Mishnah.org Logo

Today's Mishnah Yomi

Yevamos 9:6 - 10:1

The Mishnah Yomi for Sunday, November 26, 2023 is Yevamos 9:6 - 10:1

＜ Previous DayTodayNext Day ＞

Mishnah 1

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 9 Mishnah 6

יבמות פרק ט׳ משנה ו׳

6
The daughter of a priest married to an Israelite may not partake of teruma. If the Israelite died and she has a son from him, she may not partake of teruma as long as that son is alive. If she subsequently married a Levite she may partake of tithe. If he died, and she had a son from him, she may still partake of tithe. If she subsequently married a priest, she may partake of teruma. If the priest died and she had a son from him, she may partake of teruma. If her son from the priest also died, she may not partake of teruma, but she may partake of tithe, as she has a son from a Levite. If her son from the Levite died, she may no longer partake of tithe. If her son from the Israelite died, she returns to her father’s house and may once again partake of teruma. And with regard to this woman, it is stated: “And she is returned unto her father’s house, as in her youth; she may eat of her father’s bread” (Leviticus 22:13).
בַּת כֹּהֵן שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, לֹא תֹאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. מֵת וְלָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ בֵן, לֹא תֹאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. נִשֵּׂאת לְלֵוִי, תֹּאכַל בַּמַּעֲשֵׂר. מֵת, וְלָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ בֵן, תֹּאכַל בַּמַּעֲשֵׂר. נִשֵּׂאת לְכֹהֵן, תֹּאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. מֵת, וְלָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ בֵן, תֹּאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. מֵת בְּנָהּ מִכֹּהֵן, לֹא תֹאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. מֵת בְּנָהּ מִלֵּוִי, לֹא תֹאכַל בַּמַּעֲשֵׂר. מֵת בְּנָהּ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל, חוֹזֶרֶת לְבֵית אָבִיהָ. וְעַל זוֹ נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא כב), וְשָׁבָה אֶל בֵּית אָבִיהָ כִּנְעוּרֶיהָ מִלֶּחֶם אָבִיהָ תֹּאכֵל:
ו׳

Mishnah 2

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 10 Mishnah 1

יבמות פרק י׳ משנה א׳

1
With regard to a woman whose husband went overseas, and witnesses came and they said to her: Your husband is dead, and she married another man on the basis of this testimony, and afterward her husband came back from out of the country, she must leave both this man and that one, as they are both forbidden to her. And she requires a bill of divorce from this one and that one. And furthermore, she has a claim to neither payment of her marriage contract, nor the profits of her property used by either of them, nor sustenance, nor the worn clothes she brought to the marriage. She has rights to these claims neither against this man nor against that one, i.e., she cannot collect these payments from either her first or second husband. And if she took any of these items from this man or from that one, she must return them to him. And the offspring is a mamzer from this one and from that one. Her child from the second husband is a definite mamzer, as she was never divorced from her first husband, and the Sages decreed that if she returned to her first husband, a child born later from him is also a mamzer. And neither this man nor that man may become impure for her upon her death, if they are priests. And neither this one nor that one is entitled to the rights that stem from the marriage bond: Neither to her found articles, nor to her earnings, nor to the nullification of her vows. If she was a regular Israelite woman, she is disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, as her intercourse with the second husband is considered an act of illicit sexual relations, and the daughter of a Levite is disqualified from partaking of the first tithe, and the daughter of a priest is disqualified from partaking of teruma. And neither the heirs of this man nor the heirs of that one inherit her marriage contract, as she is not considered married to either of them. This clause will be explained in the Gemara. And if they both died childless, the brothers of this one and the brothers of this one must perform ḥalitza and they do not enter into levirate marriage. Rabbi Yosei disagrees with the first tanna and says that she does receive payment of her marriage contract, and the obligation of her marriage contract is upon the property of her first husband. Rabbi Elazar says: The first husband is entitled to her found articles, to her earnings, and to the nullification of her vows. Since her second marriage was an error, the first husband does not forfeit his rights. Rabbi Shimon says an even more far-reaching ruling: Her sexual relations or her ḥalitza with the brothers of the first husband exempts her rival wife, as it is considered a proper levirate marriage or ḥalitza, and certainly she does not require ḥalitza from the brother of the second husband. And if she returns to her first husband, the child from him is not a mamzer. All these halakhot refer to a situation when she married with the permission of the court, after hearing that her husband had died. But if she married without the consent of the court, basing herself entirely on the testimony she heard, and her husband returned, it is permitted for her to return to her first husband. The mishna adds another difference between these two scenarios: If she married by permission of the court, she must leave both of them and she is exempt from bringing the offering, i.e., the sin-offering for her unwitting adultery, as she had the authorization of the court and is therefore considered to have acted under duress.
הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלַךְ בַּעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, וּבָאוּ וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ, מֵת בַּעְלֵךְ, וְנִסֵּת, וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּא בַעְלָהּ, תֵּצֵא מִזֶּה וּמִזֶּה, וּצְרִיכָה גֵט מִזֶּה וּמִזֶּה. וְאֵין לָהּ כְּתֻבָּה וְלֹא פֵרוֹת וְלֹא מְזוֹנוֹת וְלֹא בְלָאוֹת, לֹא עַל זֶה וְלֹא עַל זֶה. אִם נָטְלָה מִזֶּה וּמִזֶּה, תַּחֲזִיר. וְהַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר מִזֶּה וּמִזֶּה. וְלֹא זֶה וָזֶה מִטַּמְּאִין לָהּ, וְלֹא זֶה וָזֶה זַכָּאִין לֹא בִמְצִיאָתָהּ וְלֹא בְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ, וְלֹא בַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ. הָיְתָה בַת יִשְׂרָאֵל, נִפְסְלָה מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה, וּבַת לֵוִי מִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר, וּבַת כֹּהֵן מִן הַתְּרוּמָה. וְאֵין יוֹרְשִׁים שֶׁל זֶה וְיוֹרְשִׁים שֶׁל זֶה יוֹרְשִׁים אֶת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. וְאִם מֵתוּ, אָחִיו שֶׁל זֶה וְאָחִיו שֶׁל זֶה חוֹלְצִין וְלֹא מְיַבְּמִין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, כְּתֻבָּתָהּ עַל נִכְסֵי בַעְלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, הָרִאשׁוֹן זַכַּאי בִּמְצִיאָתָהּ וּבְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ, וּבַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, בִּיאָתָהּ אוֹ חֲלִיצָתָהּ מֵאָחִיו שֶׁל רִאשׁוֹן פּוֹטֶרֶת צָרָתָהּ, וְאֵין הַוָּלָד מִמֶּנּוּ מַמְזֵר. וְאִם נִסֵּת שֶׁלֹּא בִרְשׁוּת, מֻתֶּרֶת לַחֲזֹר לוֹ:
א׳

האשה. ואמרו לה מת בעליך – that one witness said to her: “your husband has died,” and she married upon the testimony of one witnesses, and therefore, she should leave from this one and that one according to the law of a married woman who has been unchaste who is forbidden to her husband and forbidden to the person who initiated sexual intercourse with her for she is not an outraged woman and even though the Rabbis believe one witness regarding a woman because of being a chained woman. What is the reason? Because she herself is evidence by implication and she marries and this which is not evidence by implication, we fine her but she is married by [the testimony] of two witnesses who said to her that your husband died, but we say at the end, that she marries according to the testimony of the Jewish court, meaning to say, that she didn’t need the permission of the Jewish court since there were two witnesses testifying in the matter. She is permitted to return to her first husband for she is an outraged woman for what could she do? In the Gemara (Talmud Yevamot 88b) it proves that the Halakha is not this, but rather there is no difference whether she married according to the Jewish court with one witness and whether she married through [the testimony] of two witnesses, if her first husband comes, she should leave from this marriage (i.e., the second marriage) and that one (i.e., with the other husband) and all of these paths are concerning her.

וצריכא גט מזה ומזה – the reason that she requires a Jewish bill of divorce from the second [husband] for when they see that the first [husband] is alive, they would think that he divorced her, and as a result of this, she married the second [husband] and she is completely his (i.e., the second husband’s) wife, but if he removes her without a Jewish bill of divorce, she is found to be a married woman who leaves without a Jewish bill of divorce.

ולא בלאות – that were lost but her right to claim compensation for the wear and tear or ruin of the things which she brought along on her property that exist she did not lose.

והולד ממזר מזה ומזה – if she gave birth from the second [husband] he is a complete Mamzer/illegitimate child, and if the first [husband] took her back and she gave birth, he is a Mamzer from Rabbinic law.

לא זה ולא זה זכאין במציאתה – that the reason - why did the Rabbis state that what his wife finds belongs to her husband? It is because of enmity; here it should be enmity and hostility.

ולא במעשה ידיה – that the reason – why did the Rabbis states that her handiwork belongs to her husband? It is because of sustenance and here, where she doesn’t have sustenance, her handiwork is not his.

ובהפר נדריה – that the reason of why the husband annuls his wife’s vows, just as she should not make herself reprehensible to her husband, here, she would make herself look ever so repulsive (Talmud Yevamot 90b).

נפסלה מן הכהונה – because she is a harlot.

מן המעשר – it is fine, for the daughter [of a Levite] who ran about as a prostitute is not disqualified from the first tithe.

מן התרומה – even the priest’s due of the Rabbis.

יורשים כתובתה – the Ketubah of male issue.

חולצין ולא מיבמין – the brothers of the first [husband] perform the act of Halitzah according to the Torah, but the Rabbis decreed that he should not engage in a levirate marriage, and the brothers of the second [husband] perform the act of Halitzah according to the Rabbis, just as she requires a Jewish bill of divorce from the second [husband] according to the Rabbis.

ביאתה או חליצתה – he disputes with the first part of the Mishnah as it is taught they don’t perform levirate marriage.

ואין הולד ממנו ממזר – if the first [husband] took her back but the Halakha is neither according to Rabbi Yosi, nor according to Rabbi Eliezer nor according to Rabbi Shimon.

נשאת שלא ברשות – of the Jewish court, such as the example when two witnesses said to her: “your husband died,” that she doesn’t need the legal permission of the Jewish court.

האשה. ואמרו לה מת בעליך. שאמר לה עד אחד מת בעליך ונשאת על פי עד אחד. ולפיכך תצא מזה ומזה כדין אשת איש שזנתה שאסורה לבעל ואסורה לבועל, דלאו אנוסה היא, ואף על גב דהימנוהו רבנן לעד אחד באשה משום עגונה, טעמא מאי משום דהיא גופה דייקא ומנסבא, והך דלא דייקא קנסינן לה. אבל נשאת על פי שני עדים שאמרו לה מת בעלך, הא אמרינן בסיפא נשאת שלא על פי ב״ד כלומר שלא היתה צריכה להיתר ב״ד כיון שהיו שני עדים מעידין בדבר, מותרת לחזור לבעלה הראשון, דאנוסה היא, דמאי הוה לה למעבד. ובגמרא מוכח דלית הלכתא הכי, אלא לא שנא נשאת על פי ב״ד בעד אחד ולא שנא נשאת ע״פ שני עדים אם בא בעלה הראשון תצא מזה ומזה וכל הדרכים האלו בה:

וצריכה גט מזה ומזה. טעמא דבעיא גט משני, שכשרואים את הראשון חי סבורים שגרשה וע״י כן נשאה שני ואשתו גמורה היא, ואם מוציאה בלא גט נמצאת אשת איש יוצאה בלא גט:

ולא בלאות. שנאבדו, אבל בלאותיה הקיימים לא הפסידה:

והולד ממזר מזה ומזה. אם ילדה מן השני, ממזר גמור. ואם החזירה הראשון וילדה, הוי ממזר מדבריהם:

לא זה וזה זכאין במציאתה. דטעמא מאי אמור רבנן מציאת אשה לבעלה, משום איבה, הכא תיהוי לה איבה ואיבה:

ולא במעשה ידיה. דטעמא מאי אמור רבנן מעשה ידיה לבעלה משום מזוני, והכא דמזוני לית לה, מעשה ידיה לאו דיליה:

ולא בהפרת נדריה. דטעמא מאי בעל מיפר נדרי אשתו, כי היכי דלא תתגנה על בעלה, הכא תתגנה ותתגנה:

נפסלה מן הכהונה. דזונה היא:

מן המעשר. קנסא היא. דבת לוי שזנתה לא נפסלה מן המעשר:

מן התרומה. אפילו תרומה דרבנן:

יורשים כתובתה. כתובת בנין דכרין:

חולצין ולא מיבמין. אחיו של ראשון חולץ מדאורייתא ורבנן גזור דלא ליבם, ואחיו של שני חולצין מדרבנן כי היכי דבעיא גט משני מדרבנן:

ביאתה או חליצתה. ארישא פליג דקתני ולא מיבמין:

ואין הולד ממנו ממזר. אם החזירה ראשון. ולית הלכתא לא כר׳ יוסי ולא כר׳ אליעזר ולא כר״ש:

נשאת שלא ברשות. ב״ד, כגון שאמרו לה שני עדים מת בעליך שאינה צריכה להיתר ב״ד:

Mishnah Yomi FAQ

Still have a question? Contact Us