Se dois homens se casaram com duas mulheres, e quando os casaram (ou seja, coabitação), eles (sem querer) os trocaram, eles são responsáveis (por uma oferta pelo pecado) por motivo de adultério. Se eles eram irmãos, eles são responsáveis [além disso] por causa da esposa de um irmão. E se elas eram irmãs (elas também são responsáveis) em razão do (interdito contra) levar uma mulher e sua irmã. E se eles eram niddoth (eles também são responsáveis) em razão de (o interdito contra viver com) um niddah. [Mesmo que nós determinemos que um interdito não se sobrepõe a outro, este tanna mantém isso com issur kollel (um interdito abrangente), e issur mosif (um interdito superadicionado) e issur bath-achath (um interdito simultâneo), como neste por exemplo, um interdito é sobreposto ao outro, e cada um exige uma oferta pelo pecado separada.] E eles são separados [para não voltarem a seus maridos] por três meses, para que não fiquem grávidas [e os filhos sejam mamzerim. E é necessário discriminar entre a semente que é kasher e a semente que não é, para que (a última) não seja atribuída aos seus maridos)]. E se eram menores incapazes de suportar, são devolvidos imediatamente. E se elas eram filhas de Cohanim, são impróprias para comer terumah [nas casas de seus pais, mesmo após a morte de seus maridos, e apesar de terem sido trocadas inconscientemente.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
היו אחין – even because of [the prohibition of] marrying the wife of your brother, etc., and even though we hold that this prohibition does not take effect upon another prohibition, this Tanna/teacher holds that an inclusive prohibition and a prohibition that adds and a simultaneous prohibition, like here, that a prohibition occurs on top of another prohibition and he is liable to bring a sacrifice on each and every prohibited act [performed] (i.e., a person may sometimes consume one piece of food and incur the penalty of four sin-offerings and one guilt offering - see Talmud Yevamot 34a).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
Introduction
Our mishnah discusses all of the potential violations that could occur in a case where two brothers betroth two women and the women are accidentally switched when the two couples enter the bridal chamber (huppah). In other words, Reuven has relations with Shimon’s wife and vice versa. Note that the mishnah is only discussing a situation where this occurred accidentally. Had the switch been intentional, they would all be intentional adulterers and the men would have to divorce their wives.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
ומפרישין אותן – so that they will not return to their husbands.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
If two men betrothed two women, and as they were entering into the bridal chamber, they exchanged the one for the other, behold, they are guilty of having relations with a married woman. If they were brothers they are guilty of having relations with a brother’s wife. If they were sisters, they are guilty of having relations with a wife’s sister. If they were menstruants [they are guilty] of having relations with a menstruant. They must be kept apart for three months, lest they are pregnant. If they were minors incapable of bearing children, they may be returned [to their rightful husband] at once. If the women were of priestly families they are disqualified from eating terumah. At the time of the mishnah, in typical situations a man would betroth a woman and only some time later marry her. The marriage was actualized by him bringing her into the huppah, which was a true bridal chamber, and not the symbolic huppah used today. In the huppah the couple would have sexual relations. Once the woman is betrothed, she is considered like a full wife with regard to adultery. Therefore, if the two brides were switched, each brother who has relations with the other’s wife has violated the prohibition of adultery.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
שמא מעוברות הן – and the offspring will be illegitimate/Mamzerim and we need a probe to distinguish between kosher seed/offspring and disqualified seed/offspring (i.e., seed that was sewn in holiness and seed that was sown in unholiness) so that the fetuses will not be left in doubt with [regard to] their husbands.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
He has also violated the prohibition of having relations with your brother’s wife. See Leviticus 18:16 and 20:21.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
ואם היו כהנות – daughters of Kohanim.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
If they were sisters he has also violated the prohibition of having relations with one’s wife’s sister. See Leviticus Leviticus 18:18.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
נפסלו מתרומה – from eating heave-offering (i.e., Priest’s due) of the house of her father, even after the death of her husband, and even though she was a ravaged woman.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
If they were menstruating, the brothers have violated the prohibition of having relations with a menstruant. See Leviticus 18:19.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
Before each wife can return to having relations with her lawful husband, she must wait three months, lest she was impregnated on her wedding night. The three months allows us to recognize whether the child is from the wrong husband. If she was impregnated by the wrong husband, the child will be a mamzer. If she was a minor who could not become pregnant, the three month waiting period is unnecessary.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
If these women were from priestly families, they will no longer be allowed to eat terumah, for any woman who has had relations with someone forbidden to her, can no longer marry a priest or eat terumah. If her husband should die without children, she does not return to her priestly family and resume eating terumah, as would a normal widow in such a situation (see Leviticus 22:13).
