Halakhah for Yevamot 16:8

Some background is necessary to understand the Gemara’s case. If a man dies childless, the Torah (Devarim 25:4-11) obligates the brother of the deceased either to marry the widow (yibum) or participate in a ceremony in which he officially declines to marry her (chalitzah). If the deceased left offspring, however, there is no obligation for his brother to perform either yibum or chalitzah. The Mishnah (Yevamot 16:1) discusses a case where a woman’s husband died childless and the deceased husband did not have a brother, thus avoiding the requirement for yibum or chalitzah. However, the deceased husband’s mother remains alive in a distant land where the wife could not communicate with her. The Mishnah teaches that the wife need not be concerned that the mother gave birth to a male child who would be required to perform yibum or chalitzah because of what may be construed as a s’feik s’feika: “Perhaps she miscarried and perhaps she gave birth to a female.” It thus appears that such a s’feik s’feika is valid.¹¹Alternatively, the Gemara’s case could be understood as employing the principle of rov, as we noted earlier from the Chatam Sofer. Rav Zalman Nechemia Goldberg, however, understands s’feik s’feika to be merely a more potent form of rov, and thus one cannot distinguish between the two, since they are identical concepts. For further discussion of this issue, see Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 110:96-98.

What sort of murder is it that is not observed by the eye yet the punishment for it is very great, the transgression is light but regarded as very serious in heaven. It is “shame” and (this) refers to one who puts his neighbor to shame publicly ¹Baba Metzia 58b. or causes him to suffer in the presence of another before whom he is pained with embarrassment. It is as though he murdered him, because the other would surely suffer death rather than be so humiliated. One who shames his neighbor but later grieves and repents and is willing to receive punishment and comes before one who is God-fearing to find a way to repent, let them say to him, “Know that your evil is great, that you shed the blood of your neighbor.” For so we find with Abijam, the son of Rehoboam, who reproved Jeroboam and shamed him publicly and was stricken dead.²J. T. Yebamoth 16:3. Therefore go my son and entreat your neighbor until he is pacified, be exceedingly careful for your soul that you neither shame nor insult anyone. For the manner of penitents is to be exceedingly humble,³Maimonides, Hilkhoth Teshuvah, 7:8. meek and submissively forebearing. And the meek do not retaliate insult for insult, nor do they reply. They are joyful in the afflictions of their meekness. And if fools shame you saying, “Remember your former deeds,” say to them, “I know that I sinned greatly and I did many things unbecoming, but the Lord will forgive me.” Endure those that shame you measure for measure, (if you insult them and then they insult you) for in this way will you expiate for your sins.⁴Berakoth 12b. If his sin, involving unchastity, was made known to the public, because of this shame⁵Shulhan Arukh, “Orah Hayim,” 138, see Baer Hetev, note 3. let him not refrain from studying those laws that deal with unchastity. For it is better for him to obtain forgiveness in this world ⁶Kiddushin 81a. since shame sheds blood and turns back perversity. And so we find in the Jerusalem Talmud, a murderer who comes to a city and is shown honors must confess, “I am a murderer,” ⁷Makkoth 12b. for it is said in Scripture, “and this is the case of the man slayer” (Deut. 19:4) this refers to “speech,” that he verbalize and confess the slaying.

Once they established that the husband in question was in the World Trade Center during the attacks, the Beth Din of America began exploring ways to establish that he indeed perished, rather than viewing the World Trade Center as parallel to mayim she’ein lahem sof. The Shulchan Aruch (E.H. 17:30), based on the Gemara (Yevamot 121b), rules that one who witnessed a husband fall into a cauldron of fire may testify that the husband died. The Beit Shmuel (17:92) cautions, though, that this ruling obviously applies only to a fire from which the husband would be unable to extricate himself. Once it has been proven that the husband entered a situation that no person could survive, the Halachah does not concern itself with the possibility that a miracle occurred and the husband was saved in defiance of the laws of nature.²⁴See Tosafot (Yevamot 121b s.v. Ein), who note that the Yerushalmi (Yevamot 16:3) actually does raise the possibility that a miracle occurred. Regardless of the Yerushalmi’s position, we follow the rulings of the Babylonian Gemara, which does not concern itself with such an eventuality.