Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot Chapter 4

הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוְולָד שֶׁלְּקַיָימָא הוּא מוּתָּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא מוּתֶּרֶת בִּקְרוֹבָיו. וְלֹא פְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. אֵין הַוְולָד שֶׁלְּקַיָימָא הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִּקְרוֹבָיו. וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת כול׳. בְּשֶׁעָבַר. הָא כַתְּחִילָּה לֹא. דֵי מַתְנִיתָא הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ וְלֹא תִתְיַבֵּם עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא לָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִּׁים. וְתַחֲלוֹץ מִיָּד. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. אִם בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא לֹא נָגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה. אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא הֲרֵי חֲלִיצָתָהּ בְּיָדָהּ. רִבִּי זְעִירָה רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵּׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. רִבִּי בָּא רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. מֵאֵן יְבָמִי. אֶת שֶׁאוֹמְרִין לוֹ. יַיבֵּם. אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. יַיבֵּם. אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. מַה נְפַק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. הָיְתָה כְשֵׁירֵה וְנִתְחַלְּלָה. כְּגוֹן אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּגְרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. מָאן דְּאָמַר. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. וְזוּ הוֹאִיל וְאֵינָהּ צרִיכָה כְּרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה חוֹלֶצֶת. מָאן דְּאָמַר. אֶת שֶׁאוֹמְרִים לוֹ יַיבֵּם. אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. חָלַץ בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים מַהוּ שֶׁתְּהֵא צְרִיכָה לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִים. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. קְטַנָּה שֶׁחָלְצָה תַחֲלוֹץ מִשֶׁתַּגְדִּיל. וְאִם חָלְצָה חֲלִיצָתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה. רִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר לָהּ סְתָם. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בְרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִיָיה מָטֵי בָהּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. אֵין חוֹלְצִין וְאֵין מְיַיבְּמִין אֶת הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁמָּא תִימָּצֵא אַיְילוֹנִית. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָלְצָה חוֹלֶצֶת. וְהָכָא נַמֵּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָלְצָה חוֹלֶצֶת. רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. חָלַץ לָהּ מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְהִפִּילָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. הֲרֵי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעוּבֶּרֶת יָכוֹל תְּהֵא זְקוּקָה לְיָבָם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אֶת שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ מָחוּי. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר. לְהָקִים לְאָחִיו שֵׁם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. עַד שֶׁתֵּדַע אִם בֶּן קַיָימָה הוּא אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָה. יָכוֹל אַף אֵשֶׁת סָרִיס תְּהֵא צְרִיכָה לְיִיבּוּם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אֶת שֶׁאֵין שְׁמוֹ מָחוּי. יָצָא זֶה שֶׁ(אין) שְׁמוֹ מָחוּי. יָכוֹל אוֹמֵר. צָרָתָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְהִינָּשֵׂא. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר. צָרָתָהּ לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא עַד שֶׁתֵּדַע בְּמַה הִיא מוּתֶּרֶת אִם בְעִיבּוּר אִם בְּבִיאָה. אַף בַּחֲלוּצָה כֵן. חֲלִיצָה פְטוֹר וּבִיאָה פְטוֹר. כְּמַה דְתֵימַר בְּבִיאָה כָּךְ אַתְּ מָר בַּחֲלִיצָה. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. זָכִין בָּעוֹבָּרִין. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר. אֵין זָכִין בָּעוֹבָּרִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר זָכִין לָעוֹבָּרִין. מוֹדֵי הוּא שֶׁיָּצָא רֹאשּׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַחַיִים. דֵי מַתְנִיתָא הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוֹבֶּרֶת. כְּמָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר כָּאן. הוּא לְמַפְרֵעַ לֹא נָגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה. וְהָכָא בֵּ(י)ן הוּא לְמַפְרֵעַ וְהוּא שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הָאוֹמֵר. אִם יָלְדָה אִשְׁתִּי זָכָר יִטּוֹל מָנֶה. יָלְדָה זָכָר נוֹטֵל מָנֶה. אִם נְקֵיבָה מָאתַיִם. יָלְדָה נְקֵיבָה נוֹטֶלֶת מָאתַיִם. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר. לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בְנוֹ. הָא אַחֵר לֹא. רִבִּי יוֹסָה אָמַר. אֲפִילוּ אַחֵר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר וּבִלְבַד שְׁכִיב מְרַע. הָא בָרִיא לֹא. בִּלְבַד מְטַלְטְלִין. הָא קַרְקָעוֹת לֹא. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי לָעְזָר. גֵּר שֶׁמֵּת וּבִיזְבְּזוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת נְכָסָיו. וְנוֹדַע שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵן בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה עִיבְּרָה. הַכֹּל חַיָיבִין לְהַחֲזִיר. מַה עָבַד לָהּ רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא הָכָא שֶׁהוּא בְנוֹ. וְסֵיפָא פְלִיגָא עַל שְׁמוּאֵל מִן הָדָא דְרִבִּי יוֹסָה. הֶחֱזִירוּ הַכֹּל. אַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הַבֵּן אוֹ שֶׁהִפִּילָה. כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה זָכָה. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא זָכָה. אֲפִילוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא יִזְכֶּה. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. זָכִין לָעוֹבָּרִין. מוֹדֵי וְהוּא שֶׁיָּצָא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַחַיִים. הֲרֵי אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר אֶלְעָזָר. מִשּׁוּם יִיאוּשׁ. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיסָרִין רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר וָוא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר נָתָן. חָזַר בָּהּ רִבִּי נָתָן. מִן מַתְנִיתָא. אִם זָכָר מָנֶה. אִם נְקֵיבָה מָאתַיִם. וּנְקֵיבָה גַבָּהּ לֹא בְעִנְיָין כְּאַחֵר הוּא. תַּנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא. בֶּן יוֹמוֹ זָכִין לוֹ.

MISHNAH: If somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant and gives birth, if it is a live birth 5:3 states that a one-day old baby causes levirate (if the husband died childless one day after a brother was born to him) and frees from levirate (if the pregnant widow gave birth to a live baby). Then her late husband potentially had a child when he died, there can be no levirate or ḥalîṣah and, legally, the ceremony never happened. her relatives are permitted to him and his relatives are permitted to her; he has not disabled her [from marrying into] priesthood. If it is a still birth, her relatives are forbidden to him and his relatives are forbidden to her; he has disabled her [from marrying into] priesthood. HALAKHAH: “If somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant,” etc. If he transgressed, but not from the start. That follows the Mishnah is not needed since she could not remarry even if she had children, for the same reason. : “The widow should not perform ḥalîṣah or have levirate until after three months.” Why can she not have ḥalîṣah immediately? As you take it, if she has a live birth, ḥalîṣah did not affect her 5:3 states that a one day old baby causes levirate (if the husband died childless one day after a brother was born to him) and frees from levirate (if the pregnant widow gave birth to a live baby). Then her late husband potentially had a child when he died, there can be no levirate or ḥalîṣah and, legally, the ceremony never happened. . If she has a still birth, she holds ḥalîṣah in her hand. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood prevents a woman from marrying a priest, an invalid ḥalîṣah demands public proclamations by the town crier (a herald, Greek κῆρυξ), to make sure people would not think that her children from a Cohen are desecrated. The same argument in Babli 41b . Cf. also Chapter 16, Note 11 . . Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jacob bar Idi, in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah, that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood. Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: “My levir refuses. 25:7 . As long as the levir is not required to marry her, she cannot claim that he refused. The same argument in Babli 41b . .” To the one to whom one says: perform levirate, to him one says: perform ḥalîṣah ; but to the one to whom one cannot say: perform levirate, to him one cannot say: perform ḥalîṣah ! What is the difference between them? If she had been acceptable and was desecrated. 21:7 , 14 . , e. g., a widow for the High Priest or a divorcee or one who had performed ḥalîṣah for a common priest. According to him who says that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood; that one, who does not need a proclamation for the priesthood, should have ḥalîṣah . According to him who says that to the one to whom one says: perform levirate, to him does one say: perform ḥalîṣah ? If there was ḥalîṣah during these three months, does she need another one after three months? Let us hear from the following: “A minor who performed ḥalîṣah should perform ḥalîṣah after she grows up; if she performed [only one] ḥalîṣah , the ḥalîṣah she performed is valid is the declaration of the levir, by necessity an adult, that he refuses to marry the widow. .” Rebbi Mana said it anonymously, Rebbi Isaac the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya brought it in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan; this is Rebbi Meïr‘s, since Rebbi Meïr says one does neither perform ḥalîṣah nor levirate with a minor: maybe she would turn out to be a she-ram unnecessary. The same argument in Babli Bekhorot 19b ; a detailed discussion in Tosaphot ad. loc., s. v . איש. . As you say there, even though she already performed ḥalîṣah , she again performs ḥalîṣah ; so here also though she did perform ḥalîṣah , she performs ḥalîṣah was performed early, against the rules, it has to be performed again after the three months have passed but, in case this was not done, the first ḥalîṣah is valid. . Rebbi Yudan asked: If he performed ḥalîṣah with a pregnant woman and she had a miscarriage? Let us hear from the following: If somebody died and left a pregnant widow, should I think that she must have recourse to her levir? The verse says, “that his name should not be extinguished from Israel,” only one whose name is extinguished. The verse says, “to establish a name in Israel for his brother,” until you know whether there is a live child or not is of no legal value. . I could think that the wife of an eunuch should need levirate, the verse says “that his name should not be extinguished from Israel,” only one whose name is not extinguished; this excludes this one whose name was already extinguished. Could I say, her. co-wife may remarry? “ are in Babli, 36a , Tosephta 6:3 . He who marries his sister-in-law and she turns out to be pregnant,” as you say, “her co-wife cannot marry until you know by which means she is permitted, whether by pregnancy or by intercourse” The same is valid for the one who performed ḥalîṣah. Ḥalîṣah frees and intercourse frees. As you said it for intercourse so it was said for ḥalîṣah . Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses; Rebbi Eleazar said, one cannot transfer benefits to fetuses141b/142a , Yerushalmi Baba Batra 9:1 in a similar way. The opinion of R. Eleazar is attributed to (the slightly older) Rav Huna in the Babli. . Rebbi Yose said, even though Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses, he agrees that most of [the fetus’s] head and body must come out alive 142a , that a gift to a minor is acquired only at the time of birth is the opinion of Rav Naḥman, Samuel’s foremost student in matters of civil law. . That is the Mishnah, “if somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant,” as you say here, retroactively ḥalîṣah did not touch her, so retroactively the child is a son and receives the benefit. There, we have stated: “If somebody says, if my wife gives birth to a male, he shall take a mina 141b , only the male baby is mentioned. In Yerushalmi Baba batra 9:2 , edited by a different group, and Tosephta Baba batra 9:5 , a different text, the male gets double the amount of the female. , if she gave birth to a male, [the male baby] will take a mina. If a female, 200 [drachmae], if she gave birth to a female, that one will take 200.” Rebbi Eleazar said, this is only for his son, but not for any other. Rebbi Yasa said, even any other. In the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar, only from a sick person, but not a healthy one; only movables but not real estate and Baba batra . Real estate can be acquired only if all rules are followed; since the fetus cannot perform the act of acquisition, no real estate can be transferred to him on the death bed. . A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Eleazar. “ in Babli Baba batra 142a . If a proselyte has no children after he became Jewish, his estate has no heirs; so anybody who wants to may take it. It is assumed here that if the deceased had a wife, he died without a will and she was not present since either way she immediately could lay claim to the entire property. Therefore, it is stated that only later it became known that the widow was pregnant. If a proselyte died and Jews plundered his estate, then it became known that he had a son overseas or that [his wife] was pregnant, everybody is required to return [what he took].” What does Rebbi Eleazar do with this. 27:8 ). ? There is a difference because it is his child. The second part [of the Mishnah] disagrees with Samuel in the interpretation of Rebbi Yose: “If they returned everything and then the son died or she had a miscarriage, anybody who takes first after that acquires it.” The first group did not acquire. Even at the beginning they should not have acquired! Did not Rebbi Yose say, even though Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses, he agrees that most of [the fetus’s] head and body must come out alive. He was not living! Rebbi Isaac bar Eleazar 9:1 this is an anonymous statement of the editors. In ms A: R. Eleazar. Cf. Berakhot 7:117. said, because of abandoning 2. . The rabbis of Caesarea, R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Abba bar Natan: Rebbi Natan changed his mind because of that Mishnah: “If a male, a mina, if a female, 200.” Is a female in this situation not like an outsider? Bar Qappara stated: “On transfers benefit to a one day old. 5:3. ”

הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוְולָד שֶׁל קַיָימָא יוֹצִיא וְחַיָיבִין בְּקָרְבָּן. וְאִם אֵין הַוְולָד שֶׁל קַיָימָא יְקַיֵים. סָפֵק בֶּן תֵּשַׁע לָרִאשׁוֹן סָפֵק בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן יוֹצִיא וְהַוְולָד כָּשֵּׁר וְחַיָיבִין בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. כָּל שֶׁאֶיפְשַׁר לָךְ לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּאוֹ אֵין חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי זֵיתִים אֶחָד שֶׁלְּחֵלֶב וְאֶחָד שֶׁלְּשׁוּמָּן וְאָכַל אֶחָד מֵהֶן וַחֲבֵירוֹ מוּנָח בְּתוֹכָהּ. וְאָמַר. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאִילּוּ אֶמְצָא אֶת הַמַּפְתֵּחַ יָכוֹל אֲנִי לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּאוֹ מַהוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת עַד שֶׁלֹּא יִוָודַע לוֹ אִם בֶּן קַיָימָא הוּא אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַיָימָא מֵבִיא. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא. רַב אָמַר. כָּל שֶׁאֵיפְשַׁר לוֹ לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודַּייוֹ אֵין חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. הָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי זֵיתִים אֶחָד שֶׁלְּחֵלֶב וְאֶחָד שֶׁלְּשׁוּמָּן וְאָכַל אֶחָד מֵהֶן. וּבָא עוֹרֵב וְאָכַל אֶת הַשֵּׁינִי. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודַּייוֹ אֵין חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אֲבָל אִם אָכַל עוֹרֵב תְּחִילָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ אָכַל הוּא. מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודַּייוֹ חַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רַב. וְהוּא שֶׁיוֹכִיחַ לְפָנָיו חֵלֶב בָּרוּר. אַף עַל גַּב דְּרַב אָמַר. וְהוּא שֶׁיוֹכִיחַ לְפָנָיו חֵלֶב בָּרוּר. מוֹדֶה הוּא הָכָא. שֶׁיָּכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּאוֹ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. כְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר אוֹמֵר. חַיָיבִין עַל חֶלְבּוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. מַה עֲבַד רַב. פָּתַר לָהּ. חֲלוּקִין עַל דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. חֲתִיכָה שֶׁלְּחוּלִין וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁלְּקוֹדֶשׁ. אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֶת אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָיה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַודַּאי. אָכַל אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָיה זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. נִיחָא רִאשׁוֹן מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. שֵׁינִי לָמָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיְתָה חֲתִיכָה גְדוֹלָה וְאָכַל חֶצְיָיהּ וְהִנִּיחַ חֶצְיָיהּ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. סָפֵק בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן יוֹצִיא וְהַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר וְחַיָיבִין אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. הֲרֵי אֵיפְשַׁר לָךְ לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּייוֹ וְחַיָיבִין עַל סְפֵיקוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. קִיֶימָהּ רִבִּי זְעִירָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר וָוא. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא. קִיְימָהּ רִבִּי זְעוּרָה קָמִינָן. מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לְהֶעָרוֹת וְלִפְרוֹשׁ וְלֵידַע אִם מִמֶּנּוּ הוּא אִם מֵאַחֵר הוּא. כְּמִי שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לַעֲמוֹד עַל וַודָּייוֹ. מַה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם כְּשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ לְאַחַר מִיתַת בַּעֲלָהּ מִיָּד הוּכָּר עוּבְּרָהּ לְאַחַר שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים. נִיתְנֵי. בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לַזֶּה וְלַזֶּה בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לַזֶּה וְלַזֶּה. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין בְּשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ לְאַחַר שְׁנֵי חֳדָשִׁים וְהוּכָּר עוּבְּרָהּ לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. נִיתְנֵי. הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ וְלֹא תִתְיַבֵּם עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ לָהּ חֲמִשָּׁה חֳדָשִׁים. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין. כְּשֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ לְאַחַר אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וְהוּכָּר עוּבְּרָהּ לְאַחַר חֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם. הֲרֵי יֵשׁ כָּאן שְׁלֵימִין לָרִאשׁוֹן וּמְקוּטָעִין לַשֵּׁינִי. שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת לַחֳדָשִׁים שְׁלֵימִים. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהֵן שְׁתֵּי יְצִירוֹת. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת לַחֳדָשִׁים מְקוּטָעִין. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִִשָּׁה מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְחוֹזֶרֶת וּמִתְעַבֶּרֶת. אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָהּ שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה אֵינָהּ מְעֻבֶּרֶת מִשְּׁנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם כְּאַחַת. וּפְלִיגָא עַל דְּרַבָּנִן דַאֲגַדְתָּא. דְּרַבָּנִן דַאֲגַדְתָּא אוֹמְרִים. וַיֵּצֵא אִישׁ הַבֵּינַיִים. מִמַּעַרְכוֹת פְּלִשְּׁתִּים. מִמֵּאָה עָרְלוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים. שֶׁהֶעֲרוּ בָהּ מֵאָה עָרְלוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְיָיה. וְלָא פְלִיגִין. עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִסְרַח הַזֶּרַע הָאִשָּׁה מְעוּבֶּרֶת מִשְּׁנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם כְּאַחַת. מִשֶּׁנִּסְרַח הַזֶּרַע אֵין הָאִשָּׁה מְעוּבֶּרֶת מִשְּׁנֵי בְנֵי אָדָם כְּאַחַת. מְנַיִין שְׁתֵּי יְצִירוֹת. רִבִי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוּנָא. וַיִיצֶר. יְצִירָה לְשִׁבְעָה וִיצִירָה לְתִשְׁעָה. נוֹצָר לְשִׁבְעָה וְנוֹלָד לִשְׁמוֹנָה חַיי. כָּל שֶׁכֵּן לְתִשְׁעָה. נוֹצָר לְתִשְׁעָה וְנוֹלָד לִשְׁמוֹנָה אֵינוֹ חַיָיה. נוֹצָר לְתִשְׁעָה וְנוֹלָד לְשִׁבְעָה. אִיתָא חֲמִי. אִם לִשְׁמוֹנָה אֵינוֹ חַיָיה לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן לְשִׁבְעָה. בָּעוּן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. מְנַיִין לְבֶן שִׁבְעָה שֶׁהוּא חַיָיה. אָמַר לוֹן מִדִּידְכוֹן אֲנָא יְהִב לְכוֹן. זוטא אבטא זוטא אבטא. בָּא הַסָּפֵק לִיטּוֹל אֶת חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָבִיו. אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. הַנֵּי אָבִיךָ. בָּא הַיָּבָם לִיטוֹל חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָחִיו. אוֹמְרִים לֵיהּ. הַנֵּי בְּרֵיהּ. הָא כֵיצַד. עוֹשִׂין שִׁיפִיּוּת בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמְחַלְּקִין נִיכְסֵי הַמֵּת. נִמְצֵאת אוֹמֵר. שִׁיפִיּוּת לְאָחִיו הֶפְסֵד לָאַחִין. תַּחֲרוּת בָּאַחִין שֶׁבֶר בָּאַחִין. מֵת הַזָּקֵן הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בָּאִים בָּנִים בְּוַודַּאי וּבֶ(י)ן בֵּן בְּסָפֵק. מֵת הַסָּפֵק הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בֵּן אֲחִי אָב בְּוַודַּאי וְאֵם בְּסָפֵק. מֵת אֶחָד מַן הָאַחִין הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בֶּן בְּוַדַּאי וּבֵ(י)ן אָח בְּסָפֵק. מֵתָה אִמּוֹ שֶׁלְּסָפֵק הֲרֵי יֵשׁ כָּאן בֵּן בְּוַדַּאי וּבַעַל בְּסָפֵק. מֵת הַסָּפֵק וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵתָה אִמּוֹ הֲרֵי יֵשׁ בֶּן אֲחִי אֵם בְּוַדַּאי וּבַעַל בְּסָפֵק. מֵת הַיָּבָם וּבָא הַסָּפֵק לִיטּוֹל חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָבִיו. אִי הֲוָה קַדְמַיָיא מִיסְכֵּן אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. הַנֵּי אָבוּךְ. אִין הֲוָה עָתִיר אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. כּוּלָּן אַחִין בְּנֵי אַחִין. בּוֹאוּ וְנִירַשׁ חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלְּאָבִינוּ וְחֶלְקוֹ שֶׁלַּאֲחִי אָבִינוּ. תַּנֵּי הָרִאשׁוֹן רָאוּי לִהְיוֹת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל וְהַשֵּׁינִי מַמְזֵר בְּסָפֵק. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר. אֵין מַמְזֵר בְּסָפֵק. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב בִּסְפֵק כּוּתִים וּבִסְפֵק חַלָּלִים. כְּהַהִיא דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. עֲשָׂרָה יוּחֲסִין עָלוּ מִבָּבֶל. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב שְׁמוֹנֶה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרַבָן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר תִּשְׁעָה. עַל דַּעְתִּין דְּרִבָּנִן עֲשָׂרָה.

MISHNAH: If somebody marries his sister-in-law but she turned out to have been pregnant and gave birth. If the child is alive, [the levir] has to divorce her and they must bring a sacrifice. 4 ). One has to assume that the marriage was entered into without any suspicion of pregnancy. . If the child is not alive, he may keep her. If it is doubtful whether [the child is] a nine-month child of the first [brother] or a seven-month of the second, he has to divorce her, the child is legitimate, and they are obligated to bring a reparation offering for an uncertain case are bastards. The reparation offering is the אָשָּׁם required if it is uncertain whether a sin was committed or not ( Lev . 5:17–19 ). . HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose17b ) by implication attributes to Rav Assi the opinion that a reparation offering is due if the true situation cannot be ascertained. said, in any case where the true fact can be ascertained, one does not have to bring a reparation offering because of doubt. How is that? If there were before him two olive-sized pieces, one of suet. 7:27 ). Eating an olive-sized piece of suet inadvertently requires a purification offering. and one of fat, he ate one of them and the other is locked up.He says, since I could determine the true fact if I would find the key, does one have to bring a reparation offering in this case of doubt? Let us hear from the following: “If somebody marries his sister-in-law but she turned out to have been pregnant”, as long as it is not known whether the child lives or does not live, does he have to bring a reparation offering because of the doubt? This means that he does not bring. Rav said, in any case where the true fact can never be established, one does not have to bring a reparation offering for the doubt2:8 , Babli Keritut 17b . {The commentators who did not recognize that Yerushalmi אֵיפשר = Babli אי אפשר had to rewrite the text; cf. Peah , Chapter 7, Note 170 .} . How is that? If there were before him two olive-sized pieces, one of suet. 7:27 ). Eating an olive-sized piece of suet inadvertently requires a purification offering. and one of fat, he ate one of them, and then a raven ate the other. Since he cannot ascertain the true fact, one does not have to bring a reparation offering for this doubt. But if the raven ate first and then he ate, since he could have ascertained the true fact, one has to bring a reparation offering for the doubt. But did not Rav say, only if he made sure that it certainly was suet 17b , quotes a similar statement in the name of Ḥiyya bar Rav, that the offering for a doubt is due only if there were two pieces, one permitted, one forbidden, whose history can be traced and their true status ascertained. But if there is only one piece whose status is indeterminate (the case of Rebbi Yose, Rav Assi), the offering for a doubt does not apply. ? Even though Rav said, only if he made sure that it certainly was suet, he agrees here that he could have ascertained the true fact. A baraita disagrees with Rav: “As Rebbi Eleazar says, one must bring a reparation offering for the doubt of suet 2:8 , quoted in Babli Keritut 17b . The animal is the koy , for which it is impossible to ascertain whether it is domestic (whose suet is forbidden) or wild (whose suet is permitted). .” What does Rav do with that? They disagree with the words of Rebbi Eleazar. A baraita disagrees with Rav 5:4 ; Tosephta Keritut 3:1 . Neither of these texts is identical with the baraita quoted here. : “If there were both a piece of profane [meat] and a piece of sacrificial [meat], he ate one of them and it is not known which one, he brings a reparation offering for the doubt. If he [then] ate the second piece, he brings a reparation offering for a certain transgression. 5:14–16 . Both texts quoted in Note 55 require two sacrifices, one a reparation sacrifice for the use of sacred meat, the other a purification sacrifice ( Lev . 4:27–35 ) for the sin. . If he ate the first piece and another person came and ate the second, each one brings a reparation offering for the doubt.” One understands that the first brings a reparation offering for the doubt. Why the second? Rebbi Yose said, explain it that the piece was large, he ate half of it and left the other half. A Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “If it is doubtful whether [the child is] a nine-month child of the first [brother] or a seven-month of the second, he has to divorce her, the child is legitimate, and they are obligated for a reparation offering for the doubt.” Here it is impossible to ascertain the true fact and they are obligated for a reparation offering for the doubt! Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Ze‘ira explained it before Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba; Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Rebbi Ze‘ira explained it before us. Since he could just have touched her. 20:17 is taken to mean “touched (the female genital by the male genital)”, not the etymologically more likely “bared”. Mishnah 6:1 will explain that the biblically required act of validation of the marriage with the sister-in-law is the touching of the two genitals. They could have performed this act without ejaculation to be married (and make the brother financially responsible for the sister-in-law) and then waited the prescribed 90 days to ascertain the paternity of an eventual child. and then separated, he could have known whether it is his or the other’s, it is as if he could have ascertained the true fact! How do we hold? If he came to her immediately after her husband’s death, and the fetus was recognized after two months, one should have stated: A nine-month child of either one of them or a seven-month of either one of them! But it may be that he came to her after two months and the fetus was recognized after three months, one should have stated: The sister-in-law should not perform ḥalîṣah or be married in levirate until after five months! But it must be that he came to her after 40 days and the fetus was recognized after 50 days. That would be complete months for [a child of] the first [brother] and incomplete ones for the second. This implies that a woman may give birth after full months. This implies that there are two creations. This implies that a woman may give birth after incomplete months. This implies that a woman may become pregnant repeatedly a, disagrees and holds that Jehudah and Ḥizqiah, children of Rebbi Ḥiyya, who were born 3 months apart, were twins; the one a seven-months child and the other a nine-months child. . This implies that a woman cannot become pregnant simultaneously from two men. And it disagrees with the sermonizing rabbis, since the sermonizing rabbis say “the middleman” “from the orders of the Philistines”, from 100 prepuces of Philistines, that 100 prepuces of Philistines touched her 2(21 ), Midrash Samuel ed. Buber 20(4), Babli Soṭah 42b in the name of R. Joḥanan. These sermons identify (1) the Moabite Orpah, the daughter-in-law of Noemi who did not follow her to Bethlehem, with the Philistine Haraphah ( 2S . 21:22 ), and (2) Goliat mentioned in 2S . 21 with the warrior in 1S . 17:23 . The latter is introduced in the written text as אִישׁ הַבֵּנַיִם מִמַּעַרְוֹת פְּלִשׁתִּים interpreted in a slightly pornographic way as “a man [created] in between the touchings (cf. Note 59 ) of the Philistines”, explaining that Orpah, once she had decided not to become Jewish, went to the enemies of the Jews, the Philistines of Gath, and slept with 100 of their warriors (מִמַּעַרְוֹת = מִמֵּאָה הֶעָרוֹת) in one night to create a super-warrior; in the words of R. Joḥanan, 100 fathers and one mother. One can construct such a sermon only if all gutturals had become silent and pataḥ, qāmeṣ assimilated to one another. . Rebbi Mattaniah said, there is no disagreement. As long as the semen is not spoiled, a woman can become pregnant from several men simultaneously. After the semen is spoiled, a woman cannot become pregnant from several men simultaneously. From where the two creations? Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Huna: “He created. 2:7 . In the creation of Man, it is written וייצר, in that of the animals, 2:19, only ויצר. The two letters י symbolize the two creations. A more detailed exposition of this sermon is in Gen. rabba 14(2 ). ”, a creation for seven and a creation for eight. If he was created for seven but born at eight, he lives; so much more if [born] by nine. If he was created for nine and born at eight, he does not live. If he was created for nine and born at seven? Come and see, if he does not live at eight, so much less at seven! They asked before Rebbi Abbahu. From where that a seven-month baby lives? he said to them, from yours I am giving to you: ζῇ τὰ ἑπτὰ, ζῇ τὰ ἑπτὰ14(2 ), 20(13), Tanḥuma Bemidbar 18 , Tanḥuma Buber Bemidbar 21 , Bemidbar rabba 4(3 ), the reading seems to be זיטא אפטא איטא אוכטא for the interpretation of which S. Lieberman (יוונית ויוונות בארץ ישׂראל, Jerusalem 1962, p. 209) prefers the reading of A. Crusius: ζῇ τὰ ἑπτὰ <μᾶλλον> ἤ τὰ ὀκτώ “the life-expectancy of that of seven [is better than] that of eight,” a medical maxim. The formulation is a pun on the Hellenistic numeral values of letters, zeta ζʼ = 7, eta η’ = 8. . If the uncertain [son] comes to take his part in his father’s [inheritance]. one says to him, the other one is your father. If the levir comes to take his part in his brother’s [inheritance], one says to him, that one is his son. How is that? They compromise between themselves and split the property of the deceased. One finds, compromise with his brother is loss to the brothers; competition between the brothers is catastrophy for the brothers and levirate are spelled out in Mishnaiot 3–4 . If there is no compromise, nobody gets anything. . If the old man dies, one finds that certain sons and an uncertain grandson come. If the grandson cannot prove who his father was, he cannot inherit in the presence of sons orgrandsons of known fathers. . If the uncertain [son] dies there exists a certain son of his father’s brother and an uncertain mother. If one of the brothers dies, there is a certain son and an uncertain son of a brother. If the mother of the uncertain [son] dies, there is a certain son and an uncertain husband. If first the uncertain [son] dies and after that his mother, a son of the mother’s brother is certain but the husband uncertain. If the levir dies and the uncertain [son] comes to take his part in his father’s inheritance, if the first one was poor, they tell him, that one is your father. If he was rich, the tell him, we all are brothers, sons of his brother. Come and let us inherit our father’s part and the part of our father’s brother. It was stated: “The first son could be High Priest, any second son possibly is a bastard. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, there is no such thing as a possible bastard. 4:3 . ” Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob agrees in cases of doubt of Samaritans and desecrated persons. This refers to what we have stated there: “Ten classes returned from Babylonia. 4:1 : “Ten classes returned from Babylonia, Cohanim, Levites, Israel, desecrated, proselytes, freed slaves, bastards, Gibeonites, people of unknown paternity, and foundlings. Cohanim, Levites, Israel may marry one another. Levites, Israel, desecrated, proselytes, and freed slaves, may marry one another. Proselytes, freed slaves, bastards, Gibeonites, people of unknown paternity, and foundlings, may marry one another.” For R. Eliezer ben Jacob, bastards, people of unknown paternity, and foundlings, all form one group. In Mishnah Ketubot 1:8 , Rabban Gamliel and R. Eliezer hold that the unmarried mother of a child of unknown paternity is believed if she asserts that the father was one of the first six categories (or a Gentile). For them, the special category of “child of unknown paternity” does not exist since the child inherits the status of his mother. ” In the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob, eight. In the opinion of Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer, nine. In the opinion of the rabbis, ten.

שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ נְכָסִים מוֹדִין בֵּית שַׁמַּי וּבֵית הִלֵּל שֶׁמּוֹכֶרֶת וְנוֹתֶנֶת וְקַיָים. מֵתָה מַה יֵעָשֶׂה בִּכְתוּבָתָהּ וּבִנְכָסִים הַנִּכְנָסִין וְהַיּוֹצְאִין עִמָּהּ. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים יַחֲלוֹקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים הַנְּכָסִים בְּחֶזְקָתָן. כְּתוּבָּה בְחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל. וּנְכָסִים הַנִּכְנָסִין וְהַיּוֹצְאִין עִמָּהּ בְחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ נְכָסִים כול׳. הָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. מוֹכֶרֶת וְנוֹתֶנֶת וְקַיָים. מֵתָה מַה יֵעָשֶׂה בִּכְתוּבָתָהּ. וְהָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. יַחֲלֹקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה. הֵן דְּאַתְּ אָמַר מוֹכֶרֶת וְנוֹתֶנֶת וְקַיָים. כְּשֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם. וְהָא דְאַתְּ אָמַר יַחֲלֹקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. בְּשֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשֵׂית שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם. נָפְלוּ לָהּ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נַעֲשֵׂית שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם וְעָשׂוּ פֵירוֹת מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשֵׂית שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם כְּמִי שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשֵׂית שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. הָהֵן יָבָם דְּהָכָא צְרִיכָא דְבֵית שַׁמַּי כְּבַעַל הוּא אוֹ אֵינוֹ כְבַעַל. אִין כְּבַעַל הוּא יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת הַכֹּל. אִם אֵינוֹ כְבַעַל לֹא יוֹרֵשׁ כְּלוּם. מִסָּפֵק יַחֲלוֹקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. בֵּית הִלֵּל פְּשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ כְבַעַל. וְיוֹרֵשׁ אֶת הַכֹּל. שֶׁכֵּן אֲפִילוּ אָחִיו אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אֲכִילַת פִּירוֹת בִּלְבַד. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. יִירְשׁוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין אֶת כְּתוּבָתָהּ חַיָיבִין בִּקְבוּרָתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אִילוּלֵי דְתַנִּיתָהּ רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה הֲוָות צְרִיכָה לַן. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין לָהּ כְְּתוּבָּה אֵין לָהּ קְבוּרָה. וְקַשְׁיָא. אִילּוּ אִשָּׁה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה שֶׁמָּא אֵין לָהּ קְבוּרָה. אִשָּׁה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה יֵשׁ לָהּ קְבוּרָה. בְּרָם הָכָא אִם יֵשׁ לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה יֵשׁ לָהּ קְבוּרָה. אִם אֵין לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה אֵין לָהּ קְבוּרָה.

MISHNAH: If property came to a woman waiting for her levir. In the meantime, the ketubah , the money due her at the dissolution of her marriage (her dowry and the capital due her from her husband) is not payable since concerning money matters levirate is considered as continuation of the first marriage. The capital due from the husband is at least 200 zuz for a virgin, defined in Mishnah Peah 8:8 as sufficient to disqualify her from public assistence. , the House of Shammai agree with the House of Hillel that she may sell or give away and it is valid. If she dies, what does one do with her ketubah and property that enters and leaves with her contract and whose value only has to be returned at the dissolution of the marriage, these remain her property and, during marriage, may be sold or mortgaged only by the common action of the wife as owner and the husband as administrator. These properties are called נִכְסֵי מְלוֹג (Accadic mulūgu “wife’s property”), cf. Mishnah 8:1 . ? The House of Shammai say, the husband’s heirs should split with her father’s heirs. But the House of Hillel say that all property remains where it is; the ketubah in the hands of the husband’s heirs and property that enters and leaves with her in the hands of her father’s heirs. HALAKHAH: “If property came to a woman waiting for her levir,” etc. Here, you say “she may sell or give away and it is valid. If she dies, what does one do with her ketubah ?” And you also say “the husband’s heirs should split with her father’s heirs!” Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, when do you say “she may sell or give away and it is valid”? If they came to her before she became a woman waiting for her levir. When do you say “the husband’s heirs should split with her father’s heirs”? If they came to her after she became a woman waiting for her levir. If they came to her before she became a woman waiting for her levir and produced revenue after she became a woman waiting for her levir, [that revenue is as if] they came to her after she became a woman waiting for her levir. Rebbi Ze‘ira makes the unencumbered woman a wife in criminal but not in civil matters. said, the levir in this situation is a problem for the House of Shammai. If he is a husband, he inherits everything. If he is not a husband, he inherits nothing. Because of the doubt, “the husband’s heirs should split with her father’s heirs.” For the House of Hillel it is obvious that he is a husband and inherits everything. For even his brother had only the usufruct.) . Rebbi Hoshaia stated: The heirs of her ketubah are obliged to bury her 81a . The discussion there is irrelevant for the Yerushalmi. The heirs of the ketubah are the heirs of the husband since her death terminates the obligation of ketubah . Since the husband is freed from the obligation of paying the ketubah , he has to pay all costs connected with her funeral. . Rebbi Yose said, if Rebbi Hoshaia had not stated this, we would have had a problem. If she had no ketubah , do they not have to bury her? This is difficult. If a woman has no ketubah , does she not have to be buried in case of dissolution of the marriage to her husband for current cash, nevertheless the husband is required to bear the expenses of her funeral. She must have had a ketubah to be married. ? A wife, even if she has a ketubah , must be buried. This one, if she has a ketubah , is entitled to burial costs. But here, if she does not have a ketubah , she is not entitled to burial costs.

כְּנָסָהּ הֲרֵי הִיא כְאִשְׁתּוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא כְתוּבָּתָהּ עַל נִכְסֵי בַּעֲלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן. כְּנָסָהּ הֲרֵי הִיא כְאִשְׁתּוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר כול׳. כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה. כּוֹנֵס וּמְגָרֵשׁ וּמַחֲזִיר וְהִיא [שׁוֹבֶרֶת] לוֹ עַל כְּתוּבָּתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. לִצְדָדִין הִיא מַתְנִיתָא. אוֹ [שׁוֹבֶרֶת] לוֹ עַל כְּתוּבָּתָהּ. רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רַב הַמְנוּנָא. כְּנָסָהּ וְגֵירְשָׁהּ וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ. אִם חִידֵּשׁ לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה כְּתוּבָּתָהּ עַל נְכָסָיו. וְאִם לָאו כְּתוּבָּתָהּ עַל נִיכְסֵי בַּעֲלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר בְּשֵׁם רַב חִסְדָּא. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן שֶׁהַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ. עַל מְנָת כְּתוּבָּה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה הֶחֱזִירָהּ. סוֹף עַד שֶׁיַּכְנִיס וִיגָרֵשׁ וְיַחֲזִיר. דְּרוּבָּא אָתָא מֵימָר לָךְ. אֲפִילוּ כְּנָסָהּ וְגֵירְשָׁהּ וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ. אִם חִידֵּשׁ לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה עַל נְכָסָיו. וְאִם לָאו כְּתוּבָּתָהּ עַל נִיכְסֵי בַּעֲלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן. רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הַמְנוּנָא אָמַר. אֲרוּסָה שֶׁמֵּתָה אֵין לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה. שֶׁלֹֹּא הוּתְּרָה לְהִינָּשֵׂא לַשּׁוּק. שֶׁלֹּא תֹאמַר. יֵעָשֶׂה כְמִי שֶׁגֵּירַשּׁ וִיהֵא לֵיהּ כְּתוּבָּה. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרִיךְ מֵימַר אֵין לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה.

MISHNAH: If he married her, she is his wife in every respect except that her ketubah is a lien on the property of her first husband Therefore, he did not mortgage his own property to her. . HALAKHAH: “If he married her, she is his wife in every respect”, etc. What does he do? “He marries her, he may divorce her and take her back, and she writes him a receipt for her ketubah .” makes the unencumbered woman a wife in criminal but not in civil matters. Rebbi Yose said, the baraita has two possibilities. “Or she writes him a receipt for her ketubah .”, she obviously does not write a receipt. R. Yose wants to point out that the baraita quoted here is not the Tosephta Ketubot 9:1 : “If somebody died and left his widow waiting for the levir, even if his estate is a hundred minas and her ketubah only one mina, the heirs cannot sell anything since her ketubah is a lien on the entire estate. What can he do? He marries her, divorces her, and she writes a receipt for her ketubah .” Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rav Hamnuna: If he married her, divorced her, and took her back, if he wrote her a new ketubah , the lien is on his property; otherwise, it is on the property of her first husband. Rebbi Yose said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, a Mishnah said so: “For he who takes back his wife, takes her back under the terms of her first ketubah 9:9 . .” At the end, if he married her, divorced her, and took her back? He tells you something new. Even if he married her, divorced her, and took her back, if he wrote her a new ketubah , the lien is on his property; otherwise, it is on the property of her first husband. Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rav Hamnuna said; it has no bearing on the rules of levirate since it was noted in Halakha 1:4 that women between qiddushin and marriage are not subject to levirate. The material is inserted here because this is the only other case where Rebbi Ze‘ira quotes Rav Hamnuna (of the students of Rav). : A betrothed woman who died does not have a ketubah since she was not permitted to marry outside 29b , 43 ; Ketubot 53, 89; Baba meṣi‘a 18a; Sanhedrin 28a ) quotes a baraita to the effect that if she dies, the husband does not inherit but if he dies, she collects her ketubah . Since a ketubah is not necessary for qiddushin but only for nissuin , the actual marriage, there is a problem only if the ketubah was already written at the time of qiddushin , which also implies that the dowry was determined or even delivered at that time. Then it is clear that at the groom’s death the betrothed woman can recover the dowry recorded in the ketubah . For the amount due from the husband, even though they disagree in the case of ketubah written at the betrothal, both Talmudim [ Ketubot , Yerushalmi 5:1 (fol. 29c), Babli 56a ] agree that any sum agreed to above the statutory minimum can be collected only after the consummation of the marriage. . That you should not say [the case] should be considered as if he divorced her and she should have a ketubah ; therefore it was necessary to say that she does not have a ketubah .

מִצְוָה בַּגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֵּם לֹא רָצָה מְהַלְּכִין עַל כָּל הָאַחִין. לֹא רָצוּ חוֹזְרִין אֵצֶל הַגָּדוֹל וְאוֹמְרִים לוֹ עָלֶיךָ מִצְוָה אוֹ חֲלֹץ אוֹ יַבֵּם.

MISHNAH: The obligation of levirate is on the oldest [brother]. If he refuses, one 2:7. goes to all the other brothers. If they refuse, one returns to the oldest and tells him, the obligation is yours, either give ḥalîṣah or marry in levirate.

תָּלָה בַקָּטָן עַד שֶׁיַּגְדִּיל וּבַגָּדוֹל עַד שֶׁיָּבוֹא מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם וּבַחֵרֵשׁ וּבַשּׁוֹטֶה אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לוֹ עָלֶיךָ מִצְוָה אוֹ חֲלוֹץ אוֹ יַיבֵּם.

MISHNAH: If he made it dependent on a minor until he grows up, or on the oldest when he returns from overseas, or on a deaf-mute or on an insane [brother], one does not listen to him but tells him, the obligation is yours, either give ḥalîṣah or marry in levirate.

הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא כְאֶחָד מִכָּל הָאַחִין לַנַּחֲלָה. וְאִם יֵשׁ שָׁם אָב הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁלָּאָב. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ זָכָה בְנִיכְסֵי אָחִיו. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ אִם יֵשׁ שָׁם אָב הַנְּכָסִים שֶׁלָּאָב. הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא כְאֶחָד מִכָּל הָאַחִין לַנַּחֲלָה כול׳. שֶׁלֹּא תֹאמַר. חֲלִיצָה פְטוֹר וּבִיאָה פְטוֹר. כְּמָה דְתֵימַר הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ זָכָה בְנִיכְסֵי אָחִיו. וְדִכְוָותָהּ הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ זָכָה בְנִיכְסֵי אָחִיו. לְפוּם כֵּן צָרִיךְ מֵימָר הֲרֵי הוּא כְאֶחָד מִכָּל הָאַחִין לַנַּחֲלָה. רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. הָעוֹשֶׂה מַאֲמָר בִּיבִמְתּוֹ לֹא זָכָה בְנִיכְסֵי אָחִיו. וְאַף בֵּית שַׁמַּי מוֹדֵיי בָהּ. וְאַף רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מוֹדֵיי בָהּ. וְלֹא כְרִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ. דְּרִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲרָךְ אוֹמֵר. הַמַּאֲמָר קוֹנֶה קִינְיָין גָּמוּר בִּיבָמָה. הָיוּ שְׁתֵּי יְבָמוֹת. עָשָׂה מַאֲמָר בְּזוֹ וּבָעַל לְזוֹ. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. אִם בְּמַאֲמָר יִזְכֶּה אִם בְּבִיאָה יִזְכֶּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְקַיֵים אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן לֹא זָכָה בְנִיכְסֵי אָחִיו. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר טֵבֶלֵיי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. טַעֲמָא דְרִבִּי יְהוּדָה וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר אֲשֶׁר תֵּלֵד. מַקִּישׁוֹ לַבְּכוֹר. מַה הַבְּכוֹר אֵינוֹ יוֹרֵשׁ בְּחַיֵי אָבִיו אַף זֶה אֵינוֹ יוֹרֵשׁ בְּחַיֵי אָבִיו. אִי מַה בְּכוֹר יוֹרֵשׁ לְאַחַר מִיתַת אָבִיו אַף זֶה יוֹרֵשׁ לְאַחַר מִיתַת אָבִיו. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָה. מִינָהּ. מַה הַבְּכוֹר לֹא יוֹרֵשׁ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לֵירֵשׁ אַף זֶה אֵינוֹ יוֹרֵשׁ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לֵירֵשּׁ. עוֹד אֵינוֹ יוֹרֵשׁ. רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כַּהֲנָא רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר אַשִּׁי בְשֵׁם רַב. הֲלָכָה כְּרִבִּי יְהוּדָה. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר. הֲלָכָה כְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ רִבִּי לָעְזָר בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. הֲלָכָה כְּרִבִּי יוּדָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. זִימְנִין סַגִּין יָתְבִית קוֹמֵי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה וְלֹא שָׁמְעִית מִינֵּיהּ הָדָא מִילְתָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְלֵית בַּר נַשׁ דּוּ שָׁמֵע מִילָּה וְלֵית חַבְרֵיהּ שְׁמִיעַ לֵיהּ.

MISHNAH: He who performs ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law is like any of the other brothers for the inheritance and, if there is a father, the property goes to the father. 27:6–11 ) but since the paternal uncles are mentioned it is clear that one assumes that the father died before his son. Since the rules imply that thedescendants of the son rank before all other relatives, it is logical to assume that the father ranks before all his descendants and other relatives; Baba batra 8:2. . He who marries his sister-in-law acquires his brother’s property. Rebbi Jehudah says, in any case if there is a father, the property goes to the father. The problem does not appear in the case of ḥalîṣah since the widow has to be paid in full before the inheritance is distributed. In the Tosephta, 6:3 , R. Jehudah also denies that the levir gets all the inheritance if there is no father. . HALAKHAH: “He who performs ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law is like any of the other brothers for the inheritance,” etc. That one should not say, ḥalîṣah is freeing, intercourse is freeing; just as you say, “he who marries his sister-in-law acquires his brother’s property,” so he who performs ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law acquires his brother’s property. Therefore, it is necessary to say “he is like any of the other brothers for the inheritance”. Rav Jehudah said in the name of Samuel: He who “bespeaks” his sister-in-law does not acquire his brother’s property do not give the husband any property rights, the weaker “bespeaking” cannot do it either. . Even the House of Shammai agree to that. The same argument is good for R. Simeon who only allows for the possibility that “bespeaking” might be like qiddushin ( Chapter 2, Note 16 ). ; even Rebbi Simeon agrees to that, but not Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh. As Rebbi Eleazar ben Arakh said, “bespeaking” acquires the sister-in-law totally. If there were two sisters-in-law, he “bespoke” one and came to the other. As you take it, either by “bespeaking” he acquires or by intercourse he acquires. Rebbi Yose said, since he cannot keep either one, he did not acquire his brother’s property. Rebbi Isaac ben Tevele in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: The reason of Rebbi Jehudah: “. 25:6 . The verse connects the birth of a first-born with the inheritance of the dead brother. The first-born whom she will bear shall be”; He compared it to a first-born. Since the first-born does not inherit during his father’s lifetime, so this one does not inherit during his father’s lifetime. But since the first-born inherits after his father’s death, does this one inherit after his father’s death? Rebbi Ze‘ira said, since the first-born does not inherit when it was time to inherit, so this one does not inherit when it was time to inherit. 21:17 ) to “all that is found of his property.” This is interpreted as excluding claims that are not yet collected; cf., e. g., Babli Baba batra 55a . Since the inheritance of the dead brother is under his wife’s lien for her ketubah , it is not considered as “found of his property”. . Afterwards he cannot inherit. Rebbi Abba bar Cahana, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, practice follows Rebbi Judah. Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia, practice follows Rebbi Judah. Rebbi Joḥanan said, many times I sat before Rebbi Hoshaia and never heard that from him. He said to him, does nobody exist who heard something his partner did not hear?

הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִקְרוֹבָיו. הוּא אָסוּר בְּאִמָּהּ וּבְאֵם אִמָּהּ וּבְאֵם אָבִיהָ בְּבִתָּהּ בְּבַת בִּתָּהּ וּבְבַת בְּנָהּ וּבַאֲחוֹתָהּ בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא קַיֶימֶת. הָאַחִין מוּתָּרִין. הִיא אֲסוּרָה בְאַבִיו בַּאֲבִי אָבִיו בִּבְנוֹ וּבְבֶן בְּנוֹ בְּאָחִיו וּבְבֶן אָחִיו. מוּתָּר אָדָם בִּקְרוֹבַת צָרַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ וְאָסוּר בְּצָרַת קְרוֹבַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ. הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ כול׳. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחָלַץ לָהּ. הָא לֹא חָלַץ לָהּ וּמֵתָה מוּתָּר בְּאִמָּהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי אֲבִינָא. הָדָא הִיא דָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בְּאִמָּהּ. זִיקָה הָּיְתָה לוֹ בָהּ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּתָה בָטְלָה לוֹ זִיקָתָהּ. וְהָכָא כֵּיוָן שֶׁמֵּת בָּטְלָה זִיקָתוֹ. רִבִּי אָבוּן שָׁמַע לָהּ מִן דְּבַתְרָה. וּבַאֲחוֹתָהּ בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא קַיֶימֶת וְהָאַחִין מוּתָּרִין. וַאֲחוֹתָהּ אֵצֶל הָאַחִין לֹא כְמֵתָה הִיא. אֲסוּרָה בְאַבִיו וּבַאֲבִי אָבִיו בִּבְנוֹ וּבְבֶן בְּנוֹ וּבְאָחִיו וּבְבֶן אָחִיו. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁנִּיתְּנוּ שְׁנִיּוֹת לַחוֹלֵץ. וְהַיְידָא אָמְרָה דָא. בִּבְנוֹ וּבְבֶן בְּנוֹ בְּאָחִיו וּבְבֶן אָחִיו. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁנִּיתְּנוּ שְׁנִיּוֹת לַחוֹלֵץ. כֵּינִי מַתְנִיתָא. מוּתָּר הוּא אָדָם בִּקְרוֹבַת צָרַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ וְאָסוּר בְּצָרַת קְרוֹבַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ. הָדָא מְסַיְיעָא לְהַהִיא דְאָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֲבִינָא. קַל וָחוֹמֶר. מַה אֲחוֹת חֲלוּצָתוֹ שֶׁהוּא מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן נָתְנוּ לָהּ חֲכָמִים צָרָה. כָּאן שֶׁיֵּשׁ כָּאן אִיסּוּר אָחִיו לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן.

MISHNAH: He who performs ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law is forbidden her relatives and his relatives are forbidden to her; cf. also Mishnah 4:13 . . Forbidden to him are her mother and her mother’s mother, her father’s mother, her daughter, her daughter’s daughter and her son’s daughter, and her sister as long as she is alive. The brothers are permitted. Forbidden to her are his father, his father’s father, his son and his son’s son, his brother and his brother’s son. The relative of a co-wife of a person who had ḥalîṣah with him is permitted to him, but the co-wife of a relative of a person who had ḥalîṣah with him is forbidden. HALAKHAH: “He who performs ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law,” etc. Because he performed ḥalîṣah with her. Therefore, if he did not perform ḥalîṣah with her but she died, her mother is permitted to him. That is what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If a woman waiting for her levir died, her mother is permitted to him. He had in her an interest of candidacy. When she died, the candidacy was eliminated. And here, when he died, the candidacy was eliminated. Rebbi Abun understood it from what follows: “And her sister as long as she is alive, but the brothers are permitted.” Is her sister’s position relative to the brothers not as if. she herself had died? “Forbidden to her are his father, his father’s father, his son and his son’s son, his brother and his brother’s son.” Does this imply that secondary prohibitions are imposed on the one performing ḥalîṣah ? That says it, “his son and his son’s son, his brother and his brother’s son.” That implies that secondary prohibitions are imposed on the one performing ḥalîṣah since that grandfather was forbidden to her from the moment she married her husband. But the son’s and the brother’s sons are secondary prohibitions. This is also the conclusion of the Babli which, however, restricts secondary prohibitions arising from ḥalîṣah strictly to those enumerated in the Mishnah. . So is the Mishnah: “The relative of a co-wife of a person who had ḥalîṣah with him is permitted to him, but the co-wife of a relative of a person who had ḥalîṣah with him is forbidden”. Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Avina: It is an inference de minore ad majus . If the Sages gave a co-wife to the sister of a woman for whom he performed ḥalîṣah , which is rabbinic, here, where there is the prohibition of sisters, not so much more?

הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנָשָׂא אָחִיו אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ וָמֵת חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. וְכֵן הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְנָשָׂא אָחִיו אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ וָמֵת הֲרֵי זוֹ פְטוּרָה. וְכֵן הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ כול׳. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר בָּא בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מַה בֵין חוֹלֵץ מַה בֵין מְגָרֵשׁ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מָה אַתְּ סָבוּר חֲלִיצָה קִנְיָין. אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא פְטוֹר. אֵין הָאַחִין חַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁלַּחוֹלֵץ. אֲבָל חַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁלַּמֵּת.

MISHNAH: If somebody performs ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law while his brother had married her sister and then died, she must perform ḥalîṣah but not levirate. . Similarly, if somebody divorces his wife while his brother had married her sister and then died, she is free. . HALAKHAH: “Similarly, if somebody divorces his wife,” etc. Simeon bar Abba asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: What is the difference between having ḥalîṣah and divorcing? He said to him: You think that ḥalîṣah is acquisiton, but it is only freeing. The brothers are not guilty makes the unencumbered woman a wife in criminal but not in civil matters. for her under the category of “wife of the one acting in ḥalîṣah ” but they are guilty under the category of “wife of the deceased”.

שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ אָחִיו אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ. מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן בָּתֵירָה אָמְרוּ. אוֹמֵר לוֹ הַמְתֵּן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה אָחִיךָ הַגָּדוֹל מַעֲשֶׂה. חָלְצוּ לָהּ אַחִין אוֹ כָּנְסוּ יִכְנוֹס אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. מֵתֶה הַיְּבָמָה יִכְנוֹס. מֵת הַיָּבָם מוֹצִיא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ בְגֵט וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו בַּחֲלִיצָה. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם כול׳. לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא מֵתָה יְבִמְתּוֹ מוּתָּר בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ. אֲבָל אִם מֵתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ אָסוּר בִּיבִמְתּוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. זוֹ דִבְרֵי רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. אֲבָל דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים מֵתָה יְבִמְתּוֹ מוּתָּר בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ. מֵתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ מוּתָּר בִּיבִמְתּוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא בָא מַחְמַת הַגּוֹרֵם בָּטַל הַגּוֹרֵם בָּטַל הָאִיסּוּר. וְדִבְרֵי רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבַּטַּל הַגּוֹרֵם הָאִיסּוּר בִּמְקוֹמוֹ.

MISHNAH: If a brother gave qiddushin to the sister of a woman waiting for the levir, they said in the name of Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra: One says to him wait until your older brother has acted. If [one of the] brothers performed ḥalîṣah or married her, he may marry his wife. If the sister-in-law died, he may marry. If the levir died, he has to remove himself from his wife by a bill of divorce and his brother’s widow by ḥalîṣah . HALAKHAH: It says only: If the sister-in-law died, his wife is permitted to him. But if his wife died, his sister-in-law is forbidden to him. Rebbi Joḥanan said, these are the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, if his sister-in-law died, his wife is permitted to him, if his wife died, his sister-in-law is permitted to him. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Sages hold that for anything induced by a cause, if the cause is removed the prohibition is removed. But for Rebbi Eliezer, if the cause is removed the prohibition remains.

הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ וְלֹא תְיַיבֵּם עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא לָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. וְכֵן כָּל שְׁאָר הַנָּשִׁים לֹא יִנָּשְׂאוּ וְלֹא יִתְאָרְסוּ עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ לָהֶן שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. אַחַת בְּתוּלוֹת וְאַחַת בְּעוּלוֹת אַחַת אַלְמָנוֹת וְאַחַת גְרוּשׁוֹת אַחַת נְשׂוּאוֹת וְאַחַת אֲרוּסוֹת. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר הַנְּשׂוּאוֹת יִתְאָרְסוּ וְהָאֲרוּסוֹת יִנָּשְׂאוּ. חוּץ מִן הָאֲרוּסוֹת שֶׁבִּיהוּדָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלִּבּוֹ גַס בָּה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר כָּל הַנָּשִׁים יִתְאָרְסוּ חוּץ מִן הָאַלְמָנָה מִפְּנֵי הָאִיבּוּל. הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ כול׳. עַד כַּמָּה הַכָּרַת הָעוּבָּר. סוּמֲכוֹס אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי מֵאִיר. עַד שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רְאַיָיה לַדָּבָר זֵיכֶר לַדָּבָר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַיְהִי כְּמִשְׁלֹשׁ חֳדָשִׁים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. אֲפִילוּ מְעוּבֶּרֶת רוּחַ. הָרִינוּ חַלְנוּ כְּמוֹ יָלַדְנוּ רוּחַ. תַּהֲרוּ חֲשַׁשׁ תֵּלְדוּ קַשׁ. רִבִּי זְעִירָא רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זוּטְרָא אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חִיָיה רַבָּה. אֲפִילוּ רוּבּוֹ שֶׁלָּרִאשׁוֹן וְרוּבּוֹ שֶׁלָּאַחֲרוֹן וְהָאֶמְצָעִי שָׁלֵם. רִבִּי אַסִי אָמַר. תִּשְׁעִים יוֹם שְׁלֵימִין. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר הֵן עִיבּוּרֵיהֶן. אָתָא עוֹבְדָה קוֹמֵי רַבָּנִן דְּתַמָּן דְּלָא יָדְעִין אִם שְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר מִן הָרִאשׁוֹן וְשִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר מִן הָאַחֲרוֹן. [אוֹ שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר מִן הָרִאשׁוֹן וּשְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר מִן הָאַחֲרוֹן.] וַחֲמִשָּׁה שְׁלֵימִין בָּאֶמְצַע. וּבִיקְשׁוּ לִיגַּע בַּוְולָד מִשּׁוֹם סָפֵק מַמְזֵירוּת. אָמַר לוֹן רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יַעֲקֹב. בְּהָהֵין עוֹבְדָא אָתָא קוֹמֵי רַבָּה בַּר בָּא וְאַכְשְׁרוֹ. אַבָּא בַר וָוא פַּלִּיג עַל שְׁמוּאֵל בְּרֵיהּ. אָמַר רַבָּא. שַׁנְיָיה הִיא הַכָּרַת הָעוּבָּר שַׁנְיָיה הִיא לֵידָתוֹ. הַכָּרַת הָעוּבָּר לַחֳדָשִׁים שְׁלֵימִין וְלֵידָתוֹ לַחֳדָשִׁים מְקוּטָעִין. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. וְכַמָּה הִיא קִישּׁוּיָּהּ. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. אֲפִילוּ אַרְבָּעִים חֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. דַּיָיהּ חָדְשָׁהּ. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים. אֵין קִישּׁוּי יוֹתֵר מִשְׁתֵּי שַׁבָּתוֹת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי וָוא. זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת לַחֳדָשִׁים מְקוּטָעִין. דִּלֹכֵן נִיתְנֵי שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. רִבִי יוֹסֵה בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי וָוא זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת לַחֳדָשִּׁים שְׁלֵימִין. דְּתַנִינָן דַּיָיהּ חוֹדְשָׁהּ. רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. סוֹף דָּבָר עַד שֶׁתֵּלֵד. לֹא אֲפִילוּ הִפִּילָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. שְׁמָעִית בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. הִיא הַכָּרַת הָעוּבָּר הִיא לֵידָתוֹ. וְלֵית אֲנָא יְדַע מִן מַה שְׁמָעִת. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר כֹּהֵן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמְרָהּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה. לֹא אָמְרָהּ רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. וְאִיקְפִּד רִבִּי יוֹסֵי לְקִיבְּלֵיהּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. שֶׁכֵּן אֲפִילוּ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ שֶׁהָיָה [קָשּׁוּר] לְמֹשֶּׁה לֹא אָמַר כֵּן. וְאַתְּ אוֹמְרָהּ כֵּן. חָזַר וְאָמַר. אִין דְּאָמְרָהּ אֶלָּא כְאִינֶּשׁ דְּשָׁמַע מִילָּה וּמַקְשֵׁי עָלֶיהָ. וְאַבָּא בַּר וָוא פַלִּיג עַל שְׁמוּאֵל בְּרֵיהּ. רִבִּי בְּרֶכְיָה בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. לְעוֹלָם אֵין הָאִשָּׁה יוֹלֶדֶת אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנַיִם אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וְאַרְבָּעָה. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי מָנָא. מְנָן שָׁמַע רִבִּי הָדָא מִילְתָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִן רִבִּי בָּא. מִחְלְפָא שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי בָּא. תַּמָּן הוּא אָמַר. שַׁנְיָיא הוּא הַכָּרַת הָעוּבָּר שַׁנְיָיא הוּא לֵידָתוֹ. וְהָכָא אָמַר הָכֵין. רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר זוּטְרָא בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. {כָּל שֶׁהוּא בְהֵ׳י רַבָּה. בְאַלֶ׳ף רָבָא.} [כָּל שֶׁהוּא בְהַרְבֶּה הֲרֵי הוּא בְאַרְבֶּה.] רַב חִיָיה בַּר אַשִּׁי הֲוָה יְתִיב קוֹמֵי דְרַב. חֲמִיתֵיהּ מַבְעִת. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מַהוּ כֵן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. חֲמָרְתִּי מְעַבְּרָה וְהִיא בְּעָיָא מֵילַד וַאֲנָא בָּעֵי מִרְבַּעְתָּהּ עַד דְּלָא תְצַנֵּן. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אֵימָתַי עָלָה עָלֶיהָ הַזָּכָר. אָמַר לֵיהּ. בְּיוֹם פַּלָּן. וְחָשַׁב אָמַר לֵיהּ. בְּעָיָא הִיא עַד כְּדוֹן. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. חֲמָרְתָה פּוֹחֶתֶת אֵינָהּ פּוֹחֶתֶת מִימוֹת הַלְּבָנָה וְהַמּוֹסֶפֶת אֵינָהּ מוֹסֶפֶת עַל יְמוֹת הַחַמָּה. מִילְתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי פְלִיגָא. דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. בָּקוֹרֶת מִשֶּׁלַּמַּלְכוּת עִיבְּרָה וְהִרְבִּיעֵי שֶׁלְּבֵית רִבִּי מִמֶּנָּה שְּׁוָורִים. וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶן שֶׁיָּלְדוּ עַכְשָׁיו וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶן שֶׁיָּלְדוּ לְאַחַר זְמָן. כָּאן בִּבְהֵמָה טְהוֹרָה כָּאן בִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵיאָה. וְהָא כְתִיב הֲיָדַעְתָּ עֵת לֶדֶת יַעֲלֶי סָלַע וגו׳. תִּסְפּוֹר יְרָחִים תְּמַלֶּאנָה וְיָדַעְתָּ עֵת לִדְתָּנָה. הֲיָדַעְתָּ עֵת לֶדֶת. חַיָּה טְהוֹרָה כִבְהֵמֶה טְמֵאָה. רִבִּי מֵאִיר חָשַׁשׁ לְגִיטִּין. רִבִּי יוּדָה חָשַׁשׁ לִוְולָד. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי חָשַׁשׁ לַגִּיטִּין וְלִוְולָד. אִין תֵּימַר דְּלֵית רִבִּי מֵאִיר. חוֹשֵׁשׁ לַגִּטִּין. דִּתְנָן. אֲרוּסוֹת יְנָשְׂאוּ מִיָּד. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי גְּדוּלָה. מְמָאֶנֶת אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. [הָיוֹצְאָה בְגֵט צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים.] הָדָא מְסַיְיעָא לְרִבִּי מֵאִיר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר חָשַׁשׁ לְגִיטִּין. רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵּׁם רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יִרְמְיָה. אֲנוּסָה אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. מְסַיְיעָא לְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי חָשַׁשׁ לַגִּיטִּין וְלִוְולָד. תַּנֵּי הַגִּיּוֹרֶת וְהַשְּׁבוּיָה וְהַשִּׁפְחָה שֶׁנִּפְדּוּ וְשֶׁנִּתְגַיְירוּ וְשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּחְרְרוּ צְרִיכוֹת לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. אֵינָן צְרִיכוֹת לְהַמְתִּין. וּבְדָמִים. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. מְטַמֵּא מֵעֵת לָעֵת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר. דַּיָיה שַׁעְתָּהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי. נִרְאִין דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה בְדָמִים וְדִבְרֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בִוְולָד. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. אַבָּא הֲוָה לֵיהּ עוֹבְדָא וְשָׁלַח שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי חִיָיה וּלְרִבִּי יוֹסָה וּלְרִבִּי אִמִּי וְהוֹרוּן לֵיהּ כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בִּוְלָד. דִלֹא כֵן מַה אֲנָן אָמְרִין. רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אֶלָּא בְגִין דְּאָמַר רִבִּי. נִרְאִין. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעוּרָה. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁשָּׁנָה רִבִּי. נִרְאִין. עֲדַיִין הַמַּחֲלוֹקֶת בִּמְקוֹמָהּ חוּץ מֵעִיגּוּל שֶׁלַּדְּבֵילָה. דְּדֵין מוֹדֵי לְדִין וְדֵין מוֹדֵי לְדִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. קַשְׁיָיתָהּ קוֹמֵי רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְּרֵיהּ דְּרִבִי אַבָּהוּ. אֲפִילוּ דָבָר בָּרִיא שֶׁנִּבְעֲלוּ. אָמַר לוֹ. וּסְתָם גּוֹיוֹת לֹא כִבְּעוּלּוֹת הֵן. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר בָּא אָמַר. אָתָא עוֹבְדָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְהוֹרֵי כְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וַהֲוָה רִבִּי לָעְזָר מִצְטָעֵר. אָמַר. שָׁבְקִין סְתָמָא וְעָבְדִין כִּיחִידָיָיא. אַשְׁכַּח תַּנֵי לָהּ רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מֵאִיר. כְּרִבִי שִׁמְעוֹן שָׁמַע לָהּ דְּתַנֵּי לָהּ רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. יְאוּת סַבָּא יְדֵע פִּירְקֵי גִיטָא. רִבִּי מָנָא בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוּדָן. תַּמָּן אָמַר רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁשָּׁנָה רִבִּי מַחֲלוֹקֶת וְחָזַר וְשָׁנָה סְתָם הֲלָכָה כִסְתָם מִשְׁנָה. וְהָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר הָכֵין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. לֹא רִבִּי דִּילְמָא חוֹרָן אָמַר. מִן מַה הֵן דְּשָׁנָה רִבִּי מַתְנִיתִין מַחֲלוֹקֶת וְחָזַר וְשָׁנָה סְתָם הֲלָכָה כִסְתָם. אַתַאי דְּלָא אַשְׁכַּח רִבִּי מַתְנִיתִין מַחֲלוֹקֶת אֶלָּא אֲחֵרִים שָׁנוּ מַחֲלוֹקֶת וְרִבִּי שָׁנָה סְתָם לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן תְּהֵא הֲלָכָה כִסְתָם. אָתָא רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה וְרִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. וַאֲפִילוּ שָׁנוּ אֲחֵרִים מַחֲלוֹקֶת וְרִבִּי שָׁנָה סְתָם הֲלָכָה כִסְתָם. וְלָמָּה הוּא מוֹרֵי לֵיהּ כִּיחִידָיָיא. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אִינָיָיא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא. הָדָא דְתֵימַר בְּשֶׁאֵין מַחֲלוֹקֶת אֶצֵל סְתָם. אֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ מַחֲלוֹקֶת אֶצֵל סְתָם לֹא בְדָא הֲלָכָה כִסְתָם. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא. הָדָא דְתֵימַר בְּיָחִיד אֵצֶל יָחִיד. אֲבָל בְּיָחִיד אֵצֶל חֲכָמִים לֹא בְדָא הֲלָכָה כִסְתָם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁשָּׁנָה סְתָם מִשְׁנָיוֹת דְּרַבָּנָן עַד שֶׁיְּפָרֵשׁ לוֹ רַבּוֹ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אוֹמֵר. כָּל סְתָם מִשְׁנָיוֹת דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר עַד שֶׁיְּפָרֵשׁ לוֹ רַבּוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסָה לֹא דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ פַּלִּיג אֶלָּא דוּ חֲמֵי רוֹב סְתָם מִשְׁנָיוֹת דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. רִבִּי זְעִירָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. הֵידֵינוֹ רַבָּה. רַבָּה דְמַתְנִיתָא רַבָּה דְאוּלְפָּנָא. לֵית מִילְתָא דְרִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמְרָה רַבָּה דְמַתְנִיתָה. כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דְּתַנֵּי לָהּ רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. יְאוּת סַבָּא יְדֵע פִּירִקֵי גַרְמָה. נֹאמַר אוּלְפָּן קְבִיל מִן רַבָּה דְמַתְנִיתָה. כַּד שָׁמַע דְּתַנֵּי לָהּ רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי מֵאִיר. הַחוֹלֶצֶת מוֹנָה מִשְּׁעַת מִיתָה. הַיּוֹצְאָה בְגֵט מוֹנָה מִשְּׁעַת נְתִינַת גִּיטָּהּ. רִבִּי חֲנִינָה אָמַר. מִשְּׁעַת נְתִינַת גִּיטָּהּ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. מִשְּׁעַת כְּתִיבָה. רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל. רַב כְּרִבִּי חֲנִינָה. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר כְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מָתִיב שְׁמוּאֵל לְרַב. עַל דַּעְתָּךְ דְּאַתְּ אָמַר מִשְּׁעַת נְתִינָה. מִשּׁוּם מָה אַתְּ חוֹשֵׁשׁ. מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנִּתְיָיחְדָה בֵּנְתַיִים. וְנִיחוּשׁ לָהּ לְגֵט יָשָׁן. מָתִיב רִבִּי חֲנִינָה לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. עַל דַּעְתָּךְ דְּאַתְּ אָמַר מִשְּׁעַת כְּתִיבָה. הָיוּ שְׁנֵי גִיטִּין. אֶחָד נִכְתָּב עַכְשָׁיו וְאֶחָד נִכְתָּב לְאַחַר זְמָן וְנִיתְּנוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן בְּיוֹם אֶחָד. לַזּוֹ אַתְּ אוֹסֵר וְלַזּוֹ אַתְּ מַתִּיר. מִן דַהֲוָה מוֹתְבָה רַב לִשְׁמוּאֵל הָתִיב רִבִּי חֲנִינָה לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מִן דַהֲוָה רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מוֹתְבָא לְרִבִּי חֲנִינָה הָתִיב שְׁמוּאֵל לְרַב. וַהֲלָכָה מוֹנֶה לְגֵט מִשְּׁעַת כְּתִיבָה אִם לֹא נִתְיָיחֵד עִמָּהּ. חוּץ מִן הָאַלְמָנָה מִפְּנֵי הָאִיבּוּל. וְכַמָּה הוּא הָאִיבּוּל. שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. הָדָא דְתֵימַר בַּנָּשִׁים. אֲבָל בָּאֲנָשִׁים שְׁלֹשָׁה רְגָלִים. בְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בָנִים. אֲבָל אִם אֵין לוֹ בָנִים מִיָּד. בְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִי שֶׁיְּשַׁמְּשֶׁנּוּ. אֲבָל אִם אֵין לוֹ מִי שֶׁיְּשַׁמְּשֶׁנּוּ מִיָּד. בְּשֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָנָיו קְטַנִּים. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ בָנָיו קְטַנִּים מִיַּד. כְּהָדָא. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁמֵּתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁלְּרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. עַד כְּשֶׁהוּא בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת אָמַר לַאֲחוֹתָהּ. הִיכָּנְסִי וְגַדְּלִי אֶת בְּנֵי אֲחוֹתֵיךְ. אַף עַל פִּי כֵן כְּנָסָהּ וְלֹא הִכִּירָהּ עַד שֶׁעָבְרוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם.

MISHNAH: No sister-in-law should be a party to ḥalîṣah or levirate until after three months. Similarly, no woman should be married or receive qiddushin until after three months, whether virgin or not virgin, widow or divorcee, married or betrothed. Rebbi Jehudah says, those that had been married may receive qiddushin and those that had received qiddushin can be married except those that had received qiddushin in Judea because he is familiar with her 1:5 that in Judea one permitted the betrothed couple to be together unchaperoned. Therefore, one may assume that they slept together. . Rebbi Yose said, any woman may receive qiddushin except a widow because of her mourning. HALAKHAH: “No sister-in-law should be a party to ḥalîṣah ,” etc. 8b , but the meaning is different there. In the Babli, the discussion is not about recognizing a pregnancy for the question of remarriage; that question is settled by the proviso that a woman must wait 90 days after her husband’s death (as explained in the Mishnah here) and, if she turns out to be pregnant, she cannot remarry as long as the child is not weaned ( Ketubot 5:6 , Sotah 4:4 ; Babli Ketubot 60a/b ). The statement there is to the effect that if a woman has missed her period three times and is visibly pregnant, then, starting three months after her last period, any bleeding does not follow the general rules of menstrual flow but the special rules of pregnant women. There is no discussion of the rule and it is not claimed that the rule represents any medical validity. But in the Yerushalmi it appears from the sequel that one sees in the rule a statement of biological fact. The Halakhah, up to Note 155 , is copied in Niddah 1:4 . How long is it until a pregnancy is recognized? 1:7 , including the statement attributed here to Rebbi Yudan. Symmachos said in the name of Rebbi Meїr: After three months. Even though it is no proof, there is a hint: “It was after about three months.. 38:24 . ” Rebbi Yudan said, even for a phantom pregnancy, “we were pregnant, we were sick, as if we gave birth to wind,. 26:18 ; as the Babli points out, this statement is addressed to males and therefore not a good support. In the interpretation of the Babli (Note 131), a fake delivery (“delivery of wind”) after recognition of the pregnancy does not change the status of the woman in matters of impurity. ” “get pregnant with dry grass, give birth to straw. 33:11 . .” Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Abba bar Zuṭra said, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya: Even most of the first, most of the last, and the middle one complete. Rav Assi said, a full 90 days. Samuel said, they in their fulness. A case came before the rabbis there; we do not know if thirteen of the first and seventeen of the last or seventeen of the first and thirteen of the last, and five complete ones in the middle; they wanted to touch the child because of a doubt of bastardy and her actual marriage, which would make the child a bastard. . Rav Naḥman bar Jacob told them, such a case came before Abba bar Abba and he declared it acceptable. Does Abba bar Abba disagree with his son Samuel? Rebbi Abba said, there is a difference between recognizing a pregnancy and giving birth. A pregnancy is recognized after full months, a birth can happen after fractional months. There, we have stated 4:5. : “How long can labor be ( Lev. 15:25 ). The disagreement is on how long the exemption from impurity can be claimed. ? Rebbi Meїr said, even 40 to 50 days. Rebbi Jehudah said, her month is sufficient. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon say, no labor is longer than two weeks”. “Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abba: This implies that a woman gives birth after fractional months. Since otherwise one should have stated “thirty days”. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Abba: This implies that a woman gives birth after full months. Since we have stated: “Her month is sufficient.” Rebbi Yudan asked: Does this hold until she gives birth? No, even if she had a miscarriage blood which requires a purification offering? The Babli declares that miscarriages and stillborn babies make their mother impure retroactively ( Niddah 38b ). . Rebbi Mana said, I heard in the name of Samuel that there is no difference between recognizing a pregnancy and giving birth, but I do not remember from whom I heard this. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Jeremiah said this. Rebbi Ḥizqyah said to him, Rebbi Jeremiah did not say this; Rebbi Yose was offended by him. He said to him: Even Joshua who was bound to Moses would not have said so, but you said so! He checked himself and said, it is true that he said that but as a person who quotes something and questions it; does Abba bar Abba disagree with his son Samuel? Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Samuel: A woman gives birth only either after 271, 272, 273, or 274, days 38b , Mar Zuṭra is quoted that a 9 months pregnancy is 271 days, the numerical value of הריון “pregnancy” in the Alexandrian system. . Rebbi Mana said to him, from whom did the rabbi hear this? He said to him, from Rebbi Abba. The position of Rebbi Abba seems inverted. There, he says, there is a difference between recognizing a pregnancy and giving birth, and here, he says so? Rebbi Abba bar Zuṭra in the name of Samuel: {If with ה Rabba, with א Rava.}; it is a gloss from a student of the Babli to distinguish between quotes of Rabba רבה (Rav Abba bar Naḥmani) and Rava רבא (Rav Abba bar Rav Joseph bar Ḥama), assuming the copyists made no mistakes. Everything which is “many” is 208 and it makes sense, that if in the Pentateuch there is a promise of הרבה ארבה (cf. Gen . 16:10 , 22:17 ) it implies a seven month birth after א + ר + ב + ה = 1+200+2+5 days. In Babli Niddah 38b , Mar Zuṭra reads 1S . 1:20 that Hanna gave birth to Samuel after 2 seasons (of 91¼ days each) and two days, or 184.5 days, barely more than 6 full months. . Rab Ḥiyya bar Ashi was sitting before Rav who saw him disturbed. He said to him, what is the matter? He said to him, my female donkey is pregnant and will give birth; then I have to get her to copulate before she is out of heat. He said to him, when did the male mount her? He said, on day X. He calculated and said, she still has some time until then. It was stated so: A quick female donkey does not need less than the days of the moon and one who is late is not later than the days of the sun 8a , simply states that impure domestic animals have a gestation period of 12 months. . The words of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi disagree, since Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, the cattle herd of the government 1:4 : “of Antoninus”; cf. Kilaim, Chapter 9, Note 79 . was there for copulating and those of the house of Rebbi took bulls from them to copulate. Some of them gave birth soon and some of them later. Here it is about a pure animal, there about an impure animal. But is it not written, “do you know the time the mountain goats will give birth, etc.” “Count months, make them complete, you will know the time of their giving birth. 39:1–2 . ” “Do you know the time of giving birth?” A pure wild animal is like a domestic impure animal 16a/b , uses Job 39:1 to prove that the time of birth of wild animals is unpredictable. Elsewhere, Bekhorot 8a , the gestation period of great predators (lions, wolves, bears, panthers) as well as apes and marmosets is given as three years. . Rebbi Meїr 47a (Note כ ) indicates that the Soncino edition, in the quote of the Mishnah here, has “the words of Rebbi Meїr”, a reading rejected by Rashi ad loc . It seems that the Soncino text is the correct quote of a parallel Mishnah. is suspicious about bills of divorce. Rebbi Jehudah is suspicious about a child. Rebbi Yose is suspicious about bills of divorce and a child paternity. . Could you say that Rebbi Meїr is not suspicious about bills of divorce, as we have stated: “Those that had received qiddushin can be married.” Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Gedula: The one who repudiates does not have to wait three months; the one who leaves by a bill of divorce needs to wait three months. This supports Rebbi Me‘ir since Rebbi Meїr is suspicious about bills of divorce. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Jeremiah: A woman who has been raped does not have to wait three months. This supports Rebbi Yose, since Rebbi Yose is suspicious about bills of divorce and a child. It was stated: The proselyte, the captive, and the slave woman who were redeemed, or converted, or freed, have to wait three months, the words of Rebbi Judah. Rebbi Yose says, they do not have to wait. Their blood 1:3 , the attributions are switched, and this seems to be the background both for the remark of Rebbi (not in the Tosephta) and the later discussion since in a switched version, Rebbi seems to prefer the stringency of R. Judah in the matter of remarriage. But it is difficult to change the text against the testimony of both mss. (which, however, represent the same Vorlage .) The Babli has no possible interest in this discussion since it holds ( Avodah zarah 36b ) that all Gentile women are rabbinically permanently menstruating {and biblically married, since in talmudic theory, Sanhedrin 58b , a Gentile is married to the first partner he or she is copulating with, without possibility of divorce (a position which seems to be adopted by the Apostle Paul).} , Rebbi Jehudah says, makes impure 24 hours retroactively; Rebbi Yose says, from its moment onwards. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Judah are reasonable for the blood, and the words of Rebbi Yose for the child. Rebbi Ḥanina ben Rebbi Abbahu said, my father had a case and he asked Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Yasa, and Rebbi Immi, and they instructed him following Rebbi Yose for the child. For if it were not so, what could we say? Between Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Yose, practice does not follow Rebbi Yose 3:1, Notes 20–26 ; Babli Erubin 46b ). ? But because Rebbi said, “they are reasonable”. Did not Rebbi Abba say in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira, every time Rebbi taught “they are reasonable”, the disagreement is unresolved except in the case of the fig cake where each party to the controversy accepts the opposition’s argument Halakhah 4:10, Tosephta 5:11. In neither source is there a reference to the position taken by Rebbi. . Rebbi Yose said, I stated a difficulty before Rebbi Ḥanina ben Rebbi Abbahu: Even if it is certain that they had sex? He said to him, is a normal Gentile not like one who had sex? Simeon bar Abba said, there came a case before Rebbi Joḥanan and he instructed following Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Eleazar was sorry about this; he said, one disregards the anonymous [Mishnah] and follows an isolated opinion! He found that Rebbi Ḥiyya stated it in the name of Rebbi Meїr. He understood that following Rebbi Simeon, he found that Rebbi Ḥiyya stated it in the name of Rebbi Meїr. He said, the old man certainly understands the chapters about bills of divorce. Rebbi Mana asked before Rebbi Yudan: There Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Abbahu, said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Every place where Rebbi taught a disagreement and afterwards taught it anonymously, practice follows the anonymous Mishnah 42b , Baba qama 102a , Avodah zarah 7a , Niddah 11b , quotes the corresponding statement (in the name of R. Joḥanan) in a very succinct way: Disagreement followed by anonymous statement implies practice follows the anonymous statement; anonymous statement followed by disagreement implies practice does not follow the anonymous statement. Therefore, the Babli has no problem to follow R. Yose in this Halakhah. The same conclusion is reached here in the last sentence of the paragraph. . And here, you say so? He said to him, if not Rebbi, maybe somebody else said it? Since when Rebbi taught a disagreement and afterwards taught it anonymously, practice follows the anonymous [text]. It must be that Rebbi did not find a disagreement in the Mishnah; but if others taught it in disagreement and Rebbi taught it anonymously, certainly practice follows the anonymous [text]. There come Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Jacob bar Abba and Rebbi Simeon bar Abba, in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Even if others taught a disagreement but Rebbi taught it anonymously, practice follows the anonymous [text]. Why does he agree here with a dissenting opinion? Rebbi Samuel ben Inaya in the name of Rebbi Aḥa. That means, if no diagreement is stated together with the anonymous [text], but if a disagreement is stated together with the anonymous [text], practice does not follow the anonymous [opinion]. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Aḥa. That is, if individual disagrees with individual. But if an individual disagrees next to the [anonymous] Sages, practice does not follow the anonymous [text]. Rebbi Joḥanan said, everywhere one taught anonymous Mishnaiot, it follows the rabbis unless one’s teacher explains it [differently]. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, all anonymous Mishnaiot follow Rebbi Meїr unless one’s teacher explains it [differently] 43a ), the formulation usually is due to R. Meїr ( Sanhedrin 86a ). The attributions of texts in other tannaitic works stated in the latter source have no parallels in Yerushalmi sources. . Rebbi Ze‘ira said before Rebbi Yasa, not that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagrees, only he saw that most anonymous Mishnaiot follow Rebbi Meїr. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Mana: What kind of teacher? The teacher of the baraita or the teacher of study? Does not the story of Rebbi Eleazar imply, the teacher of the baraita ? “Following Rebbi Simeon, he found that Rebbi Ḥiyya stated it in the name of Rebbi Meїr. He said, the old man certainly understands his chapters.” We have to say that he received instruction from the teacher of the baraita to be discovered by independent research. when he understood that Rebbi Ḥiyya stated it in the name of Rebbi Meїr. The woman who performs ḥalîṣah counts from the moment of death The Babli, 42a , follows the Tosephta, 6:7 , that a sister-in-law who performed ḥalîṣah within the first three months must wait another three months. . The one who leaves by a bill of divorce counts from the moment of delivery of her bill. Rebbi Ḥanina said, from the moment of delivery of her bill. Rebbi Joḥanan said, from the moment of writing. Rav and Samuel, Rav like Rebbi Ḥanina, Samuel like Rebbi Joḥanan. Samuel objected to Rav: According to you, since you say from the moment of delivery, about what are you suspicious? Because in the meantime she was alone with him! Then one should worry about an old bill of divorce 8:4 ). According to Samuel, Rav should not permit the delivery of a bill of divorce if husband and wife are at the same place and the bill was not delivered on the day it was written and signed. ! Rebbi Ḥanina objected to Rebbi Joḥanan: According to you, since you say from the moment of writing, if there were two bills of divorce, one written now and one later, and both delivered on the same day. This one you prohibit and that one you permit! 18a . What Rav objected to Samuel, Rebbi Ḥanina objected to Rebbi Joḥanan. What Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Ḥanina, Samuel objected to Rav. Practice: She counts from the time of writing if he never was alone with her18a . . “Except the widow because of her mourning.” How much does mourning last? Thirty days. That is, for women. But for men 23a. (Except when he has nobody to serve him; current practice follows the Yerushalmi.) , three holidays. If he has children; but if he does not have children immediately. If he has somebody to serve him; but if he has nobody to serve him, immediately. If he does not have small children; but if he has small children, immediately, as in the following: It happened that Rebbi Ṭarphon’s wife died. While he still was in the cemetery, he said to her sister: Come into my house and raise your sister’s children. Even though he married her, he did not know her until 30 days had passed.

אַרְבָּעָה אַחִין נְשׂוּאִין לְאַרְבַּע נָשִׁים וָמֵתוּ אִם רָצָה הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבָּהֶם לְיַיבֶּם אֶת כּוּלָּן הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ. מִי שֶּׁהָיָה נָשׂוּי לִשְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים וָמֵת בִּיאָתָהּ אוֹ חֲלִיצָתָהּ שֶׁל אַחַת מֵהֶן פּוֹטֶרֶת צָרָתָהּ. הָיְתָה אַחַת כְּשֵׁירָה וְאַחַת פְּסוּלָה אִם הָיָה חוֹלֵץ חוֹלֵץ לַפְּסוּלָה וְאִם הָיָה מְיַיבֵּם מְיַיבֵּם לַכְּשֵׁירָה. אַרְבָּעָה מֵאַחִין כול׳. דֶּלֹמָא. תְּלַת עָשָׂר אַחִין הַוְיָין וּמֵתִין תְּרֵין עָשָׂר דְּלָא בְּנִין. אַתְיוּן בְעַיּוּן מִתְיַיבְּמָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי. אֵיזִיל יַיבֶּם. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. לֵית בְּחֵיילִי. וְהֵם אוֹמְרוֹת. כָּל חָדָא וְחָדָא אֲנָא מְזַיְינְנָא יַרְחִי. אֲמַר. וּמָאן זַיֵין הַהוּא יַרְחָא דְעִיבּוּרָא. אֲמַר רִבִּי. אֲנָא זַיְינְנָא יַרְחָא דְעִיבּוּרָא. וְצַלִּי עֲלֵיהוֹן וְאָזְלוּן לְהוֹן. בְּתָר תְּלַת שְׁנִין אָתוּן טְעִינִין תַּלְתִּין וְשִׁיתָא מֵיְינוּקִין. אָתוּן וְקַמְנוּ לָהֶן קוֹמֵי דָרְתָה דְרִבִּי. סָלְקִין וְאָמְרִין לֵיהּ. לְרַע קַרְיָיא דְמֵיינוּקִין בְּעַיָין מִישְׁאוֹל בִּשְׁלָמָךְ. אוֹדִיק רִבִּי מַן כִּוְותָּא וְחַמְתּוֹן. אֲמַר לוֹן. מַה עִיסְקֵיכוֹן. אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. אֲנָן בְּעַיָין תֵּיתִין לָן הַהוּא יַרְחָא דְעִיבּוּרָא. וִיהִיב לְהוֹן הַהוּא יַרְחָא דְעִיבּוּרָא. כְּתִיב וַיֵּשֶׁב אֲרוֹן יי עִם עוֹבֵד אֱדוֹם בְּבֵיתוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וַיְבָרֶךְ יי וגו׳. בְּמָה בֵּירְכוֹ. בְּבָנִים. הָדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב כֵּל אֵלֶּה מִבְּנֵי עוֹבֵד אֱדוֹם הֵמָּה וּבְנֵיהֶם וַאֲחֵיהֶם אִישׁ חַיִל בַּכֹּחַ לַעֲבוֹדָה שִׁשִּׁים וגו׳. דַּהֲוָות כָּל חָדָא מִינְּהֶן יָלְדָה תְּרֵיי בְכָל יַרְחָא. הָא כֵיצַד. טְמֵאָה שִׁבְעָה וּטְהֹרָה שִׁבְעָה וִילֵדַת. טְמֵאָה שִׁבְעָה וּטְהֹרָה שִׁבְעָה וִילֵדַת. שִׁית עָשָׂר לְכָל יֶרַח. לִתְלָתָא יַרְחִין הָא אַרְבָּעִין וּתְמַנְיָיא. וְהוּא אֲשִׁתִּין. הָא חַמְשִׁין וְאַרְבָּעָה. וְתַמְנוֹתֵיהוֹן. הָא אֶשְׁתִּין וּתְרֵיי. הָדָא הִיא דִכְתִיב שִׁשִּׁים וּשְׁנַיִם לְעוֹבֵד אֱדוֹם. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָּא. כְּתִיב וְנִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ בְיִשְׂרָאֵל בֵּית חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל. בַּיִת שֶׁהוּא נִיתָּר בַּחֲלִיצָה אַחַת. אַף בְּבִיאָה כֵן. חֲלִיצָה פוֹטֵר וּבִיאָה פוֹטֵר. [כְּמָה] דְאַתְּ אָמַר בַּחֲלִיצָה כֵּן אַתְּ אָמַר בְּבִיאָה. וּמַהוּ לְהַעֲרִים. וְכִי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אֲבִיהֶן שֶׁלְּכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא הֶעֱרִים. קִידֵּשׁ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת נָשִׁים בִּימֵי רַעֲבוֹן עַל מְנָת לְהַאֲכִילָן בִּתְרוּמָה. תַּמָּן אֵין כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת רְאוּיָה לוֹכַל בִּתְרוּמָה. בְּרָם הָכָא כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד רָאוּי לְיַיבֵּם. רִבִּי יוּדָן בֵּירִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל עָבְדִין לֵיהּ כֵּן.

MISHNAH: If four brothers were married to four women and died, if their oldest [brother] wants to marry all of them in levirate, he is permitted to do so. If somebody was married to two women and he died, intercourse or ḥalîṣah with one of them frees the co-wife. If one was acceptable and the other blemished is considered a divorcee for a Cohen, the chances of remarriage of the acceptable one should not be diminished. For levirate, he may take either one. , if he performs ḥalîṣah , he performs it with the blemished; if he takes in levirate, he takes the acceptable one. HALAKHAH: “Four of the brothers,” etc. Explanation: There were thirteen brothers, of whom twelve died childless. They [the widows] came and wanted to be married in levirate before Rebbi. He said to him, go and take in levirate. He said to him, it overtaxes my means. But each one of them said, I will support during my month. He said, and who will support during that intercalary month? Rebbi said, I shall support during that intercalary month. He prayed for them and they went from him. After three years they came, carrying 36 toddlers. They came and stood in front of Rebbi’s dwelling. [People] went in and told [Rebbi], outside are rural toddlers who want to greet you. Rebbi looked down from the window and saw them. He asked them, for what are you here? They said to him, we beg that you give us [support for] that intercalary month; he gave them [support for] that intercalary month. It is written: “. 13:14 , 2S . 6:10 . The ark of the Eternal dwelt in the house of Obed Edom for three months, and the Eternal blessed,” etc. By what did he bless him? With sons. That is what is written: “. 26:8 . All these were from the sons of Obed Edom, they, their sons and relatives, strong men for the service, sixty” etc., because each one of them gave birth to two every month. How was that? She was impure for seven days 12:2 . , pure for seven days, and gave birth, was impure for seven days, pure for seven days, and gave birth. Sixteen every month 26:4–5 ). , in three months 48. And he, six63b/64a , the wife and all her daughters-in-law each had one birth of sextuplets. . This makes 54 together. And those eight, sum total 62. That is what was written: “. 26:8 . 62 for Obed Edom”. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda said, it is written: “His house should be called in Israel the house of the shoe-stripped.” A house which was permitted by one stripping. The same is true for intercourse. Stripping frees and intercourse frees. What you say about stripping you say about intercourse. May one apply a trick the one who cannot marry a Cohen should perform ḥalîṣah . If the older brother insists on having ḥalîṣah with the other widow, may one intervene to direct another brother to consent to the more desirable ḥalîṣah ? ? Did Rebbi Ṭarphon, the father of all of Israel, not apply a trick? He gave qiddushin to 300 women in times of famine to let them eat heave 5:3 ) and R. Ṭarphon formally acquired all 300 women but married none of them. ! There, every one of them was able to eat heave. But here, is each one able to perform levirate? Rebbi Yudan the son of Rebbi Ismael: One deals with him is such a way 5:3 ) and R. Ṭarphon formally acquired all 300 women but married none of them. .

הַמַּחֲזִיר אֶת גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא אֶת חֲלוּצָתוֹ וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא אֶת קְרוֹבַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ יוֹצִיא וְהַוְולָד מַמְזֵר דִבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָא. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים אֵין הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. וּמוֹדִים בְּנוֹשֵׂא אֶת קְרוֹבַת גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ שֶׁהַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. הַמַּחֲזִיר אֶת גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ כול׳. רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַמַּחֲזִיר אֶת גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ מִשֶּׁנִּישֵּׂאת פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. בְּלֹא כָךְ אֵינָהּ פְּסוּלָה מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. אֶלָּא פְּסוּלָה מִלּוֹכַל בִּתְרוּמָה. רִבִי זְעִירָה רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַמַּחֲזִיר גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ מִשֶּׁנִּישֵּׂאת בִּתָּהּ כְּשֵׁירָה לִכְהוּנָּה. וּמַאי טַעֲמָא. כִּי תוֹעֵבָה הִיא. הִיא תוֹעֵבָה הִיא וְאֵין הַוְולָד תּוֹעֵבָה.

MISHNAH: He who takes back his divorcee. 24:4 . This is a simple prohibition. , or marries the woman with whom he performed ḥalîṣah . 25:9 that he is a man “who will not build his brother’s house.” This excludes any belated levirate with a woman with whom he performed ḥalîṣah as a simple prohibition. , or marries a relative of the woman with whom he performed ḥalîṣah , has to divorce her and any child is a bastard, the words of Rebbi Aqiba is biblical. . But the Sages say, it is not a bastard. But they agree that the child of one who marries a relative of his divorcee is a bastard. HALAKHAH: “He who takes back his divorcee,” etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He who takes back his divorcee after she had remarried makes her blemished for the priesthood. Without that, is she not blemished for the priesthood? But, she is blemished in that she cannot eat heave. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The daughet of a man who takes back his divorcee after she had remarried is acceptable for the priesthood. What is the reason? “She is an abomination. 24:4 . The parallel to this paragraph is in Babli 11b , where the first statement of R. Ḥiyya is quoted as tannaitic and a disagreement is noted whether qiddushin or marriage with another man triggers the prohibition. ”. She is an abomination, the child is not an abomination.

וְאֵי זֶהוּ מַמְזֵר כָּל שְׁאֵר בָּשָׂר שֶׁהוּא בְלֹא יָבוֹא דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי עֲקִיבָא. שִׁמְעוֹן הַתִּימְנִי אוֹמֵר כָּל שֶׁחַיָיבִים עָלָיו כָּרֵת בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם וַהֲלָכָה כִדְבָרָיו. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר כָּל שֶׁחַיָיבִים עָלָיו מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין.

MISHNAH: And what is a bastard? Any [child of a] blood-relation to whom he is forbidden to come, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Simeon from Timna says, any [child of a relation] for which one is subject to extirpation by heaven’s action. 20 , also including capital crimes. , and practice follows him. Rebbi Joshua said, any [child of a relation] which is a capital crime.

אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי מָצָאתִי מְגִילַּת יוֹחֲסִין בִּירוּשָׁלֵם וְכָתוּב בָּהּ אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי מַמְזֵר מֵאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ לְקַיֵים דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אֵי זֶהוּ מַמְזֵר כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶן חֲנִינָה אוֹמֵר. וְכוּלְּהָם מֵאֵשֶׁת אָב לָמְדוּ. לֹא יִקַּח אִישׁ אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו וְלֹא יְגַלֶּה כְּנַף אָבִיו. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה דוֹרֵשׁ. מַה אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו מְיוּחֶדֶת שֶׁהִיא בְּלֹא יָבוֹא הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. אַף כָּל שֶׁהוּא בְּלֹא יָבוֹא הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. הָתִיבוּן. הֲרֵי אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא שֶׁפֵּירַשּׁ בָּהּ חָלָל. שִׁמְעוֹן הַתִּימְנִי דָרַשׁ. מַה אֵשֶׁת אָב מְיוּחֶדֶת שֶׁחַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ כָּרֵת בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. אַף כָּל שֶׁחַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ כָּרֵת בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. הָתִיבוּן. הֲרֵי נִידָּה. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא שֶׁאֵין כָּתוֹב בָּהּ שְׁאֵר בָּשָׂר. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דָּרַשׁ. מַה אֵשֶׁת אָב מְיוּחֶדֶת שֶׁחַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין וְהַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. אַף כָּל שֶׁחַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין הַוְולָד מַמְזֵר. אַף עַל גַּב דְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָמַר הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ הַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר. מוֹדֶה שֶׁאִם הָיְתָה הַוְולָד נְקֵיבָה שֶׁהִיא פְסוּלָה מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. אַף עַל גַּב דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוּדָה מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד שֶׁבָּאוּ עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר. מוֹדֵי שֶׁאִם הָיְתָה נְקֵיבָה שֶׁהִיא פְסוּלָה מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. חַד בַּר נַשׁ אָתָא לְגַבַּת רַב אָמַר. בְּנִין דִּילֵידַת אִמָּה דְהַהוּא גַבְרָא אֲרָמַאי. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כָּשֵׁר. אָמַר לֵיהּ רַב חָמָא בַר גּוּרְיָא. הֵן דְּעַיְימָךְ רַגְלֵיךְ עַד דְּלָא יֵיתֵי שְׁמוּאֵל וִיפְסָלִינָךְ. אַף עַל גַּב דְּרַב אָמַר. גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד שֶׁבָּאוּ עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַוְולָד כָּשֵׁר. מוֹדֵי שֶׁאִם הָיְתָה נְקֵיבָה שֶׁהִיא פְסוּלָה מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. וּמַה רָאוּ לוֹמֵר. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הַתִּימְנִי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָא. מָקוֹם שֶׁנִּכְלְלוּ כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת לְהִיכָּרֵת. יָצָאת אֵשֶׁת אָב לְלַמְּדָךְ עַל הַמַּמְזֵר. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה. תַּמָּן הוּא יְלִיף לֵיהּ מִכְּלָלָא וְהָכָא הוּא יְלִיף לֵיהּ מִפְּרָטָה. דְּתַנֵּי מִצְוֹת יי. הָיִיתִי אוֹמֵר. אַף אוֹכְלֵי שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים בִּכְלָל. הֲרֵי אַתְּ דָּן לוֹמַר. נֶאֱמַר כָּאן מֵעֵינֵי וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן מֵעֵינֵי. מַה עֵינֵי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן דָּבָר שֶׁחַיָיבִין עַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת וְעַל זְדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת. אַף מֵעֵינֵי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן חַיָיבִין עַל זְדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת וְעַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת. אִי מַה עֵינֵי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין אַף מֵעֵינֵי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה. מָקוֹם שֶׁיָּצָאת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לְלַמֵּד עַל מְחוּיָיבִין כְּרִיתוּת לֹא יָצָא עִמָּם כָּרֵת אֶלָּא כָּרֵת בִּלְבַד. אֲבָל מִיתָה מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר בָּאת. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי חֲנִינָה. תַּמָּן הוּא יְלִיף לֵהּ מִכְּלָלָא וְהָכָא הוּא יְלִיף לֵהּ מִפְּרָטָא. תַּמָּן נִכְלְלוּ כָל הָעֲרָיוֹת לְקָרְבָּן. יָצָאת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לְלַמֵּד עַל מְחוּיָיבֵי קָרְבָּנוֹת. אִית לָךְ מֵימַר. הָכָא נִכְלְלוּ כָל הָעֲרָיוֹת לְמַמְזֵר. יָצָאת אֵשֶׁת אָב לְלַמֵּד עַל הַמַּמְזֵר.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Simeon ben Azai said, I found a genealogical list in Jerusalem and it was written in it: The man X is a bastard from a married woman, to support the words of Rebbi Joshua. HALAKHAH: “What is a bastard,” etc; “Rebbi Simeon ben Azai said,” etc. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, all of them learned from the father’s wife. “A man shall not take his father’s wife and not uncover his father’s garment’s wing.. 23:1 . This is only half the basis of the arguments. The other is verse 3 : No bastard shall come into the community of the Eternal. Since v. 2 speaks of men who cannot have children, v. 3 is taken to refer to v. 1 , that the child of a man and his stepmother is a bastard. This is spelled out in detail in the Babli, 49a . ” Rebbi Aqiba explains: Just as his father’s wife is special in that she is a forbidden relation from which the child is a bastard, so in any case there is a forbidden relation, the child is a bastard. They objected, is there not a widow for the High Priest. 21:14 . Everybody agrees that the child is not a bastard from any of the priestly prohibitions since it is spelled out in v. 15 that the children would be desecrated, barred from the priesthood. This case is not discussed in the Babli. ? There is a difference, since desecration is spelled out. Simeon from Timna explained: Just as his father’s wife is special in that one is subject to extirpation for her, the child is a bastard, so in any case that one is subject to extirpation for her, the child is a bastard. They objected, is there not the menstruating woman. 20:18 . In the Babli, this refers to an amoraic statement. ? There is a difference, since “blood-relation” is not written in reference to her. Rebbi Joshua explained: Just as his father’s wife is special in that one is subject to the death penalty for her, the child is a bastard, so in any case that one is subject to the death penalty for her, the child is a bastard. Even though Rebbi Joshua said, the child of him who sleeps with his sister is acceptable, he agrees that if the child was female that she is blemished for the priesthood. Even though Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah [says] in the name of Rebbi Simeon: If a Gentile or a slave came to a daughter of Israel, the child is acceptable, they agree that if she was female, she is blemished for the priesthood. A man came to Rav and said, since the children of this man’s mother are from an Aramean? He said, acceptable. Rav Ḥama bar Guria said to him, let your feet carry you away before Samuel comes and declares you blemished. Even though Rav said, if a Gentile or a slave came to a daughter of Israel, the child is acceptable, he agrees that if she was female, she is blemished for the priesthood. Why did they say, practice follows Rebbi Simeon from Timna? 2:4 ; much more truncated in Babli Horaiot 8a . Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, from a place where all incest prohibitions were taken as one set [of sins] causing extirpation, the father’s wife came out to tell you about the bastard Chapter 18 are punishable by divine extirpation as made clear in Chapter 20. The verses about the connection between the father’s wife and the bastard are in Deut. 23 . The father’s wife represents a single element of the set of incest prohibitions. Deut. 23 has no penalties spelled out. It is presumed that the penalty common to all sins mentioned in Lev. 18 is also understood in Deut. 23 . Cf. Chapter 11, Note 63 . . The method of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina seems inverted. There, he infers from the set and here 2:4 , for which transgressions a purification sacrifice is due, viz ., those under penalty of divine extirpation. [Simple transgressions are expiated either by the punishment imposed by the court or by sincere repentance and the Day of Atonement ( Mishnah Yoma 8:7 )]. he infers from one of its members. As we have stated: “The commandments of the Eternal, 4:2 , the introduction to the laws of the purifying sacrifice: “If a person sins inadvertently against any of the Eternal ’ s commandments about what should not be done, but he did one of these. ” I could think that this includes also those who eat abominations and crawling things 11 ; these are simple prohibitions, at most punishable by whipping. . You argue, saying that here it says “from the eyes 4:13 ) “if the entire congregation of Israel errs and something is hidden from the eyes of the community and they do one of the actions which by the commandments of the Eternal should not be done, and they do damage.” This is part of a series of 5 different statements on purification offerings. “There” is the isolated statement about the particular purification offering due for the sin of apostasy (i. e., idolatry, Num. 15:22–28 ). Num. 15:24 reads: “If from the eyes of the congregation it was done in error.” By the hermeneutic rule of גזירה שוה “equal cut”, parallel expressions imply parallel meanings. ” and there it says “from the eyes”. Just as “from the eyes” mentioned there means something for which one is obligated for a purification sacrifice in case of inadvertent sin and extirpation in case of intentional sin, also “from the eyes” mentioned here means something for which one is obligated for a purification sacrifice in case of inadvertent sin and extirpation in case of intentional sin. But since “from the eyes” mentioned there is a case involving the death penalty, does “from the eyes” mentioned here involve the death penalty? Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, from the place from which idolatry was singled out to teach about all who are subject to extirpation, there was no mention of anything but extirpation 15:30 for the blasphemer and idolator, offenses which at other places are classified as capital crimes. . But the death penalty is written elsewhere. The method of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina seems inverted. There, he infers from the set and here he infers from one of its members! There, all incest prohibitions were taken together as to the duty of sacrifice. Idolatry was singled out to teach who is obligated for a sacrifice. What can you say? Here, all incest prohibitions were taken together concerning of bastards. The father’s wife was singled out to teach about the bastard.

אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. גֵּירְשָׁהּ וָמֵתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. נִשֵּׂאת לְאַחֵר וָמֵתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. יְבִמְתּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. חָלַץ לָהּ וָמֵתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ כול׳. הָא בְאִמָּהּ אָסוּר. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בְּאִמָּהּ. אֶלָּא בְגִין דְּתַנִּינָן. חָלַץ לָהּ וָמֵתָה מוּתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. הָא בְאִמָּהּ אָסוּר. לְפוּם כֵּן תַּנָּא אֲחוֹתָהּ.

MISHNAH: If his wife died, her sister is permitted to him. If he divorced her and she died, her sister is permitted to him 18:18 . If she was his wife for one minute, her sister is forbidden to him during her lifetime, by biblical standards. The same holds for the sister-in-law from a childless brother by rabbinic standards. . If she had married another man and died, her sister is permitted to him. If his sister-in-law died, her sister is permitted to him. If he performed ḥalîṣah with her and she died, her sister is permitted to him. HALAKHAH: “If his wife died, her sister is permitted to him,” etc. That means, her mother is forbidden to him. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa say in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If a woman waiting for her levir died, her mother is permitted to him2:5. . But since we stated: “If he performed ḥalîṣah with her and she died, her sister is permitted to him,” therefore he stated “her sister.”