Mishnah
Mishnah

Talmud for Yevamot 1:1

חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה נָשִׁים פּוֹטְרוֹת צָרוֹתֵיהֶן וְצָרוֹת צָרוֹתֵיהֶן מִן הַחֲלִיצָה וּמִן הַיִּבּוּם עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן, בִּתּוֹ, וּבַת בִּתּוֹ, וּבַת בְּנוֹ, בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וּבַת בְּנָהּ, וּבַת בִּתָּהּ, חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ, וְאֵם חָמִיו, אֲחוֹתוֹ מֵאִמּוֹ, וַאֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ, וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו מֵאִמּוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְעוֹלָמוֹ, וְכַלָּתוֹ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פּוֹטְרוֹת צָרוֹתֵיהֶן וְצָרוֹת צָרוֹתֵיהֶן מִן הַחֲלִיצָה וּמִן הַיִּבּוּם עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם. וְכֻלָּן אִם מֵתוּ, אוֹ מֵאֲנוּ, אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשׁוּ, אוֹ שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ אַיְלוֹנִיּוֹת, צָרוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרוֹת. וְאִי אַתָּה יָכוֹל לוֹמַר בַּחֲמוֹתוֹ וּבְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ וּבְאֵם חָמִיו שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ אַיְלוֹנִיּוֹת אוֹ שֶּׁמֵּאֵנוּ:

Fifteen women exempt their tzaroth ["rival wives"] from chalitzah [release from yibum (levirate marriage)] and from yibum all the way down the line (i.e., tzarah of tzarah of tzarah, etc.). [If one of them were married to his brother, who (with her) had two wives, and he died without children, they are both exempt, it being written (Leviticus 18:8): "And a woman together with her sister you shall not take to be rivals (litzror) to reveal her nakedness upon her." What is the intent of "upon her"? To teach that even his yevamah, of whom it is written (Deuteronomy 25:5): "Her yavam shall come upon her" — if she is "a woman together with her sister," you shall not take her. And the same applies to all of the other arayoth where kareth obtains. And this tells me only of her. Whence is her tzarah derived (as likewise forbidden)? From "litzror," which implies: Take neither her, nor her tzarah, nor the tzarah of her tzarah.] They (the fifteen women) are: His daughter [His daughter from his anussah (a woman that he had forced), as is the case with "the daughter of his daughter" and "the daughter of his son." For his daughter from his wife is "bath ishto." For since it is written (Leviticus 18:17): "The nakedness of a woman (ishah) and her daughter you shall not reveal," it makes no difference whether it is his or another's daughter. But his daughter from his anussah is not derived from that verse, for "ishah" connotes marriage. It is derived, rather, from (Ibid. 10): "The nakedness of the daughter of your son or the daughter of your daughter."], the daughter of his daughter, the daughter of his son, the daughter of his wife, the daughter of her son, the daughter of her daughter, his mother-in-law, the mother of his mother-in-law, the mother of his father-in-law [All of these are forbidden to him by reason of (Ibid. 17): "The nakedness of a woman and her daughter you shall not reveal. The daughter of her son and the daughter of her daughter, etc.", subsumed in which are his mother-in-law, the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law.], his sister from his mother [who married his brother from his father, who died, as is the case with his mother's sister. For yibum obtains only with one's brother from his father, this being derived by "brotherhood" identity from the sons of Yaakov (see Deuteronomy 25:5). Just as there, (they were all) brothers from the father, but not (necessarily) from the mother, here, too, (in the instance of yibum), it is not different.], his mother's sister, his wife's sister, the wife of his brother from his mother, [who, after her husband's death, married his brother from his father, to whom she is not kin. If he died without children, and she fell before him for yibum, she is forbidden to him by reason of her first having been the wife of his brother from his mother, who is forbidden to him perpetually, it being written (Leviticus 18:16): "The nakedness of the wife of your brother," which is expounded "your brother," whether from your father or from your mother.], and the wife of his brother who was not in his world [e.g., Reuven died without children and after his death, a brother, Levi, was born. Shimon took Reuven's wife in yibum. He had another wife and he died without children. Both of Shimon's wives fell before Levi for yibum. Both are exempt. The wife of Reuven who had been married to Shimon is forbidden to Levi on (liability of) kareth, Scripture having excluded her (from yibum), viz. (Deuteronomy 25:5): "When brothers dwell together" — when both of them had "one dwelling" (i.e., when they were concurrently alive) in the world. Therefore, when Reuven died, she was rendered perpetually forbidden to Levi (just as the wife of a brother who has children). And though now she falls to Levi through the marriage of Shimon, who was in his world, she is forbidden to him by reason of Reuven. And just as she is forbidden, so her tzarah is forbidden.], and his daughter-in-law. [His son died and she married his (her father-in-law's) brother. His daughter-in-law is forbidden to him perpetually, even after his son's death.] These (the aforementioned) exempt their tzaroth and the tzaroth of their tzaroth from chalitzah and from yibum all the way down the line. And all of them — if they died, or refused (his brother), or were divorced, or were found to be eiloniyoth (barren) — their tzaroth are permitted. [e.g., if his daughter died before his brother did, or if she refused him. And even though (normally), refusal (miun) obtains only with an orphaned minor, who was married by her mother and her brothers, it may also occur in her father's lifetime, as when her father married her to another and she was divorced when still a minor, in which instance her father no longer has jurisdiction over her. If she then married her father's brother while still a minor, she then can gain release through miun. (She is referred to later as "an orphan in her father's lifetime.") If she refused his brother, or were divorced by him, or were found to be an eilonith (in which instance "her purchase was mistaken" and it is as if she were never his brother's wife), her tzarah is taken in yibum.] ["eilonith" — from "ayil," a ram. The characteristics of an eilonith are: an absence of breasts and of (pubertal) signs, a thick voice, like that of a man, and a lack of a "belly slope," characteristic of women, i.e., her pudendum not projecting from her body, as that of other women.] And it cannot be said of his mother-in-law, the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law, that they were found to be eiloniyoth or that they refused. [For they already bore children to another before they married his brother. Therefore, they are not eiloniyoth. And miun, also, does not obtain with them, their being adults, and miun obtaining only with minors. As to our tanna's not including one's mother among those women who exempt their tzaroth from yibum, he holds with the ruling that one may not marry a woman whom his father had forced or seduced. But according to the ruling that one may marry her, and that this is the halachah, it is possible for one's mother to marry his brother from his father; and if his brother dies without children, his mother falls before him for yibum. So that there are found to be sixteen women who exempt their tzaroth, his mother being one of them. And this is the halachah.]

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

MISHNAH: If he wrote in the name of an inappropriate government63If the document was dated by the regnal years of a king who did not rule over the place at which the bill was written., in the name of the government of Media64The government of Media had ceased with Cyrus, many centuries earlier. An astronomer like Ptolemy could base his computations (during the reign of Antoninus Pius) on the era of the Assyrian king Nabonassar, but a legal document had to refer to the years of the Princeps in Rome or the Parthian, later the Persian king in Babylonia. or the government of Greece65Probably this refers to any one of the successors of Alexander., from the construction of the Temple or the destruction of the Temple66This way of dating probably was proscribed by the Roman government.; if he was in the West and wrote “in the East” or in the East and wrote “in the West”67If the place of writing the document was described incorrectly., she needs a bill of divorce from both of them68The situation of a woman remarrying based on an invalid bill of divorce is identical with that of a woman wrongly informed of the death of her husband who remarried based on that information; cf. Mishnah Yebamot 10:1, Notes 3–6., she has neither ketubah nor usufruct nor used clothing from either of them, and if she took anything she must return it. Any child from either of the men is a bastard; neither of them may defile himself for her. Neither man has any claim on what she finds or earns, or on invalidation of her vows. If she was the daughter of an Israel, she is disabled from priesthood, the daughter of a Levite from tithe, the daughter of a Cohen from heave. The heirs of neither man inherit her ketubah. If they died, the brothers of both of them perform ḥaliṣah but not levirate. If he changed his or her name or the name of his or her city69As noted in the Halakhah, only this section of the Mishnah represents practice; it has given rise to an enormous literature dealing with the correct spelling of Jewish names of persons and places; cf. the Introductions to E. and H. Guggenheimer, Jewish Family Names and Their Origins,An Etymological Dictionary, Ktav Publishing 1992; Etymologisches Lexikon der jüdischen Familiennamen, K. G. Saur 1996. she shall be divorced from both of them and all the indicated consequences apply to her.
Referring to all the close relatives about whom they said that their co-wives are permitted, if any of the co-wives went and married otherwise but the relatives turned out to be she-rams, she shall be divorced from both of them and all the aforementioned consequences apply to her74A “she-ram” is an infertile woman lacking secondary sex characteristics. Her marriage is considered non-existent by biblical standards. It is the basic tenet of the House of Hillel that if a man dies without issue and any of his wives is forbidden to any of his brothers, all of his wives are forbidden to all the brothers and are free to marry outside the family without further ceremony (cf. Mishnah Yebamot 1:1). If the relative turns out to be a she-ram, who cannot be married, the release of the other wives turns out to have been erroneous and their new marriages incestuous for those who hold that the outside marriage of a candidate for levirate marriage is incestuous (which is an opinion of R. Aqiba rejected by his successors.).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Full ChapterNext Verse