Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

יבמות א׳:ג׳ - א׳:ד׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Tuesday, February 25, 2020 is יבמות א׳:ג׳ - א׳:ד׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 1 Mishnah 3

יבמות פרק א׳ משנה ג׳

3
Six women with whom relations are forbidden who were not enumerated in the first mishna are forbidden by prohibitions that are more severe than those listed in that mishna because they may be married only to others and may never be married to any of the brothers, due to the closeness of their relationship. However, this stringency entails a corresponding leniency: Since the halakha of levirate marriage is entirely inapplicable in these cases, their rival wives are permitted. The rival wife of a forbidden relative is forbidden herself only if the mitzva of levirate marriage is applicable, but where it is not in effect she is permitted. The six women with whom relations are forbidden are as follows: His mother, and his father’s wife, and his father’s sister, and his paternal half sister, and the wife of his father’s brother, and the wife of his paternal half brother. Each of these women with whom relations are forbidden is forbidden equally to all of the brothers, and the mitzva of levirate marriage is inapplicable. Therefore, her rival wife is permitted.
שֵׁשׁ עֲרָיוֹת חֲמוּרוֹת מֵאֵלּוּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁנְּשׂוּאוֹת לַאֲחֵרִים, צָרוֹתֵיהֶן מֻתָּרוֹת. אִמּוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אָבִיו, וַאֲחוֹת אָבִיו, אֲחוֹתוֹ מֵאָבִיו, וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו מֵאָבִיו:
ג׳
ברטנורא

שש עריות חמורות מאלו – and what is their stringency? That they are married to others (i.e., outsiders). But they are not able to marry the brother of this one from his father, and if their husbands died, who are “strangers” (i.e., outsiders) regarding this one, their rival/co-wives are permitted to marry to this one, for the rivals of a woman are not forbidden on account of consanguinity other than when she falls before him for levirate marriage from his brother. And our Rabbi/teacher, Moshe bar Maimon (i.e., Maimonides) explained, that if they married through sin to his brother and he died without children, and they fell [before him] for levirate marriage, their rival/co-wives are permitted, for these are not [forbidden] on account of consanguinity since their betrothal/Kiddushin do not take effect to his brother in those forbidden relations of incest.

אמו – she cannot marry his brother from his father, for she is to him the wife of the father, according to the one who says that the ravaged wife of his father is prohibited, and above (Mishnah two), I explained, that this is not the Halakha, but rather, his mother exempts her rival/co-wife, for she is able to marry to his brother from his father.

אשת אביו אשת אחיו מאביו – [that he had children] and the sister of his father, all of them are forbidden to his brother, like they are forbidden to him, and there is not side of Levirate marriage on this forever, and if others married them and they have other wives, and they (i.e., the husbands) died, their rival/co-wives are permitted to marry this one, and similarly, if his brother married them in sin, and he died without children, their rival/co-wives are permitted.

שש עריות חמורות מאלו. ומה היא חומרא שלהן, שנשואות לאחרים. ואינן יכולות להנשא לאחיו של זה מאביו, ואם מתו בעליהן שהן נכרים אצל זה, צרותיהן מותרות לינשא לזה, שאין צרת ערוה אסורה אלא בנופלת לפניו ליבום מאחיו. ורבינו משה בר מיימון פירש, אם נישאו בעבירה לאחיו, ומת בלא בנים ונפלו ליבום לפניו, צרותיהן מותרות, שאין אלו צרות ערוה, הואיל ולא היו קדושין תופסין לאחיו באותן עריות:

אמו. אינה יכולה להנשא לאחיו מאביו, שהרי היא לו אשת האב, לדברי האומר שאנוסת אביו אסורה. ולעיל פירשתי שאין כן הלכה, אלא אמו פוטרת צרתה, שהיא יכולה להנשא לאחיו מאביו:

אשת אביו, אשת אחיו מאביו. [שהיה לו בנים] ואחות אביו, כולן אסורות לאחיו כמו שאסורות עליו, ואין בהם צד יבום על זה לעולם. ואם נשאום אחרים ולהם נשים אחרות ומתו, צרותיהן מותרות לינשא לזה. וכן אם נשא אותה אחיו בעבירה ומת בלא בנים צרותיהן מותרות:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 1 Mishnah 4

יבמות פרק א׳ משנה ד׳

4
Up to this point, the discussions were based on the assumption that not only may a forbidden relative not enter into levirate marriage, but her rival wife is also exempt. However, this issue is subject to a long-standing dispute. Beit Shammai permit the rival wives to the brothers, as they did not accept the interpretation of the verses that indicates that rival wives are prohibited. And Beit Hillel forbid them. The previous mishnayot are in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel. If any of the rival wives of the brother performed ḥalitza, Beit Shammai disqualify her from marrying into the priesthood, as in their opinion these rival wives were fit for levirate marriage, which means that the ḥalitza was fully valid. Consequently, they are disqualified from marrying a priest, like all other women who perform ḥalitza. And Beit Hillel deem them fit, as they maintain that no legal act of ḥalitza was performed here at all. If they entered into levirate marriage, Beit Shammai deem them fit for the priesthood, as in their opinion, this is a fully legal levirate marriage. And Beit Hillel disqualify them, because they engaged in licentious sexual relations as the rival wives of a forbidden relative. § The mishna comments: Although Beit Hillel prohibit the rival wives to the brothers and Beit Shammai permit them, and although these disqualify these women and those deem them fit, Beit Shammai did not refrain from marrying women from Beit Hillel, nor did Beit Hillel refrain from marrying women from Beit Shammai. Furthermore, with regard to all of the disputes concerning the halakhot of ritual purity and impurity, where these rule that an article is ritually pure and those rule it ritually impure, they did not refrain from handling ritually pure objects each with the other, as Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel frequently used each other’s vessels.
בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מַתִּירִין הַצָּרוֹת לָאַחִים, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹסְרִים. חָלְצוּ, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי פּוֹסְלִין מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מַכְשִׁירִים. נִתְיַבְּמוּ, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מַכְשִׁירִים, וּבֵית הִלֵּל פּוֹסְלִין. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵלּוּ אוֹסְרִין וְאֵלּוּ מַתִּירִין, אֵלּוּ פּוֹסְלִין וְאֵלּוּ מַכְשִׁירִין, לֹא נִמְנְעוּ בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מִלִּשָּׂא נָשִׁים מִבֵּית הִלֵּל, וְלֹא בֵית הִלֵּל מִבֵּית שַׁמַּאי. כָּל הַטָּהֳרוֹת וְהַטֻּמְאוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ אֵלּוּ מְטַהֲרִין וְאֵלּוּ מְטַמְּאִין, לֹא נִמְנְעוּ עוֹשִׂין טָהֳרוֹת אֵלּוּ עַל גַּבֵּי אֵלּוּ:
ד׳
ברטנורא

בית שמאי מתירין – the rival of a woman forbidden on account of consanguinity is to be married by the levir, for they (i.e., the School of Shammai) lack this exposition/Midrashic interpretation of (Leviticus 18:18): “[Do not marry a woman] as a rival [to her sister and uncover her nakedness in the other’s lifetime].”

חלצו – [they performed the ritual of Halitzah] the rival/co-wives from the brothers.

בית שמאי פוסלין – the rival/co-wives from the priesthood, since their [act of] Halitzah is [considered] Halitzah.

ובית הלל מכשירין – that their [act of] Halitzah was not a necessity and she is considered as one who performed Halitzah from a heathen/foreigner.

נתיבמו – to brothers.

בית שמאי מכשירין – [The School of Shammai validates them] to Kohanim, if they had become widowed from their levirs.

ובית הלל פוסלים – that they had engaged in sexual relationship with those forbidden to them, and one who engages in sexual relations with one prohibited to her makes her a harlot, and a harlot is prohibited to [marry] a Kohen.

לא נמנעו – and even though that the children of the rival/co-wives who had been married by the levir that according to the School of Shammai are Mamzerim/illegitimate according to the School of Hillel, and they are [included] in the prohibition of marrying the wife of one’s brother upon them, and the [violation of] the [marriage of the] wife of one’s brother is [liable to] extirpation, and those who are liable for extirpation are considered Mamzerim/illegitimate, nevertheless, [members of] the School of Hillel were not prevented from marrying women from the School of Shammai, because they would inform them of those women coming from the rival/co-wives and separate from them.

אלו על גבי אלו – they would loan their utensils one to the other. And in the Gemara (Tractate Yevamot 14a), raises an objection on that which is taught [in our Mishnah]: “The School of Shammai declares that the rival/co-wives are permitted [to enter into levirate marriage with] the brothers and the School of Hillel [prohibits] . They call it here (Deuteronomy 14:1): “You shall not gash yourselves/לא תתגדדו “ – do not form yourselves into religious [factions]. And they responded – such as the case of one Jewish court in one city – where half teach according to the School of Shammai and half teach according to the School of Hillel, but [where there are] two Jewish courts in one city, and all the more so, two Jewish courts in two towns, it does not matter.

בית שמאי מתירין. צרת ערוה להתיבם לאחיו. דלית להו הך דרשה דלצרור:

חלצו. הצרות מן האחין:

בית שמאי פוסלין. הצרות מן הכהונה, שחליצתן חליצה:

ובית הלל מכשירין. שחליצתן שלא לצורך היתה, והרי היא כחולצת מן נכרי:

נתיבמו. לאחין:

בית שמאי מכשירין. אותן לכהנים אם נתאלמנו מיבמיהם:

ובית הלל פוסלים. שנבעלו לאסור להם, והנבעלת לאסור לה עשאה זונה וזונה אסורה לכהן:

לא נמנעו. ואע״פ שבני הצרות שנתיבמו כדברי בית שמאי ממזרים הם לב״ה, שהרי באיסור אשת אח הם עליהם ואשת אח בכרת, ובני חייבי כריתות ממזרים הם, אעפ״כ לא נמנעו ב״ה מלישא נשים מב״ש, לפי שהיו מודיעים להם אותן הבאות מן הצרות ופורשין מהן:

אלו על גבי אלו. משאילים כליהם אלו לאלו. ובגמרא פריך אהא דתנן בית שמאי מתירין את הצרות לאחים ובית הלל אוסרים, קרי כאן לא תתגודדו, לא תיעשו אגודות אגודות. ומשני, כגון בית דין אחד בעיר אחת פלג מורים בבית שמאי ופלג מורים כבית הלל. אבל שני בתי דינים בעיר אחת, וכ״ש שני בתי דינים בשתי עיירות לית לן בה:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר