Yevamot 23

Chapter 23

א אמר ליה תניתוה היתה אחת כשרה ואחת פסולה אם היה חולץ חולץ לפסולה ואם היה מייבם מייבם לכשרה מאי כשרה ומאי פסולה אילימא כשרה כשרה לעלמא פסולה פסולה לעלמא כיון דלדידיה חזיא מאי נפקא ליה מינה

1 — The other replied,1 You have learned it: If one of them was a permitted wife and the other a forbidden one; if she submits to halizah he must submit to that of the forbidden one; and if he marries, he marries the permitted one. Now, what is meant by 'permitted' and 'forbidden'? If it be suggested that 'permitted' means permitted to all the world and 'forbidden' means forbidden to all the world, what practical difference, in view of the fact that she is in either case suitable for him, could this make to him? Consequently 'permitted' must mean permitted to him, and 'forbidden', forbidden to him; and this may happen where he remarries his divorced wife; and yet it was taught. 'If he marries he marries the permitted one'!2

ב אלא לאו כשרה כשרה ליה פסולה פסולה ליה ומאי ניהו מחזיר גרושתו וקתני אם היה מייבם מייבם לכשרה

2 — No; 'permitted' may still mean permitted to all the world, and 'forbidden', forbidden to all the world; and as to your question. 'What practical difference, in view of the fact that she is in either case suitable for him, could this make'? One must take into account the moral lesson of R. Joseph. For R. Joseph said: Here, Rabbi taught that a man shall not pour the water out of his cistern so long as others may require it.3 Come and hear: 'Where a man remarried his divorced wife after she had been married, she and her rival are to perform halizah.' Is it possible to say 'she and her rival'? Consequently it must mean, 'either she or her rival.'4

ג לא כשרה לעלמא פסולה לעלמא ודקאמרת כיון דלדידיה חזיא מאי נפקא ליה מינה משום דרב יוסף דאמר רב יוסף כאן שנה רבי לא ישפוך אדם מי בורו ואחרים צריכים להם

3 Did you not, however, have recourse to an interpretation? [You might as well] interpret thus: She is to perform halizah, while her rival may either perform halizah or be married by the levir. R. Levi b. Memel said in the name of Mar 'Ukba in the name of Samuel: The rival of a mema'eneth5

ד ת"ש המחזיר גרושתו משניסת היא וצרתה חולצת היא וצרתה ס"ד אלא אימא או היא או צרתה ולאו תרוצי קא מתרצת לה תריץ הכי היא חולצת צרתה או חולצת או מתייבמת

4 is forbidden. To whom [is she forbidden]? If it be suggested, to the brothers,6 [it may be retort ed], now that she herself7

ה אמר רב לילי בר ממל אמר מר עוקבא אמר שמואל צרת ממאנת אסורה למאן אילימא לאחים השתא היא גופה שריא דאמר שמואל מיאנה בזה מותרת בזה צרתה מיבעיא

5 is permitted,8 for Samuel said, 'If she refused one brother she is permitted to marry the other',9

ו אלא לדידיה ומאי שנא ממאנת דשריא לאחין דלא עבדא בהו מעשה צרה נמי לא עבדא בהו מעשה

6 is there any question that her rival is permitted!8 Hence [it means] to himself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the levir whom the minor had refused. The refusal removes the precept of the levirate marriage and in respect of the rival the prohibition of marrying a brother's wife comes again into force. ');">10

ז גזירה משום צרת בתו ממאנת וצרת בתו ממאנת מי אסירא והתנן וכולן אם מתו או מיאנו צרותיהן מותרות

7 Wherein, however, does the mema'eneth11 differ12

ח דמיאנה במאן אילימא דמיאנה בבעל היינו גרושה אלא לאו ביבם

8 that she is in consequence permitted to the other brothers? Obviously, in that she had taken no action in relation to them;13 but her rival also had taken no action in relation to them!14

ט לא לעולם בבעל ותרי גווני גירושין ומ"ש כי מיאנה בבעל דעקרינהו לנשואין

9 — It is an enactment made to prevent marriage with the rival of one's daughter15 who was a mema'eneth.16

י כי מיאנה ביבם נמי נשואין קמאי קא עקרא

10 Is, however, the rival of one's daughter who is a mema'eneth forbidden? Surely we learned, IF, HOWEVER, ANY AMONG THESE DIED, OR MADE A DECLARATION OF REFUSAL, OR WERE DIVORCED17 [etc.] THEIR RIVALS ARE PERMITTED. Now, against whom was the declaration of refusal made? If it be suggested that she refused the husband, then this case is identical with that of a divorced woman.18

יא משום דתני רמי בר יחזקאל דתני רמי בר יחזקאל מיאנה בבעל מותרת לאביו ביבם אסורה לאביו

11 Consequently it must refer to refusal of the levir!19 — No; it may, in fact, refer to the refusal of a husband, but there are two kinds of divorce.20

יב אלמא משעת נפילה נראית ככלתו

12 Wherein, however, does the refusal of a husband differ?21 Obviously in that she thereby annuls the original marriage; but when she refused the levir she has also annulled the original marriage! — [It differs] in respect of what Rami b. Ezekiel had learnt. For Rami b. Ezekiel learnt: If she22

יג ה"נ משעת נפילה נראית כצרת בתו

13 declared her refusal against the husband she is permitted to marry his father;23 if against the levir, she is forbidden to his father.24

יד אמר רב אסי צרת אילונית אסורה שנאמר (דברים כה, ו) והיה הבכור אשר תלד פרט לאילונית שאינה יולדת

14 From this it clearly follows that from the moment she becomes subject to the levirate marriage25 she is looked upon as his26

טו מתיב רב ששת שלשה אחין נשואין שלש נשים נכריות ומת אחד מהם ועשה בה שני מאמר

15 daughter-in-law; similarly here also27 she is looked upon as the rival of his daughter from the moment she28

טז ומת הרי אלו חולצות ולא מתייבמות שנאמר (דברים כה, ה) ומת אחד מהם יבמה יבא עליה מי שעליה זיקת יבם אחד ולא זיקת שני יבמין

16 becomes subject to the levirate marriage. Said R. Assi: The rival of a woman incapable of procreation is forbidden;29

יז וקתני עלה אמר רב יוסף זו היא צרת אשת אח מאב שאיסור נפילה גרם לה שלא מצינו בכל התורה כולה כגון זאת

17 for it is said in the Scriptures, And it shall be that the firstborn that she beareth,30 which excludes a woman incapable of procreation, since she does not bear.31

יח זו היא למעוטי מאי לאו למעוטי צרת אילונית דשריא

18 R. Shesheth raised an objection: In the case where three brothers were married to three women who were strangers to one another, and one of them having died, the second brother addressed to her32 a ma'amar33

יט לא למעוטי צרת אילונית דאסירא ומאי זו היא זו היא דאיסור נפילה גרם לה צרתה בעיא חליצה אילונית אפילו חליצה לא בעיא מ"ט הא דאורייתא הא דרבנן

19 and died, behold these34 must perform the halizah but may not marry the levir; for it is said, And one of them die [etc.] her husband's brother shall go in unto her,35

כ תנן וכולן אם מתו או מיאנו או נתגרשו או שנמצאו אילונית צרותיהן מותרות לא קשיא כאן שהכיר בה

20 only she36 who is tied to one levir<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., where the second brother had actually married her and has thus severed all her connections with the first. In such a case as in that of the usual levirate she would stand in relation to the third brother as the widow of one brother only. ');">37

כא כאן שלא הכיר בה

21 but not she who is tied to two levirs;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The formula of betrothal or ma'amar addressed to her by the second brother has only partially attached her to him and has not completely severed her connection with her husband, the first brother. She thus remains tied to the two, and consequently entirely forbidden the levirate marriage. ');">38 and concerning this it was taught: R. Joseph said, 'This is the rival of a paternal brother's wife whose prohibition39

כב דיקא נמי דקתני שנמצאו ולא קתני שהיו שמע מינה אמר רבא

22 is due to her double subjection to the levirate marriage,40 a case the like of which we do not find through out the Torah'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The widow not being one of the relatives forbidden by the Torah. The prohibition of the levirate marriage in her case is only Rabbinical, the Biblical text cited being a mere asmakta. ');">41 Now, what does the expression 'This is' exclude? Does it not exclude the rival of a woman incapable of procreation, who is permitted!42 — No; it excludes the rival of a woman incapable of procreation who is forbidden. What, then, is meant by the expression, 'This is'?43 — It is that in this case, where the subjection to the levirate marriage has caused the prohibition, her rival requires halizah; in the case, however, of a woman incapable of procreation even halizah is not required. What is the reason? — The prohibition of the one44 is Pentateuchal;45 that of the other only Rabbinical.46 We learnt; IF, HOWEVER, ANY AMONG THESE DIED, OR MADE A DECLARATION OF REFUSAL, OR WERE DIVORCED, OR WERE FOUND INCAPABLE OF PROCREATION, THEIR RIVALS ARE PERMITTED!47 — This is no difficulty; the one48 is a case where he49 knew her defect<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the time their marriage took place. Having known her defect he was not in any way misled, and the marriage, therefore, is valid. Her rival is consequently the rival of a legally married wife who is incapable of procreation and is forbidden by the deduction from Deut. XXV, 6. ');">50 while the other51 is a case where52 he did not know of it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the time he married her. Since her defect was unknown to him the marriage which had taken place under a misapprehension is invalid. The woman, therefore, is not his lawful wife, and her rival cannot be regarded as a legal rival. Hence the statement in our Mishnah that such a rival is permitted. ');">53 The inference from our Mishnah also proves this; for it was stated WERE FOUND54 and not 'were'. This proves it. Raba said:

Previous Chapter Next Chapter