Mishnah.org Logo
Perek 16

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 16 Mishnah 2

יבמות פרק ט"ז משנה ב׳

2
If there are two sisters-in-law married to two childless brothers who testify about their marital status, and this one says: My husband died, and that one says: My husband died, although each one of them is deemed credible with regard to her own status as a widow, this one is prohibited from marrying due to the possibility that the husband of that other sister may be alive, obligating her in levirate marriage, and that one is prohibited from marrying due to the husband of this sister, according to the same rationale. Although each is accorded credibility as to her own husband’s death, the halakha is that sisters-in-law are among the five types of women not accorded credibility with regard to each other’s permissibility to marry because of possible conflicts of interest. If this one has witnesses to her husband’s death, and that one does not have witnesses, then the one who has witnesses is prohibited from marrying, as there are no witnesses to the death of her yavam to exempt her from levirate marriage; but the one who has no witnesses is permitted to marry based on her own testimony that her husband died combined with the witnesses’ testimony exempting her from levirate marriage. If this one has children and that one has no children, then the one with children is permitted to marry, as she herself is deemed credible with regard to her husband’s death, and her children exempt her from levirate marriage. But the one without children is prohibited from marrying, as the death of her yavam has not been corroborated independently of her sister-in-law’s testimony. If there were two additional yevamin with whom these two widows entered into levirate marriage, and then the yevamin died childless, the women are prohibited from marrying, since the concern about an additional living yavam still remains. Rabbi Elazar says: Since these women were permitted to marry the living brothers-in-law, as the testimony of each was deemed credible with regard to her own status, they are permitted, from then on, to marry any man because their statements, taken together, indicate that neither one is obligated to enter into levirate marriage.

שְׁתֵּי יְבָמוֹת, זוֹ אוֹמֶרֶת מֵת בַּעְלִי וְזוֹ אוֹמֶרֶת מֵת בַּעְלִי, זוֹ אֲסוּרָה מִפְּנֵי בַעְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ וְזוֹ אֲסוּרָה מִפְּנֵי בַעְלָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ. לָזוֹ עֵדִים וְלָזוֹ אֵין עֵדִים, אֶת שֶׁיֶּשׁ לָהּ עֵדִים, אֲסוּרָה. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עֵדִים, מֻתֶּרֶת. לָזוֹ בָנִים וְלָזוֹ אֵין בָּנִים, אֶת שֶׁיֶּשׁ לָהּ בָּנִים, מֻתֶּרֶת. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין לָהּ בָּנִים, אֲסוּרָה. נִתְיַבְּמוּ וּמֵתוּ הַיְבָמִין, אֲסוּרוֹת לְהִנָּשֵׂא. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, הוֹאִיל וְהֻתְּרוּ לַיְבָמִין, הֻתְּרוּ לְכָל אָדָם:

ב׳

שתי יבמות – the wives of two brothers.

מפני בעלה של זו – perhaps he is living and she is bound/chained to him, and even though that his wife states that he has died, she is not believed to permit this one (i.e., the woman) to the whole world through her [words on her] lips for the widow of a brother who died without issue does not provide testimony on her fellow widow of a brother who died without issue.

לזו עדים – whose husband died and the other [woman whose husband died] does not have witnesses.

זו שיש לה עדים אסורה – to marry to the entire world, for she is a widow of a brother who died without issue who did not have witnesses that he died.

וזו שאין לה עדים מותרת – for on account of her husband, she is not forbidden, for she is believed to state: “my husband died,” and because of her being a widow of a brother who died without issue also, she is not forbidden for witnesses came testifying that he had died.

לזו בנים ולזו אין בנים – and there are witnesses neither to this one nor to that one; the woman who has children is permitted [to remarry] and the one who has no children is prohibited [from remarrying].

נתיבמו – that they had here two widows of brothers who died without issue and they married their levirs and the levirs died, they are forbidden to marry anyone in the whole world: this one (i.e., the first woman), because of the first husband of the other one, and that one (i.e., the second woman) because of the first husband of the other one, even though both were married to their levirs because of the presumption that their husbands had died, through their own testimony hey married, and they were believed, for the woman who said: “my husband died,” should be married by her levir. But now, that they would will be married to anyone in the world, no, for if they would marry to anyone in the world, it would be found that the testimony of this woman would be beneficial to that one (i.e., woman) and the testimony of that one (i.e., woman) would be beneficial to the other (i.e. woman), and widows of brothers who died without issue cannot give testimony one for the other.

הואיל והותרו ליבמין – on the presumption their husbands had died, they were permitted to marry anyone in the world, and furthermore, we don’t suspect lest that they are living, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eleazar.

שתי יבמות. נשי שני אחים:

מפני בעלה של זו. שמא הוא חי וזקוקה לו, ואע״פ שאשתו אומרת מת, אינה נאמנת להתיר זו לשוק על פיה, שאין יבמה מעידה לחברתה:

לזו עדים. שמת בעלה, ולזו אין לה עדים:

זו שיש לה עדים אסורה. לינשא לשוק, מפני יבמה שאין עדים שמת:

וזו שאין לה עדים מותרת. שהרי בשביל בעלה אינה נאסרת שהיא נאמנת לומר מת בעלי, ובשביל יבמה נמי לא מתסרא שהרי באו עדים שמת:

לזו בנים ולזו אין בנים. ואין עדים לא לזו ולא לזו, את שיש לה בנים מותרת ואת שאין לה בנים אסורה:

נתיבמו. שהיו להן כאן שני יבמין ונתיבמו ומתו היבמים, אסורות להנשא לשוק, זו מפני בעלה הראשון של זו וזו מפני בעלה הראשון של זו. אע״פ שהיו שתיהן נשואות ליבמיהן בחזקת שמתו בעליהן, על פי עצמן נישאו. והיו נאמנות שהאשה שאמרה מת בעלי תתיבם, אבל עכשיו שתהיינה נשואות לשוק לא. שאם ינשאו לשוק נמצא עדותה של זו מועיל לזו ועדותה של זו מועיל לזו ואין היבמות מעידות זו לזו:

הואיל והותרו ליבמין. בחזקת שמתו בעליהן, הותרו לינשא לשוק, דתו לא חיישינן שמא הם בחיים. ואין הלכה כרבי אלעזר: