Yevamot 39

שמגרשה בגט ומחזירה התם נמי לימא ויבמה עדיין יבומין הראשונים עליה ותיבעי חליצה

that he may divorce her with a letter of divorce and that he may remarry her',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 8b, q.v. for notes, infra 39a. ');">¹</span> let it there also be said, 'And perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXV, 5' ');">²</span> the former levirate attachment still remains with her' and, consequently, she should require <i>halizah</i> [also]! — There the case is different; since Scripture stated, 'And take her to him to wife',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXV, 5' ');">²</span>

שאני התם דאמר קרא (דברים כה, ה) ולקחה לו לאשה כיון שלקחה נעשית כאשתו לכל דבר אי הכי הכא נמי הא כתב רחמנא (דברים כה, ה) ויבמה

as soon as he married her she becomes his wife in every respect. If so, [the same deduction should be applied] here also! — Surely the All Merciful has written, 'And perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXV, 5' ');">²</span> And why the differentiation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and what did you see', i.e., why apply the first part of the text to one case and the second part of the same text to the other? ');">³</span> - It stands to reason that permission<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To give ordinary divorce without submitting to halizah. and to remarry, which is derived from And take her to him to wife. ');">⁴</span>

ומה ראית מסתברא שדי היתירא אהיתירא ושדי איסורא אאיסורא

should be applied to that which is [also otherwise] permitted,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ordinary levirate. ');">⁵</span> and that prohibition<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Implied in the words 'And perform the duty of a husband's brother unto her'. ');">⁶</span> should be applied to that which is [also otherwise] prohibited.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., 'the wife of his brother who was not his contemporary'. ');">⁷</span>

ולר' שמעון דאמר הואיל ובא ומצאה בהיתר ולא עמדה עליו שעה אחת באיסור אלא מעתה אחותו מאמו שנשאה אחיו מאביו ואחר כך נולד אח ומת תתייבם הואיל ובא ומצאה בהיתר

According to R. Simeon, however, who stated, 'Because when he was born he found her permitted, and she was never forbidden to him even for one moment',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 19b, q.v. for notes. ');">⁸</span> a brother, if this reason is tenable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'but from now'. ');">⁹</span> should be allowed to take in levirate marriage his maternal sister whom his paternal brother had married prior to his birth, dying subsequently, since, when he was born, he found her permitted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When he was born she was already his 'brother's wife'. ');">¹⁰</span>

איסור אחותו להיכן אזל הכא נמי איסור אחיו שלא היה בעולם להיכן אזל האי איסורא דלית ליה היתירא האי איסורא דאית ליה היתירא:

— Whither did the 'prohibition of sister' vanish?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'whither did it go?' ');">¹¹</span> — Here, also, whither did the prohibition of 'the wife of the brother who was not his contemporary' vanish! — The one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prohibition of a sister. ');">¹²</span> is a prohibition which can never be lifted; the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A brother's wife. ');">¹³</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> כלל אמרו ביבמה כל שהיא איסור ערוה לא חולצת ולא מתייבמת איסור מצוה ואיסור קדושה חולצת ולא מתייבמת

is a prohibition which may be lifted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the brother died without issue. When the first brother died childless the prohibition of 'brother's wife' was removed and thus the widow was permitted to the second brother. Her connection with the first thus having come to an end, the third brother, as her legitimate levir through the second brother, may consequently marry her. ');">¹⁴</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. A GENERAL RULE HAS BEEN LAID DOWN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'they said'. ');">¹⁵</span> IN RESPECT OF THE DECEASED BROTHER'S WIFE:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose husband died without issue. ');">¹⁶</span>

אחותה שהיא יבמתה חולצת או מתייבמת

WHEREVER SHE IS PROHIBITED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To marry the levir. ');">¹⁷</span> AS A FORBIDDEN RELATIVE, SHE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The rival, and much more so the forbidden relative herself. ');">¹⁸</span> MAY NEITHER PERFORM THE <i>HALIZAH</i> NOR BE TAKEN IN LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. IF SHE IS PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF A COMMANDMENT<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'an ordinance of the Scribes'. The term [H] is discussed infra. ');">¹⁹</span>

איסור מצוה שניות מדברי סופרים איסור קדושה אלמנה לכ"ג גרושה וחלוצה לכהן הדיוט ממזרת ונתינה לישראל ובת ישראל לנתין וממזר:

OR BY VIRTUE OF HOLINESS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] v. infra. ');">²⁰</span> SHE MUST PERFORM THE <i>HALIZAH</i> AND MAY NOT BE TAKEN IN LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. IF HER SISTER IS ALSO HER SISTER-IN-LAW,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the case where two sisters were married to two brothers who died childless, and both widows become subject to levirate marriage with a third brother towards whom one of them stood in any kind of forbidden relationship as, say. that of mother-in-law or daughter-in-law. ');">²¹</span> SHE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sister of the forbidden relative. ');">²²</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> כלל לאתויי מאי אמר רפרם בר פפא לאתויי צרת אילונית וכדרב אסי

MAY PERFORM THE <i>HALIZAH</i> OR MAY BE TAKEN IN LEVIRATE MARRIAGE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the forbidden relative may never marry the levir, her sister does not come under the prohibition of 'the sister of his zekukah' i.e., of 'the woman related to him by the levirate bond'. ');">²³</span> PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF A COMMANDMENT' [REFERS TO] THE SECONDARY DEGREES IN RELATIONSHIP FORBIDDEN BY THE RULING OF THE SCRIBES. 'PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF HOLINESS' [REFERS TO THE FOLLOWING FORBIDDEN CATEGORIES]: A WIDOW TO A HIGH PRIEST;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose holy status precludes him from marrying a widow. V. Lev. XXI, 13f. ');">²⁴</span> A DIVORCED WOMAN, OR ONE THAT HAD PERFORMED <i>HALIZAH</i> TO A COMMON PRIEST;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where his brother unlawfully married such a woman and died without issue. The levir must not marry her on account of his holy status. v. Lev. XXI, 7. ');">²⁵</span>

ואיכא דאמרי כל שאיסורה איסור ערוה הוא דאסירא צרתה הא לא איסורה איסור ערוה צרתה לא אסירא למעוטי מאי אמר רפרם למעוטי צרת אילונית ודלא כרב אסי:

A FEMALE BASTARD OR A NETHINAH<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">²⁶</span> TO AN ISRAELITE;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who is forbidden on the ground of the sanctity of Israel to marry such types. ');">²⁷</span> AND A DAUGHTER OF AN ISRAELITE,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who is forbidden on the ground of the sanctity of Israel to marry such types. ');">²⁷</span>

אחותה שהיא יבמתה: אחותה דמאן אילימא דאיסור מצוה כיון דמדאורייתא רמיא קמיה פגע באחות זקוקתו אלא אחותה דאיסור ערוה:

TO A NATHIN<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">²⁸</span> OR A BASTARD. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. What was the GENERAL RULE meant to include?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In addition to the forbidden relatives actually enumerated. ');">²⁹</span>

איסור מצוה שניות: אמאי קרי ליה איסור מצוה אמר אביי מצוה לשמוע דברי חכמים:

— Rafram b. papa replied: TO include the rival of a woman who was incapable of procreation, In agreement with the view of R. Assi.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who stated (supra 12a) that such a woman may neither perform halizah nor be taken in levirate marriage. ');">³⁰</span> Some there are who say:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In interpretation of our Mishnah. ');">³¹</span> 'Whenever her prohibition is that of a forbidden relative then only is her rival forbidden; when, however, her prohibition is not that of a forbidden relative, her rival is not forbidden'. What was this meant to exclude? — Rafram replied: To exclude the rival of one incapable of procreation, contrary to the view of R. Assi.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who stated (supra 12a) that such a woman may neither perform halizah nor be taken in levirate marriage. ');">³⁰</span>

איסור קדושה אלמנה לכהן גדול גרושה וחלוצה לכהן הדיוט: ואמאי קרי להו איסור קדושה דכתיב (ויקרא כא, ו) קדושים יהיו לאלהיהם

IF HER SISTER IS ALSO HER SISTER-IN-LAW [etc.]. Whose sister? If the sister of her who is forbidden by Virtue of an ordinance of the Scribes be suggested, fit may be objected,] since, pentateuchally, she<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The woman forbidden by the ordinance of the Scribes. ');">³²</span> is subject to the levir, he would<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Should he marry her sister. ');">³³</span> come in marital contact with the sister of her who is connected with him by the levirate bond! — It means the sister of her who is prohibited to him as a forbidden relative.

תניא רבי יהודה מחליף איסור מצוה אלמנה לכהן גדול גרושה וחלוצה לכהן הדיוט ואמאי קרי ליה איסור מצוה דכתי' (ויקרא כז, לד) אלה המצות

PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF A COMMANDMENT', [REFERS TO] THE SECONDARY DEGREES. Why are these designated, PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF A COMMANDMENT'? — Abaye replied: Because it is a commandment to obey the rulings of the Sages. PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF HOLINESS' … A WIDOW TO A HIGH PRIEST; A DIVORCED WOMAN, OR ONE WHO HAD PERFORMED THE <i>HALIZAH</i>, TO A COMMON PRIEST. Why are these designated 'PROHIBITED BY VIRTUE OF HOLINESS'? — Because It is written in the Scriptures, They shall be holy onto their God.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 6. ');">³⁴</span> It was taught: R. Judah reverses the order: prohibited by virtue of a commandment [refers to the following prohibited categories:] a widow to a high priest; a divorced woman or one that had performed <i>halizah</i>, to a common priest. And why are these designated, prohibited by virtue of a commandment? — Because it is written in the Scriptures, These are the commandments.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 34 which refers to all the priestly commandments laid down in that book. ');">³⁵</span>

איסור קדושה שניות מדברי סופרים ואמאי קרי ליה איסור קדוש' אמר אביי כל המקיים דברי חכמים נקרא קדוש א"ל רבא וכל שאינו מקיים דברי חכמים קדוש הוא דלא מיקרי רשע נמי לא מיקרי אלא אמר רבא קדש עצמך במותר לך:

prohibited by virtue of holiness [refers to] the secondary degrees of relationship forbidden by the rulings of the scribes. And why are these designated, prohibited by virtue of holiness? — Abaye replied: Because whosoever acts in accordance with the rulings of the Rabbis is called a holy man. Said Raba to him: Then he who does not act in accordance with the rulings of the Rabbis is not called a holy man; nor is he called a wicked man either?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely, a person disobeying the Rabbis is indeed a wicked man! ');">³⁶</span> — No, said Raba: 'Sanctify yourself by that which is permitted to you'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., marriages forbidden by the rulings of the scribes are designated as 'prohibited by virtue of holiness' because these restrictions are designed to promote self-sanctification and as a barrier and a safeguard against marriage with those who are Pentateuchally forbidden. ');">³⁷</span> A WIDOW TO A HIGH PRIEST. An unqualified ruling is laid down making no distinction between a nissu'in<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">³⁸</span>

אלמנה לכהן גדול: קפסיק ותני לא שנא מן הנשואין ולא שנא מן האירוסין

widow and an erusin<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">³⁸</span> widow. Now, one can well understand the reason the case of a nissu'in widow [since marriage with her is forbidden by] a positive<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 13. And he shall take a wife in her virginity. ');">³⁹</span> and a negative precept,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. v. 14, A widow … shall he not take. ');">⁴⁰</span>

בשלמא מן הנשואין עשה ולא תעשה ואין עשה דוחה לא תעשה ועשה אלא מן האירוסין לא תעשה גרידא הוא יבא עשה וידחה לא תעשה

and no positive precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That of the levirate marriage. ');">⁴¹</span> may override both a negative and a positive precept. In the case, however, of an erusin widow [marriage with whom is forbidden by] a negative precept only,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra n. 6. The positive precept (v. n. 5) is not infringed since she is still a virgin. ');">⁴²</span> let the positive precept<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That of the levirate marriage. ');">⁴¹</span>

אמר רב גידל אמר רב אמר קרא (דברים כה, ז) ועלתה יבמתו השערה שאין ת"ל יבמתו מה תלמוד לומר יבמתו יש לך יבמה אחת שעולה לחליצה ואינה עולה לייבום ואיזו זו חייבי לאוין

override the negative<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. v. 14, A widow … shall he not take. ');">⁴⁰</span> one? — R. Giddal replied in the name of Rab: Scripture stated, Then his brother's wife shall go up to the 'gate,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXV, 7. ');">⁴³</span> where there was no need to state his brother's wife;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the pronoun implied in [H] (then she shall go up) sufficiently indicates the subject which has been previously mentioned. ');">⁴⁴</span>

ואימא חייבי כריתות אמר קרא (דברים כה, ז) אם לא יחפוץ האיש לקחת הא חפץ מייבם כל העולה לייבום עולה לחליצה וכל שאין עולה לייבום אינו עולה לחליצה

why then was 'his brother's wife' specified? [To indicate that] there is a case of another<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. BaH a.l. Cur. edd., 'one'. ');">⁴⁵</span> brother's wife who goes up for <i>halizah</i> but does not go up for levirate marriage.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a brother's wife not coming under the obligation of levirate marriage as the one spoken of previously in the text. ');">⁴⁶</span> And who is she? One of those prohibited<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'guilty of'. ');">⁴⁷</span>

א"ה חייבי לאוין נמי הא רבי רחמנא יבמתו ומה ראית

by a negative precept.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A widow to a High Priest. V supra p. 117, n. 6. ');">⁴⁸</span> Might it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The text, His brother's wife. ');">⁴⁹</span> not be said [to include also] such as are subject to the penalty of <i>kareth</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so subject them also to halizah. ');">⁵⁰</span> — Scripture said, If the man like not to take,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. xxv, 7' ');">⁵¹</span> if he likes, however, he may take her in levirate marriage, [hence it is to be inferred that] whosoever may go up to enter into levirate marriage may also go up to perform <i>halizah</i> and whosoever may not go up to enter into levirate marriage<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Such as those who are subject to kareth. ');">⁵²</span> may not go up to perform <i>halizah</i> either. If so, the same should apply also to those forbidden by a negative Precept! — But, surely, the All Merciful has included them [by the expression] 'His brother's wife'. What ground is there for such differentiation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what did you see', i.e., why include the one and exclude the other? ');">⁵³</span>