Jeśli było trzech braci, dwóch z nich było żonami z dwiema siostrami, a jeden z nich samotny — jeśli jeden z mężów sióstr umarł, a samotny brat zrobił w niej ma'amar, a potem umarł drugi brat —Beth Shammai mówi: Jego żona pozostaje z nim [Beth Shammai uważa, że kobieta zaręczona przez ma'amar jest uważana za jego żonę, więc kiedy jej siostra upada przed nim później, nie jest to zabronione z powodu "siostry jego związanej jeden ”], a drugi wychodzi [nawet z chalicy z powodu„ siostry swojej żony ”]. A Beth Hillel mówi: Musi odesłać żonę chalicą i żonę, a żonę brata chalicą. [Albowiem ma'amar nie wystarczy, by nadać jej status zamężnej kobiety, a druga jest zabroniona ze względu na „siostrę jego związanej”. Get jest konieczny ze względu na ma'amar, który jest częściowym zaręczynami, a zaręczyny nie są rozwiązywane bez geta. I potrzebuje też chalicy, ponieważ ponieważ ma'amar nie jest prawdziwym zaręczynami, nadal jest z nim połączona (dla yibum) i potrzebuje chalicy, aby rozpuścić to połączenie; więc najpierw daje jej zdobycz, a potem chalitzah. A to jest halacha.] A oto przykład, w którym powiedzieli (13: 7): „Biada mu z powodu jego żony i biada mu z powodu żony jego brata!”
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
ואחד מופנה – without a wife (i.e., single, a bachelor).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
Introduction
This mishnah continues to deal with variants upon the situation where two of three brothers were married to two sisters.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
אשתו עמו – for since the School of Shammai holds that she is [his] wife through statement of intention [of levirate marriage] is considered as married, and when her sister fell after this [through the death of her husband, the second brother], she was not forbidden because of her being the sister of his levirate relation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
Three brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters and the third was unmarried: When one of the sisters’ husbands died, the unmarried brother performed for her ma’amar, and then his second brother died: Beth Shammai says: his wife [remains] with him while the other is exempt because she is his wife’s sister. Beth Hillel however says that he must divorce his wife with a get and by halitzah, and his brother’s wife by halitzah. This is the case in regard to which they said: “woe to him because of his wife, and woe to him because of his brother’s wife.” Reuven and Shimon were married to Rachel and Leah, and Levi was unmarried. When Reuven dies, Levi performed ma’amar with Rachel. Ma’amar, as we have learned before, is an act parallel to betrothal with a regular woman, and is only done in the case of yibbum. Ma’amar is performed by the man giving a symbolic amount of money to the woman. Rachel becomes his quasi-fiancee after having ma’amar, but she is not fully his wife until he performs yibbum (intercourse). Before Levi can have yibbum with Rachel, Shimon also dies, thereby making Leah liable for yibbum. The question is now asked, can Levi continue to stay married to Rachel, even though he is liable to have yibbum with Rachel’s sister. According to Beth Shammai, the first woman (Rachel) remains Levi’s wife and Leah is exempt from either yibbum or halitzah. In other words, Beth Shammai sees in ma’amar a full marital act, one which makes Rachel Levi’s full wife. Since he is already married to Rachel, he cannot have yibbum with Leah, Rachel’s sister, and she is completely exempt. According to Beth Hillel, ma’amar does not make Rachel into a full wife, such that it would be biblically forbidden for Levi to marry her sister. Therefore, when Leah becomes obligated for yibbum, it is the case of two sisters who are both liable to have yibbum with the same man. As we have learned previously, in such a case both must have halitzah, and neither may have yibbum, since a man cannot marry the sister of his z’kukah. In addition, Rachel requires a get, since she did have ma’amar, which is an act of betrothal. The final clause of the mishnah relates that it is about such a case that people say, woe to him for losing his wife and woe to him for losing his brother’s wife. For without having done anything wrong, both of these women are prohibited to him.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
מוציא אשתו בגט – for the statement of intention of [eventual] levirate marriage is not strong to compare it to someone married, and this prohibits her because of her being the sister of his levirate relation, and it requires a Jewish bill of divorce because the statement of intention which is partial betrothal/Kiddushin and Kiddushin is not released without a Jewish bill of divorce. And she requires Halitzah for since the statement of intention is not complete Kiddushin/betrothal, she is still his levirate relation and requires Halitzah for her levirate connection. And in the opening clause [of the Mishnah], he gives her a Jewish bill of divorce, and then performs Halitzah to her, and such is the Halakha.
