YEVAMOS - 012a – חמש עשרה נשים – פרק ראשון – יבמות, יב ע”א

He said to him: You have learned it: If one was fit and one unfit: if he performs chalitzah, he performs chalitzah with the unfit one; and if he performs yibum, he performs yibum with the fit one.^[1]

א"ל תניתוה - He answers according to both versions [of the question], for it teaches “one fit and one unfit” – evidently she is forbidden and her co-wife is permitted.

What is “fit” and what is “unfit”?

If you say “fit” means fit for the world at large and “unfit” means unfit for the world at large – since she is suitable for him, what difference does it make to him?

Rather, is it not that “fit” means fit for him and “unfit” means unfit for him – and what is that? One who remarries his divorcee;^[2] and it teaches: if he performs yibum, he performs yibum with the fit one.

No: fit for the world at large, unfit for the world at large.

And as for what you said, “since she is suitable for him, what difference does it make to him?” – it is because of Rav Yosef’s teaching,

for Rav Yosef said: Here Rebbi taught that a person should not pour out the water of his well when others need it.^[3]

Come and hear: One who remarries his divorcee after she had married [another] – she and her co-wife perform chalitzah.^[4]

“She and her co-wife” – can you imagine so? Rather, say: either she or her co-wife.

But are you not emending it?

Emend it thus: she performs chalitzah; her co-wife either performs chalitzah or is taken in yibum.

Rav Leili bar Memel said in the name of Mar Ukva in the name of Shmuel: The co-wife of a refuser^[5] is forbidden.

צרת ממאנת - Two yevamos fell before him from one brother, an adult and a minor, and the minor refused him; her co-wife is forbidden.

To whom?

למאן אסורה - If you say even to the other brothers – now she herself is permitted to this one.

If you say to the brothers – now she herself is permitted, for Shmuel said: If she refused this one, she is permitted to that one;^[6] is there any question about her co-wife?

Rather, to him [the yavam she refused].

אלא לדידיה - To the yavam whom she refused she is forbidden, for the mi’un uprooted the zikah, and she stands forbidden to him as a brother’s wife. And if you ask: mi’un uproots the first marriage, so she is a stranger to him and permitted to him – it is a Rabbinic decree: since she did not refuse the first [husband], and it was by force of that marriage that she fell to yibum, she looks like his brother’s wife. And so we say below: “from the time of falling she looks like his daughter-in-law,” etc. And Shmuel’s statement is in Perek Beis Shammai (below, 107b).

But what is different about the refuser, who is permitted to the brothers? That she did no act with them. The co-wife, too, did no act with them!

It is a decree on account of the co-wife of his daughter who refuses.^[7]

משום צרת בתו ממאנת - For one would come to permit the co-wife of his daughter, a minor who fell to him for yibum and refused him, since we say she uproots the first marriage and this is not the co-wife of an ervah. And how is there mi’un with his daughter while he is alive, when mi’un applies only to an orphan, whose father did not accept her kiddushin? It is found with an “orphan in her father’s lifetime,” as we learned in Perek Beis Shammai: A minor whose father married her off and she was divorced – she is an orphan in her father’s lifetime,^[8] for his rights over her lapsed once she left his authority; and if she went and married her father’s brother, she can refuse the yavam in her father’s lifetime.

And is the co-wife of his daughter who refuses forbidden?

But we learned: And all of them – if they died or refused, their co-wives are permitted!^[9]

Whom did she refuse?

If you say she refused the husband – that is the same as a divorcee!

Rather, is it not [that she refused] the yavam?

No: in fact [she refused] the husband, and there are two kinds of divorce.^[10]

And what is different when she refused the husband – that she uprooted the marriage? When she refused the yavam, too, she uproots the first marriage!

Because of what Rami bar Yechezkel taught,

for Rami bar Yechezkel taught: If she refused the husband, she is permitted to his father; [if she refused] the yavam, she is forbidden to his father.^[11]

מיאנה בבעל - A minor orphan, not related to him, who refused her husband is permitted to her father-in-law, because she uprooted the kiddushin and she is like a seduced woman, and is not his daughter-in-law.

ביבם אסורה לאביו - Since the first marriage was effective to bind her to the yavam, she looks like his full wife and looks like this man’s daughter-in-law.

Evidently, from the time of falling [to yibum] she looks like his daughter-in-law.

Here too, from the time of falling she looks like the co-wife of his daughter.

ה"נ - With his daughter who refuses.

משעת נפילה - When his daughter fell before him for yibum and had to refuse him, she looks like his brother’s wife, and her co-wife looks like the co-wife of his daughter.

Rav Assi said: The co-wife of an ailonis^[12] is forbidden, as it says (Devarim 25:6): “And it shall be that the firstborn that she bears” – excluding an ailonis, who does not bear.

צרת אילונית - Where a man was married to two wives and one was an ailonis. Ailonis: a “male-like” woman who does not give birth, from the word ayil, a male of the flock.

ומת בלא בנים - Both are forbidden to be taken in yibum and are exempt from chalitzah.

שנאמר והיה הבכור אשר תלד בראויה לילד פרט לאילונית - And since she is exempt, she stands forbidden to him as a brother’s wife, and her co-wife is the co-wife of an ervah. And although this verse, “and it shall be that the firstborn that she bears,” is explained in our masechta below (24a) as referring to the eldest of the brothers, and from here we derive that the mitzvah of yibum falls on the eldest, nevertheless we expound “excluding an ailonis” from “that she bears,” which is superfluous, since “the firstborn” speaks of the yavam himself.

Rav Sheshes objected: Three brothers were married to three unrelated women; one of them died, and the second made ma’amar with her,^[13] and he died – these perform chalitzah and are not taken in yibum,

מאמר - The kiddushin of a yevamah.

הרי אלו - The two women.

חולצות - For had he married her, the first zikah would have lapsed and she would have had only the zikah of the latter one’s marriage; but ma’amar does not cancel the zikah, and she has on her partly the zikah of the first and partly the zikah of the latter.

as it says (Devarim 25:5): “And one of them dies… her yavam shall come upon her” – one on whom there is the zikah of one yavam, and not the zikah of two yevamin.^[14]

דכתיב ומת אחד מהם - And not this one, whose two husbands died and the zikah of both is on her. Both are forbidden by Rabbinic law, and the verse is a mere asmachta, as is explained in Perek Arba’ah Achin. And the chalitzah of one does not exempt the other, for they do not come from one house, since he did not marry her; and had he not made ma’amar with her, she would have had only the zikah of the first, and they would be two yevamos coming from two houses, and both may be taken in yibum.

And it is taught on it – Rav Yosef said: This is the co-wife of a paternal brother’s wife whom the prohibition of falling caused [to be forbidden], for we have not found the like of it in the whole Torah.^[15]

שאיסור נפילה גרם לה - She fell twice from one zikah.

שלא מצינו בכל התורה - That she should be forbidden; rather she is forbidden only by Rabbinic law, for there is no prohibition of ervah here, and yet her co-wife is forbidden.

“This is” – to exclude what? Is it not to exclude the co-wife of an ailonis, who is permitted?

No: to exclude the co-wife of an ailonis, who is forbidden.

And what does “this is” mean?

This is the one whom the prohibition of falling caused: her co-wife needs chalitzah, while [the co-wife of] an ailonis does not need even chalitzah.

What is the reason?

This one is by Torah law, that one is Rabbinic.^[16]

הא דאורייתא - “That she bears” excludes the co-wife of an ailonis, who is forbidden and does not need even chalitzah.

והא דרבנן - As the reason is explained in Perek Arba’ah Achin; and they forbade her to the third brother.

We learned: And all of them – if they died, or refused, or were divorced, or were found to be ailonis – their co-wives are permitted!^[17]

It is not difficult: here, where he knew of her; there, where he did not know of her.^[18]

כאן שהכיר בה - Rav Assi speaks where he knew, when he married her, that she was an ailonis; then there is no mistaken transaction and she is his wife, and her co-wife is the co-wife of an ailonis, whom the Torah exempted through “that she bears.” And our Mishnah speaks where he did not know, when he married her, that she was an ailonis; then his transaction is a mistaken one and she is not his wife, therefore her co-wife is permitted, for she is not the co-wife of an ailonis.

The wording is precise too, for it teaches “were found” and does not teach “were”. Learn from it.

שנמצאו - After the marriage.

Rava said:^[19]

צרתה נמי לא עבדה ביה מעשה - This is difficult: granted that she did no act with him, nevertheless, since the refuser is forbidden to him, her co-wife is like the co-wife of an ervah; so how does he compare her to the refuser, who is permitted to the brothers?

אלא לאו ביבם וקתני צרותיהן מותרות - For mi’un uproots the first marriage. This is difficult: according to what is now assumed, the latter clause should be difficult for him, which teaches: any who can refuse and did not refuse, her co-wife performs chalitzah and is not taken in yibum. If she uproots the first marriage, let her refuse now and let her co-wife be taken in yibum – for so it asks on it below. One can answer: according to what is now assumed, he could say the Mishnah speaks where she is not before us to refuse, or of an adult; and below it asks on it because it wants to establish the Mishnah even where she is a minor and is before us.

מאי לאו למעוטי צרת אילונית דשריא - And if you ask: why did he not challenge from this above, against the one who forbids the co-wife of a man who remarried his divorcee, and say to him: is it not to exclude the co-wife of one who remarried his divorcee, who is permitted? One can answer: “this is” does not imply to him excluding anything except a case like it; an ailonis resembles the wife of two deceased brothers, for both are permitted to their husbands, but the remarried divorcee was forbidden to her husband.

תני שהיו - And if you ask: according to Rava, who permits the co-wife of his daughter who is an ailonis even if he knew of her, what novelty is there in teaching in the Tosefta “and all of them who were found to be ailonis,” whether in the husband’s lifetime or after his death? Granted according to Rav Assi it was needed to teach us [the case] in the husband’s lifetime, for one might have thought: since she was found to be an ailonis in his lifetime, perhaps he accepted her. One can answer: one might have thought to forbid her when she was found after his death, because at the time of falling she looks like the co-wife of his daughter, just as he forbade above the co-wife of his daughter who refuses. And if you ask: what is the difference between an ailonis and the refuser? One can answer: there, mi’un is still lacking; here, nothing is lacking. Alternatively: a refuser has no publicity, and at the time of mi’un she looks like the co-wife of his daughter; but an ailonis has publicity, and it is known that she was not the co-wife of his daughter. And if you ask: what does he challenge here against Rava from its teaching “were found” – let us say it said “were found” as a greater novelty? One can answer: where he knew of her there is a greater novelty; therefore he answers: teach “were.”

Notes

1. 1. On 11b the Gemara asked about the co-wife of a man who remarried his divorcee after she had married someone else: may the co-wife be taken in yibum? The answer cites a beraisa about two yevamos, one fit and one unfit: chalitzah is done with the unfit one, yibum with the fit one.
2. 2. A man who divorced his wife may not remarry her after she has married another (Devarim 24:4). If he did, she is forbidden to him by a lav; when he dies childless, she cannot be taken in yibum but performs chalitzah. The question is whether her co-wife is affected.
3. 3. A chalutzah is forbidden to a kohen. So the yavam should perform chalitzah with the woman who is already unfit for kehunah (such as a divorcee), and not disqualify the fit one, whom others may still marry.
4. 4. The beraisa is brought to show that the co-wife, too, performs chalitzah and is not taken in yibum; the Gemara then argues over its wording.
5. 5. Mi’un (refusal): a minor girl whose father has died may be married off by her mother or brothers by Rabbinic law. Before she comes of age she may refuse her husband; she leaves without a get and the marriage is uprooted. Shmuel speaks of a minor who refused the yavam.
6. 6. Shmuel’s statement (107b): a minor who refused one brother of the deceased husband may marry another brother; the refusal does not forbid her to them.
7. 7. If a man’s daughter was married to his brother, who died childless, she is an ervah to him and exempt from chalitzah and yibum, and so is her co-wife (the “co-wife of an ervah,” the subject of this perek). If his daughter refused, the marriage is uprooted and her co-wife might seem permitted; the Rabbis forbade the co-wife of any refuser because of this case.
8. 8. A father may marry off his minor daughter. Once she was married and divorced as a minor, she has left his authority and is “an orphan in her father’s lifetime”: if she is later married off by her mother and brothers, she may refuse even while her father is alive.
9. 9. The Mishnah (2a): the fifteen relatives whose co-wives are exempt – if the relative died or refused before the husband died, her co-wife was not the co-wife of an ervah when she fell to yibum, and is permitted.
10. 10. Refusing the husband also counts as a divorce; the Mishnah lists two kinds of divorce – by get and by mi’un.
11. 11. A minor who refused her husband is permitted to his father, since the marriage is uprooted and she was never his daughter-in-law. One who refused the yavam is forbidden to the yavam’s father by Rabbinic law, since she already looked like his son’s wife from the time she fell to him.
12. 12. An ailonis is a woman who shows the signs of being unable to bear children. According to Rav Assi the verse excludes her from yibum, so she remains forbidden as a brother’s wife – like an ervah – and exempts her co-wife.
13. 13. Ma’amar is a Rabbinic kiddushin that a yavam gives the yevamah (with money or a document) before yibum. It is not a full acquisition and does not cancel the first zikah.
14. 14. Zikah is the bond between a yevamah and the surviving brothers once her husband has died childless. Here she falls to the third brother through two brothers, so she and the second brother’s wife perform chalitzah and are not taken in yibum.
15. 15. The second brother’s wife is forbidden to yibum only because of the way she fell, not because she is the co-wife of an ervah – a case unlike any other. The Gemara asks what the words “this is” come to exclude.
16. 16. The co-wife of an ailonis (according to Rav Assi) is exempt by Torah law and needs not even chalitzah; the case of Rav Yosef is only Rabbinic (the verse is an asmachta), so the co-wife needs chalitzah.
17. 17. The Mishnah permits the co-wife of a relative who was found to be an ailonis – against Rav Assi.
18. 18. If he did not know that she was an ailonis when he married her, the marriage is void as a mistaken transaction (mekach ta’us), and the other wife was never her co-wife. If he knew, she is his wife, and her co-wife is forbidden according to Rav Assi.
19. 19. Rava’s words continue on 12b: the halachah is that the co-wife of an ailonis is permitted, even if he knew of her, and even the co-wife of his daughter who is an ailonis; and he reads “were” in place of “were found.”