹²</span>

והא הכא דלאו איסורא דידה איכא ולאו איסורא דידיה איכא וקתני מוציא את אשתו בגט אמר רב שמעיה גזירה משום התרת יבמה לשוק:

— On account of the prohibition imposed upon her.<a rel="footnote" href="#114b_13">¹³</a> Come and hear: IF TWO BROTHERS OF SOUND SENSES WERE MARRIED TO TWO SISTERS ONE OF WHOM WAS OF SOUND SENSES<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The order in our Mishnah is slightly different. ');">¹⁴</span>

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך חרש</strong></big><br><br>

AND THE OTHER DEAF, AND THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF THE DEAF SISTER. DIED, WHAT SHOULD THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, DO? [NOTHING; SINCE HIS SISTER-IN-LAW] IS EXEMPT AS HIS WIFE'S SISTER. IF THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES. DIED, WHAT SHOULD THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF THE DEAF SISTER, DO? — HE MUST DIVORCE HIS WIFE BY A LETTER OF DIVORCE, AND [RELEASE] HIS BROTHER'S WIFE BY <i>HALIZAH</i>. But why must he DIVORCE HIS WIFE BY A LETTER OF DIVORCE? Let her continue to live with him [since she is only like] a minor who eats <i>nebelah</i>!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 805. n. 9. ');">¹⁵</span> — Owing to the prohibition that is imposed upon him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is of sound senses and in possession of his faculties. Cf. supra p. 805, n. 10, mutatis mutandis. ');">¹⁶</span>

מתני׳ <big><strong>האשה</strong></big> שהלכה היא ובעלה למדינת הים שלום בינו לבינה ושלום בעולם ובאה ואמרה מת בעלי תנשא מת בעלי תתייבם

Raba said, Come and hear: IF TWO BROTHERS, ONE OF WHOM WAS DEAF AND THE OTHER OF SOUND SENSES, WERE MARRIED TO TWO SISTERS, ONE OF WHOM WAS OF SOUND SENSES<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The order in our Mishnah is slightly different. ');">¹⁴</span> AND THE OTHER DEAF, AND THE DEAF BROTHER, THE HUSBAND OF THE DEAF SISTER, DIED, WHAT SHOULD [THE BROTHER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, DO? [NOTHING; SINCE THE WIDOW] IS RELEASED BY VIRTUE OF HER BEING HIS WIFE'S SISTER. IF THE BROTHER OF SOUND SENSES, THE HUSBAND OF [THE SISTER WHO WAS] OF SOUND SENSES, DIED, WHAT SHOULD THE DEAF BROTHER, THE HUSBAND OF THE DEAF SISTER, DO? HE RELEASES HIS WIFE BY A LETTER OF DIVORCE, WHILE HIS BROTHER'S WIFE IS FOREVER FORBIDDEN [TO MARRY AGAIN]. Now here, surely, no prohibition is involved either for him or for her, and yet it was stated, HE RELEASES HIS WIFE BY A LETTER OF DIVORCE!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 805. n. 9. ');">¹⁵</span>

שלום בינו לבינה ומלחמה בעולם קטטה בינו לבינה ושלום בעולם ובאתה ואמרה מת בעלי אינה נאמנת רבי יהודה אומר לעולם אינה נאמנת אלא אם כן באתה בוכה ובגדיה קרועין אמרו לו אחת זו ואחת זו תנשא:

— R. Shemaia replied: This is a preventive measure against the possibility of allowing a sister-in-law to marry a stranger.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Were the deaf man and deaf woman allowed to continue living together, those who were unacquainted with the law that deaf-mutes are no more responsible for their actions than minors, might assume that their marriage was a valid one and that the sister-in-law, as the deaf levir's wife's sister, is exempt from the levirate marriage and halizah and, consequently, free to marry again. ');">¹⁷</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF A WOMAN AND HER HUSBAND WENT TO A COUNTRY BEYOND THE SEA [AT A TIME WHEN THERE WAS] PEACE BETWEEN HIM AND HER AND [WHEN THERE WAS ALSO] PEACE IN THE WORLD, AND SHE CAME BACK AND SAID, MY HUSBAND IS DEAD', SHE MAY MARRY AGAIN; AND IF SHE SAID, 'MY HUSBAND IS DEAD [AND HAS LEFT NO ISSUE]' SHE MAY CONTRACT THE LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. [IF, HOWEVER, THERE WAS] PEACE BETWEEN HIM AND HER, BUT WAR IN THE WORLD, [OR IF THERE WAS] DISCORD BETWEEN HIM AND HER, BUT PEACE IN THE WORLD, AND SHE CAME BACK AND SAID, 'MY HUSBAND IS DEAD', SHE IS NOT BELIEVED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reason why she is not believed in a time of war is given by Raba in the Gemara infra, while in a case of discord between herself and her husband she is suspected of a desire to get rid of him. ');">¹⁸</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> תנא שלום בינו לבינה משום דקבעי למיתני קטטה בינו לבינה תנא שלום בעולם משום דקבעי למיתני מלחמה בעולם

R. JUDAH SAID: SHE IS NEVER BELIEVED UNLESS SHE COMES WEEPING AND HER GARMENTS ARE RENT. THEY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Sages. ');">¹⁹</span> HOWEVER, SAID TO HIM: SHE MAY MARRY IN EITHER CASE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'whether this or this', whether she shows signs of distress and mourning or not. ');">²⁰</span>

אמר רבא מאי טעמא דמלחמה משום דאמרה בדדמי סלקא דעתא בכל הני דאיקטול הוא פליט אם תימצא לומר כיון דשלום בינו לבינה נטרא עד דחזיא זימנין דמחו ליה בגירא או ברומחא וסברא ודאי מת ואיכא דעבד סמתרי וחיה

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Mention was made of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he taught'. sc. in our Mishnah. ');">²¹</span> PEACE BETWEEN HIM AND HER<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though this is superfluous. It being obvious that if a husband and wife lived in peace, her declaration that he is dead should be relied upon. ');">²²</span>

סבר רבא למימר רעבון אינו כמלחמה דלא אמרה בדדמי הדר אמר רבא רעבון הרי הוא כמלחמה דההיא דאתת לקמיה דרבא אמרה ליה בעלי מת ברעב אמר לה שפיר עבדת דשיזבת נפשיך ס"ד דבההוא פורתא דנפפיתא דשבקת ליה הוה חיי אמרה ליה מר נמי ידע דכי האי גוונא לא חיי

because it was desired to speak of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to teach'. ');">²³</span> DISCORD BETWEEN HIM AND HER, and PEACE IN THE WORLD was mentioned<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra nn. 4 and 5 mutatis mutandis. ');">²⁴</span>

הדר אמר רבא רעבון גריעה ממלחמה דאילו מלחמה כי אמרה מת בעלי במלחמה הוא דלא מהימנא הא מת על מטתו מהימנא ואילו גבי רעבון עד דאמרה מת וקברתיו

because it was desired to mention<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to teach'. ');">²³</span> WAR IN THE WORLD.

מפולת הרי הוא כמלחמה דאמרה בדדמי שילוח נחשים ועקרבים הרי הן כמלחמה דאמרה בדדמי

Raba stated: What is the reason [why a wife is not believed in a time] of war? Because she speaks from conjecture. 'Could it be imagined' [she thinks]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wanting in cur. edd., and inserted by BaH. ');">²⁵</span> 'that among all those who were killed he alone escaped!' And should it be contended that since there was peace between him and her she would wait until she saw [what had actually happened to him]. it may sometimes happen [It may be retorted] that he was struck by an arrow or spear and she would think that he was certainly dead, while in fact someone night have applied an emollient<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Jast. 'A plaster', or 'bandage' (Rashi). ');">²⁶</span>

דבר אמרי לה הרי הוא כמלחמה ואמרי לה אינו כמלחמה אמרי לה הרי הוא כמלחמה דאמרי בדדמי ואמרי לה אינו כמלחמה דסמכי אדאמרי אינשי שב שנין הוה מותנא ואינש בלא שני לא אזיל

[to his wound] and he might have recovered Raba was [at first] of the opinion<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In respect of accepting a wife's evidence as to the death of her husband in a country beyond the sea. ');">²⁷</span>

איבעיא להו החזיקה היא מלחמה בעולם מהו מי אמרינן מה לה לשקר

that famine is not like war, since [in the former case] she does not speak from conjecture. [Later. however]. Raba changed his opinion. stating that famine is like war. For a woman once appeared before Raba and said to him, 'My husband died during a famine'. 'You have acted well', he remarked to her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Desiring to probe whether she had actually witnessed her husband's death or spoke from conjecture only. ');">²⁸</span> 'in that you saved your own life,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Leaving him to his fate in the famine-stricken area. ');">²⁹</span> since it could hardly be imagined that he would survive on the little remnant of flour that you left for him'. 'The Master then'. she replied. 'also understands that in such circumstances he could not survive'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' She thus admitted that she had not actually witnessed her husband's death. ');">³⁰</span> After this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he returned'. Finding that even in the case of famine a wife speaks from conjecture. ');">³¹</span> Raba ruled: Famine<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In respect of accepting a wife's evidence as to the death of her husband in a country beyond the sea. ');">²⁷</span> is worse than war; for whereas in the case of war it is only when the wife states, 'My husband died in the war', that she is not believed, but [if her statement is that]. 'He died in his bed', she is believed, in the case of famine she is not believed unless she states, 'He died and I buried him'. A ruin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In respect of accepting a wife's evidence as to the death of her husband in a country beyond the sea. ');">²⁷</span> is regarded as war, for [in this case also] she speaks from conjecture. A visitation of serpents or scorpions<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In respect of accepting a wife's evidence as to the death of her husband in a country beyond the sea. ');">²⁷</span> is regarded as war, for [here also a wife] speaks from conjecture. As to pestilence. some hold that it is like war, while others hold that it is not like war. 'Some hold that it is like war', because a wife, they maintain. speaks from conjecture; while 'others hold that it is not like war' because, they maintain, a wife relies upon the common saying.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'on what men say'. ');">³²</span> 'A pestilence may rage for seven years but none dies before his time'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., and a man without (his full tale of) years does not depart'. ');">³³</span> The question was raised:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Rashi v. 115b s.v. [H] reads, He (Raba) raised the question]. ');">³⁴</span> What is the law if it was she who established that there was a war in the world?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [And she stated, 'He died in war' v. Rashi loc. cit.]. ');">³⁶</span> Do we apply the argument. 'What motive could she have for telling a lie?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where a person has no benefit from a lie he may obviously be presumed to be speaking the truth. ');">³⁶</span>