Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

יבמות ג׳:ט׳ - ג׳:י׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Saturday, February 15, 2020 is יבמות ג׳:ט׳ - ג׳:י׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 3 Mishnah 9

יבמות פרק ג׳ משנה ט׳

9
In the case of three brothers who were married to three unrelated women, and one of the brothers died, the following occurred: The second brother performed levirate betrothal with the wife of the deceased brother and before he was able to consummate the levirate marriage he died as well, leaving behind two women who happen before the third brother for levirate marriage. Then those two women must perform ḥalitza and may not enter into levirate marriage. As it is stated: “If brothers dwell together and one of them dies and he has no child, the wife of the dead man shall not be married outside of the family to one not of his kin; her brother-in-law will have intercourse with her” (Deuteronomy 25:5). This teaches that a woman eligible for levirate marriage is one who has one levirate relationship and not one who has a double levirate relationship. In this case, the wife of the first deceased brother requires levirate marriage due to both the marriage with her first husband as well as the levirate betrothal with the second brother. Rabbi Shimon says: He may consummate the levirate marriage with whichever woman he wishes and then perform ḥalitza with the second. In the case where two brothers were married to two sisters, and one of the brothers died, the widow at this point would be exempt from levirate marriage as the sister of his wife. And afterward the wife of the second brother died. Although the yevama is no longer the sister of his wife, this woman is nevertheless forbidden to him forever, since she had already been forbidden to him at one time.
שְׁלֹשָׁה אַחִין נְשׂוּאִין שָׁלֹשׁ נָכְרִיוֹת, וּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶן, וְעָשָׂה בָהּ הַשֵּׁנִי מַאֲמָר, וָמֵת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חוֹלְצוֹת וְלֹא מִתְיַבְּמוֹת, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (דברים כה), וּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶם יְבָמָהּ יָבֹא עָלֶיהָ, שֶׁעָלֶיהָ זִקַּת יָבָם אֶחָד, וְלֹא שֶׁעָלֶיהָ זִקַּת שְׁנֵי יְבָמִין. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, מְיַבֵּם לְאֵיזוֹ שֶׁיִּרְצֶה, וְחוֹלֵץ לַשְּׁנִיָּה. שְׁנֵי אַחִין נְשׂוּאִין לִשְׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת, וּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶן, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁל שֵׁנִי, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה עָלָיו עוֹלָמִית, הוֹאִיל וְנֶאֶסְרָה עָלָיו שָׁעָה אֶחָת:
ט׳
ברטנורא

זיקת שני יבמין – for as long as this living brother didn’t marry her, the levirate relation of first is upon him and the levirate relation of the second was added upon him because of the statement of intention he made [to perform a levirate marriage], and when he died, there remained upon her the levirate relation of two brothers-in-law.

רש"א וכו' – since he holds that it is doubtful to us if the statement of intention [of performing levirate marriage] acquires completely or does not acquire at all, therefore, he performs levirate marriage on whichever of them that he desires, for if the statement of intention [to perform levirate marriage] acquires, he does not have anything other than the levirate relation of the second but if the statement of intention [of levirate marriage] does not acquire, he has nothing upon him other than the levirate relation of the first woman.

וחולץ לשניה – for one does not free him from [sexual intercourse] with the other, for perhaps the statement of intention [of levirate marriage] does not acquire, and there was two sisters-in-law that come from two homes. But there is no levirate marriage with both for perhaps the statement of intention [of levirate marriage] acquires, and there would be two sisters-in-law coming from one house. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon, and even though we state in our Mishnah that the levirate relation of the two brothers-in-law is from the Torah from a Biblical verse (Deuteronomy 25:5): “Her brother’s husband shall unite with her: [he shall take her as his wife and perform the levir’s duty],” in the Gemara (Tractate Yevamot 31b) it proves hat the levirate relation of two brothers-in-law is Rabbinic as a decree, lest the people state that two sisters-in-law coming from the same house (i.e., widows of the same brother) may both be taken in levirate marriage.

זיקת שני יבמין. דכל זמן שלא כנסה זה עדיין זיקת ראשון עליו, ונתוספה עליו זיקת שני בשביל המאמר, וכשמת נותרו עליה זיקת שני יבמין:

ר״ש אומר וכו׳ דקסבר מספקא לן אי מאמר קונה לגמרי או לא קני כלל, לכך מיבם לאיזו שירצה, דאי מאמר קני לא הוי עלה אלא זיקת שני, ואי מאמר לא קני לא הוי עלה אלא זיקת הראשון:

וחולץ לשניה. דחדא לא מפטרה בביאת אידך, דדלמא מאמר לא קני והוו שתי יבמות הבאות מב׳ בתים. ויבומי תרווייהו לא, דדילמא מאמר קני והוו ב׳ יבמות הבאות מבית אחד. ואין הלכה כרבי שמעון. ואע״ג דאמרינן במתניתין דזיקת שני יבמין דאורייתא מקרא דיבמה יבא עליה, בגמרא מוכח דזיקת שני יבמין דרבנן היא, גזירה שמא יאמרו שתי יבמות הבאות מבית אחד מתיבמות:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 3 Mishnah 10

יבמות פרק ג׳ משנה י׳

10
In the case of two men who betrothed two women, and at the time that they entered the wedding canopy, after the betrothal, the men switched this wife with that wife and that one with this one, then these two men are liable for engaging in forbidden sexual relations with a married woman, since each of them had intercourse with his fellow’s wife. The act of betrothal is sufficient to prohibit a woman to all other men as a married woman. Therefore, when the women were switched, both men transgressed this violation. And if they were brothers, then they are also liable for forbidden sexual relations with a brother’s wife. And if these women were sisters, then they are liable for taking a wife and her sister as well. And if they were menstruating women, they would be liable for intercourse with a menstruating woman as well. And following these forbidden sexual relations, we separate these women from their husbands for three months, lest they were impregnated by that forbidden act of intercourse. Doing so makes it possible to distinguish a child born of these relations, so that he could be rendered a mamzer. And if they were female minors and unable to bear children, then we immediately return them to their original husbands. And if they were daughters of priests, they are thereby disqualified from eating of teruma. By engaging in illicit sexual acts, they were rendered forbidden to priests and disqualified from eating teruma.
שְׁנַיִם שֶׁקִדְּשׁוּ שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים, וּבִשְׁעַת כְּנִיסָתָן לַחֻפָּה הֶחֱלִיפוּ אֶת שֶׁל זֶה לָזֶה, וְאֶת שֶׁל זֶה לָזֶה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חַיָּבִים מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ. הָיוּ אַחִין, מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָח. וְאִם הָיוּ אֲחָיוֹת, מִשּׁוּם אִשָּׁה אֶל אֲחוֹתָהּ. וְאִם הָיוּ נִדּוֹת, מִשּׁוּם נִדָּה. וּמַפְרִישִׁין אוֹתָן שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים, שֶׁמָּא מְעֻבָּרוֹת הֵן. וְאִם הָיוּ קְטַנּוֹת שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיוֹת לֵילֵד, מַחֲזִירִין אוֹתָן מִיָּד. וְאִם הָיוּ כֹהֲנוֹת, נִפְסְלוּ מִן הַתְּרוּמָה:
י׳
ברטנורא

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).

ומפרישין אותן – so that they will not return to their husbands.

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.

ואם היו כהנות – daughters of Kohanim.

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.

היו אחין. אף משום אשת אח וכו׳. אע״ג דקיי״ל אין איסור חל על איסור, אית ליה להאי תנא דבאיסור כולל ואיסור מוסיף ואיסור בת אחת כי הכא, איסור חל על איסור, וחייב להביא קרבן על כל איסור ואיסור:

ומפרישין אותן. שלא לחזור לבעליהן:

שמא מעוברות הן. והולדות ממזרים, ובעינן הבחנה בין זרע כשר לזרע פסול שלא יתלו העוברים בבעליהן:

ואם היו כהנות. בנות כהנים:

נפסלו מתרומה. מלאכול בתרומת בית אביה אפילו אחר מיתת בעלה, ואע״פ שנאנסה:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר