Wenn ein Weiser ihrem Ehemann eine Frau wegen eines Gelübdes verbot [Wenn sie schwor, keinen Genuss von ihrem Ehemann zu erhalten, und er sie nicht von ihrem Gelübde befreite, und sie zu einem Weisen kam, um sie davon freizustellen, und er tat es findet keine "Öffnung für Bedauern" (dh für die Absolution ihres Gelübdes)], er (der Weise) darf sie nicht heiraten [weil er verdächtig ist (es zu erfinden, sie zu heiraten)]. Wenn sie vor ihm Miun oder Chalitzah aufgeführt hat, kann er sie heiraten, weil er ein Beth-Din ist. [Das heißt, dieser Weise hat Miun oder Chalitzah nicht alleine vorgesessen, zwei oder drei sind dafür erforderlich, damit er nicht verdächtig ist. Aber ein Experte genügt für die Absolution von Gelübden.] Und alle [der Weise und einer, der ein Get brachte, und einer, der aussagte, dass eine Frau heiraten kann, über den wir erfahren haben, dass sie sie nicht heiraten dürfen], wenn sie hatten [zu der Zeit] Frauen und sie starben, sie dürfen [danach] sie heiraten, [in einem solchen Fall gibt es keinen "Verdacht"]. Und alle [diese Frauen], die mit anderen verheiratet waren [als der Weise sie verbot oder als der Zeuge aussagte, dass ihr Ehemann gestorben war] und geschieden oder verwitwet waren [von ihren zweiten Ehemännern], dürfen sie heiraten [ der Weise oder derjenige, der das Get gebracht hat]. Und sie sind alle den Söhnen oder Brüdern erlaubt [von denen, die sie erlaubt haben, und nur den Erlaubnisgebern selbst verboten; denn man sündigt nicht im Namen seines Sohnes oder seines Bruders. Und all diese, über die es heißt "Er darf sie nicht heiraten"— Wenn er sie geheiratet hat, muss er sie nicht wegschicken —Mit Ausnahme von jemandem, der des Ehebruchs verdächtigt wird. In diesem Fall muss Beth-Din sie wegschicken, wenn er sie aufgrund von Zeugnissen und eindeutigen Beweisen von ihrem Ehemann genommen hat, selbst wenn er sie geheiratet hat. Und wenn es nur Zeugen für etwas Andeutendes gäbe, wie den Mann, der geht, und die Frau, die einen Sinar (eine Art Verschlusstuch) trägt, oder den Mann, der geht und die Frau, die aus ihrem Bett aufsteht, und dergleichen—Wenn er sie geheiratet hat, muss er sie nicht wegschicken. Und wenn nach solchen Zeugen der Bericht ausgestrahlt wurde und nach anderthalb Tagen nicht aufhörte— Wenn er sie geheiratet hat, muss er sie wegschicken (es sei denn, er hatte Kinder von ihr. In diesem Fall schickt er sie nicht weg, damit seine Kinder nicht verdächtigt werden.)
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
בנדר – she took a vow refusing any benefit/favor from her husband and he did not and he did not invalidate it and she came to a Sage to release her and he did not find an opening for regret for a vow made under misapprehension.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
Introduction
Mishnah ten is a continuation of mishnah nine.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
לא ישאנה – because of suspicion.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
A sage who has pronounced a woman forbidden to her husband because of a vow must not marry her himself. If, however, a woman made a declaration of refusal or performed halitzah in his presence, he may marry her, since he [is part of a] court. If any of these had wives who [subsequently] died, [the other women] are permitted to marry them. If [the women] were married to others and were [subsequently] divorced, or widowed, they may be married to these. They are permitted to their sons or brothers. The sage may not marry the woman whom he has declared forbidden to her husband due to a vow. This could happen if the woman vowed to receive no benefit from her husband, and then came in front of the sage to release her vow (we will learn how a vow is released in tractate Nedarim). If the sage could not find an opening to release the vow, then the woman remains forbidden to her husband. The sage may not marry her lest he did not search hard to find a way to release the vow because he wanted to marry the woman himself. However, if a woman performs the declaration of refusal (an annulment of marriage made by a woman upon reaching majority in a case where her marriage was contracted by her brother or mother) or halitzah in front of a sage, that sage may still marry her. In this situation he is part of a court, and we are not suspicious of courts. Furthermore, with a court, if he wanted to illegally accept her declaration of refusal or halitzah just so that he could marry her, he would have to get the rest of the court to agree. Since this would not be so simple, we are not suspicious and he may marry her.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
שהוא ב"ד – meaning to say, a woman’s protest against a marriage contracted during her minority and Halitzah – this Sage did not do as an individual because we hold that Halitzah and a woman’s protest against a marriage contracted during her minority [we require a court] of two or three we don’t suspect, but the release from vows [is performed] by an expert individual.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
This section places certain limits on the preceding laws in this mishnah and the previous one. If these men, who testified and thereby allowed the woman to be freed from her husband (the one who brought the get, or the one who testified about the husband’s death or the sage who did not release the vow), had other wives at the time, then they may later, after their current wives die, marry these other women. Since at the time of their testimony there is little chance that they would marry the woman about whom they are testifying, they are not suspected of lying. Note that this mishnah assumes that bigamy is not common, even though it is permitted. Furthermore, if these women subsequently marry other men and then are again divorced or widowed, they may marry the men who testified in order to “free” them from their previous marriage. The fact that they married someone else first, means that the original testimony did not directly allow them to marry the one who brought the get, testified about the death or did not release the vow. The step in between gets rid of the suspicion that they were lying. Finally, these women may marry the children or brother of these men. While we suspect that one may lie in order to free a woman for himself, we do not have such suspicions for his son or brother.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
וכולן – the Sage and he person bringing a Jewish bill of divorce and a person testifying about a woman to [be allowed] to marry her, as are taught about in the Mishnah, he should not take her in marriage if he had wives at the time of the action but if they died afterwards, they (i.e., the women) are permitted to marry them for now there is no suspicion.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
וכולן – these women.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
שנישאו לאחרים – that the Sage forbade or to the witness or to the person who brings the Jewish bill of divorce [from abroad].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
וכולן מותרות לבניהם ולאחיהן – of these who permit them and they are not forbidden other than to them alone, for a man does not sin for his son or for his brothers, and all those that we mentioned, one should not marry, and if he married, he should not remove/divorce except for the where there is a claim that she I s married woman, for if the Jewish court removed her from her husband with witness and clear proof, even if he married her, he should remove/divorce her. But if witnesses came regarding an ugly matter alone, such as that they saw a man going out and she is wearing [only] a petticoat/breech-cloth (and Ezra, according to Talmud Bava Kamma 82a ordained that a woman must wear such clothing as a matter of chastity), or a man goes out and she is standing on top of the bed and similar kinds of things, if he married her, he cannot remove/divorce her, and if after the witnesses about an ugly matter came and a rumor went out and didn’t cease for the rumor stood for a day-and-a-half, if he married her, he should divorce her, other than if they had children from her, for then, he doesn’t remove her in order to not to cast aspersion upon his children.
