משנה: הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָֽלְדָה בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַװְלָד שֶׁלְּקַייָמָא הוּא מוּתָּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא מוּתֶּרֶת בִּקְרוֹבָיו. וְלֹא פְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. אֵין הַװְלָד שֶׁלְּקַייָמָא הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִּקְרוֹבָיו. וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. MISHNAH: If somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant and gives birth, if it is a live birth1Even though usually וולד של קיימא denotes a child surviving more than 30 days; in case of levirate, Mishnah Niddah 5:3 states that a one-day old baby causes levirate (if the husband died childless one day after a brother was born to him) and frees from levirate (if the pregnant widow gave birth to a live baby). Then her late husband potentially had a child when he died, there can be no levirate or ḥalîṣah and, legally, the ceremony never happened. her relatives are permitted to him and his relatives are permitted to her; he has not disabled her [from marrying into] priesthood. If it is a still birth, her relatives are forbidden to him and his relatives are forbidden to her; he has disabled her [from marrying into] priesthood2The ceremony is valid; she is (rabbinically) under all rules of a divorcee from the brother..
הלכה: הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת כול׳. בְּשֶׁעָבַר. הָא כַתְּחִילָּה לֹא. דֵי מַתְנִיתָא הַיְּבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלוֹץ וְלֹא תִתְיַבֵּם עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא לָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִּׁים. וְתַחֲלוֹץ מִיָּד. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. אִם בֶּן קַייָמָא הוּא לֹא נָֽגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה. אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַייָמָא הוּא הֲרֵי חֲלִיצָתָהּ בְּיָדָהּ. רִבִּי זְעִירָה רִבִּי חִייָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי בּוּן בְּשֵּׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. רִבִּי בָּא רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. מֵאֵן יְבָמִי. אֶת שֶׁאוֹמְרִין לוֹ. ייַבֵּם. אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. ייַבֵּם. אֵין אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. מַה נְפַק מִן בֵּינֵיהוֹן. הָֽיְתָה כְשֵׁירֵה וְנִתְחַלְּלָה. כְּגוֹן אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וּגְרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט. מָאן דְּאָמַר. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא צְרִיכָה כְרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה. וְזוּ הוֹאִיל וְאֵינָהּ צרִיכָה כְּרוּז לִכְהוּנָּה חוֹלֶצֶת. מָאן דְּאָמַר. אֶת שֶׁאוֹמְרִים לוֹ ייַבֵּם. אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. חֲלוֹץ. HALAKHAH: “If somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant,” etc. If he transgressed, but not from the start3The Mishnah is formulated “if it happened”, not that it should be the rule.. That follows the Mishnah4Mishnah 4:11. To ascertain that the widow is not pregnant. Before that time, ḥalîṣah is not needed since she could not remarry even if she had children, for the same reason.: “The widow should not perform ḥalîṣah or have levirate until after three months.” Why can she not have ḥalîṣah immediately? As you take it, if she has a live birth, ḥalîṣah did not affect her1Even though usually וולד של קיימא denotes a child surviving more than 30 days; in case of levirate, Mishnah Niddah 5:3 states that a one day old baby causes levirate (if the husband died childless one day after a brother was born to him) and frees from levirate (if the pregnant widow gave birth to a live baby). Then her late husband potentially had a child when he died, there can be no levirate or ḥalîṣah and, legally, the ceremony never happened.. If she has a still birth, she holds ḥalîṣah in her hand. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood5Since ḥalîṣah prevents a woman from marrying a priest, an invalid ḥalîṣah demands public proclamations by the town crier (a herald, Greek κῆρυξ), to make sure people would not think that her children from a Cohen are desecrated. The same argument in Yevamot.41b">Babli 41b. Cf. also Yevamot 16:1:2" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Yevamot.16.1.2">Chapter 16, Note 11.. Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jacob bar Idi, in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah, that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood. Rebbi Hoshaiah stated: “My levir refuses6Deuteronomy.25.7">Deut. 25:7. As long as the levir is not required to marry her, she cannot claim that he refused. The same argument in Yevamot.41b">Babli 41b..” To the one to whom one says: perform levirate, to him one says: perform ḥalîṣah; but to the one to whom one cannot say: perform levirate, to him one cannot say: perform ḥalîṣah! What is the difference between them? If she had been acceptable and was desecrated7By a marriage contracted in violation of the holiness prohibitions, Leviticus.21.7">Lev. 21:7,Leviticus.21.14">14., e. g., a widow for the High Priest or a divorcee or one who had performed ḥalîṣah for a common priest. According to him who says that she should not need a proclamation for the priesthood; that one, who does not need a proclamation for the priesthood, should have ḥalîṣah. According to him who says that to the one to whom one says: perform levirate, to him does one say: perform ḥalîṣah?8The answer, that still even a desecrated woman cannot remarry for 90 days after her husband’s death, is missing. This is either a scribal omission or it is assumed that everybody will be able to supply the rest of the argument.
חָלַץ בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים מַהוּ שֶׁתְּהֵא צְרִיכָה לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִים. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. קְטַנָּה שֶׁחָֽלְצָה תַחֲלוֹץ מִשֶׁתַּגְדִּיל. וְאִם חָֽלְצָה חֲלִיצָתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה. רִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר לָהּ סְתָם. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בְרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִייָה מָטֵי בָהּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְרִבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אָמַר. אֵין חוֹלְצִין וְאֵין מְייַבְּמִין אֶת הַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁמָּא תִימָּצֵא אַייְלוֹנִית. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָֽלְצָה חוֹלֶצֶת. וְהָכָא נַמֵּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁחָֽלְצָה חוֹלֶצֶת. If there was ḥalîṣah during these three months, does she need another one after three months? Let us hear from the following9Yevamot 12:4:1-5:2" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Yevamot.12.4.1-5.2">Mishnah 12:5.: “A minor who performed ḥalîṣah should perform ḥalîṣah after she grows up; if she performed [only one] ḥalîṣah, the ḥalîṣah she performed is valid10In a plurality of mss. of the Babylonian Mishnah, “not valid”. A minor cannot perform acts that are legally valid, but the essence of ḥalîṣah is the declaration of the levir, by necessity an adult, that he refuses to marry the widow..” Rebbi Mana said it anonymously, Rebbi Isaac the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya brought it in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan11In the parallel in Chapter 12, R. Jonah instead of R. Joḥanan.; this is Rebbi Meïr‘s, since Rebbi Meïr says one does neither perform ḥalîṣah nor levirate with a minor: maybe she would turn out to be a she-ram12R. Meïr is known in many cases to require attention to possibilities that are seldom realities. For a she-ram, levirate is forbidden and ḥalîṣah unnecessary. The same argument in Bekhorot.19b">Babli Bekhorot 19b; a detailed discussion in Tosaphot ad. loc., s. v. איש.. As you say there, even though she already performed ḥalîṣah, she again performs ḥalîṣah; so here also though she did perform ḥalîṣah, she performs ḥalîṣah13If ḥalîṣah was performed early, against the rules, it has to be performed again after the three months have passed but, in case this was not done, the first ḥalîṣah is valid..
רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. חָלַץ לָהּ מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְהִפִּילָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. הֲרֵי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעוּבֶּרֶת יָכוֹל תְּהֵא זְקוּקָה לְיָבָם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אֶת שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ מָחוּי. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר. לְהָקִים לְאָחִיו שֵׁם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. עַד שֶׁתֵּדַע אִם בֶּן קַייָמָה הוּא אִם אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַייָמָה. יָכוֹל אַף אֵשֶׁת סָרִיס תְּהֵא צְרִיכָה לְיִיבּוּם. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. אֶת שֶׁאֵין שְׁמוֹ מָחוּי. יָצָא זֶה שֶׁ(אין) שְׁמוֹ מָחוּי. Rebbi Yudan asked: If he performed ḥalîṣah with a pregnant woman and she had a miscarriage15Is the procedure valid if intended as a precaution in case the woman had a miscarriage?? Let us hear from the following: If somebody died and left a pregnant widow, should I think that she must have recourse to her levir16At the moment of death, the husband was childless.? The verse says, “that his name should not be extinguished from Israel,” only one whose name is extinguished17But not one who had the potential of offspring at the time of his death.. The verse says, “to establish a name in Israel for his brother,” until you know whether there is a live child or not18The early ḥalîṣah is of no legal value.. I could think that the wife of an eunuch should need levirate, the verse says “that his name should not be extinguished from Israel,” only one whose name is not extinguished; this excludes this one whose name was already extinguished19Before his death..
יָכוֹל אוֹמֵר. צָרָתָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת לְהִינָּשֵׂא. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר. צָרָתָהּ לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא עַד שֶׁתֵּדַע בְּמַה הִיא מוּתֶּרֶת אִם בְעִיבּוּר אִם בְּבִיאָה. אַף בַּחֲלוּצָה כֵן. חֲלִיצָה פְטוֹר וּבִיאָה פְטוֹר. כְּמַה דְתֵימַר בְּבִיאָה כָּךְ אַתְּ מָר בַּחֲלִיצָה. Could I say, her20The pregnant woman who performed ḥalîṣah. co-wife may remarry? “21Similar baraitot are in Yevamot.36a">Babli, 36a, Tosephta 6:3. He who marries his sister-in-law and she turns out to be pregnant,” as you say, “her co-wife cannot marry until you know by which means she is permitted, whether by pregnancy or by intercourse22Whether the deceased finally had a posthumous child and the rules of levirate do not apply or whether she is freed by the levirate of her co-wife, which is justified after the fact if the widow has a miscarriage or a still birth.” The same is valid for the one who performed ḥalîṣah. Ḥalîṣah frees and intercourse frees23The co-wife.. As you said it for intercourse so it was said for ḥalîṣah.
שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. זָכִין בָּעוֹבָּרִין. רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר אָמַר. אֵין זָכִין בָּעוֹבָּרִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר זָכִין לָעוֹבָּרִין. מוֹדֵי הוּא שֶׁיָּצָא רֹאשּׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַחַיִים. דֵי מַתְנִיתָא הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוֹבֶּרֶת. כְּמָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר כָּאן. הוּא לְמַפְרֵעַ לֹא נָֽגְעָה בָהּ חֲלִיצָה. וְהָכָא בֵּ(י)ן הוּא לְמַפְרֵעַ וְהוּא שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הָאוֹמֵר. אִם יָֽלְדָה אִשְׁתִּי זָכָר יִטּוֹל מָנֶה. יָֽלְדָה זָכָר נוֹטֵל מָנֶה. אִם נְקֵיבָה מָאתַיִם. יָֽלְדָה נְקֵיבָה נוֹטֶלֶת מָאתַיִם. רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר אָמַר. לֹא אָֽמְרוּ אֶלָּא בְנוֹ. הָא אַחֵר לֹא. רִבִּי יוֹסָה אָמַר. אֲפִילוּ אַחֵר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר וּבִלְבַד שְׁכִיב מְרַע. הָא בָרִיא לֹא. בִּלְבַד מְטַלְטְלִין. הָא קַרְקָעוֹת לֹא. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. גֵּר שֶׁמֵּת וּבִיזְבְּזוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת נְכָסָיו. וְנוֹדַע שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בֵן בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם אוֹ שֶׁהָֽיְתָה עִיבְּרָה. הַכֹּל חַייָבִין לְהַחֲזִיר. מַה עָבַד לָהּ רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. שַׁנְייָא הִיא הָכָא שֶׁהוּא בְנוֹ. וְסֵיפָא פְלִיגָא עַל שְׁמוּאֵל מִן הָדָא דְרִבִּי יוֹסָה. הֶחֱזִירוּ הַכֹּל. אַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הַבֵּן אוֹ שֶׁהִפִּילָה. כָּל־הַקּוֹדֵם בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה זָכָה. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא זָכָה. אֲפִילוּ בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא יִזְכֶּה. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. אַף עַל גַּב דִּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. זָכִין לָעוֹבָּרִין. מוֹדֵי וְהוּא שֶׁיָּצָא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרוּבּוֹ בַחַיִים. הֲרֵי אֵינוֹ בֶּן קַייָמָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר אֶלְעָזָר. מִשּׁוּם יִיאוּשׁ. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיסָרִין רִבִּי חִייָה בַּר װָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר נָתָן. חָזַר בָּהּ רִבִּי נָתָן. מִן מַתְנִיתָא. אִם זָכָר מָנֶה. אִם נְקֵיבָה מָאתַיִם. וּנְקֵיבָה גַבָּהּ לֹא בְעִנְייָן כְּאַחֵר הוּא. תַּנֵּי בַּר קַפָּרָא. בֶּן יוֹמוֹ זָכִין לוֹ. Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses; Rebbi Eleazar said, one cannot transfer benefits to fetuses24The question whether an unborn child can inherit and receive gifts is discussed in Babli Baba Batra141b/142a, Bava Batra 9:1:2-7" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.9.1.2-7">Yerushalmi Baba Batra 9:1 in a similar way. The opinion of R. Eleazar is attributed to (the slightly older) Rav Huna in the Babli.. Rebbi Yose25R. Yose, the fifth generation Amora, colleague of R. Jonah. In ms. A, the name appears as ר׳ יונסה, a confluence of both names. said, even though Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses, he agrees that most of [the fetus’s] head and body must come out alive26In Babli Baba Batra 142a, that a gift to a minor is acquired only at the time of birth is the opinion of Rav Naḥman, Samuel’s foremost student in matters of civil law.. That is the Mishnah, “if somebody performed ḥalîṣah with his sister-in-law but she turns out to have been pregnant,” as you say here, retroactively ḥalîṣah did not touch her, so retroactively the child is a son and receives the benefit27After birth, the gift is valid from the time it was given but it is not acquired (and cannot be invested by the baby’s trustees) before birth.. There, we have stated: “If somebody says, if my wife gives birth to a male, he shall take a mina28100 drachmae. In the parallel, Baba batra 141b, only the male baby is mentioned. In Bava Batra 9:2:2" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.9.2.2">Yerushalmi Baba batra9:2, edited by a different group, and Tosephta Baba batra 9:5, a different text, the male gets double the amount of the female., if she gave birth to a male, [the male baby] will take a mina. If a female, 200 [drachmae], if she gave birth to a female, that one will take 200.” Rebbi Eleazar said, this is only for his son, but not for any other. Rebbi Yasa29It seems here that instead of ר׳ יוסה (in both mss.) one should read ר׳ יסה; he is R. Yasa (Assi), contemporary of R. Eleazar. said, even any other. In the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar, only from a sick person, but not a healthy one; only movables but not real estate30The rules of emergency wills, which are much more lenient than those of standard wills, are detailed in tractates Giṭṭin and Baba batra. Real estate can be acquired only if all rules are followed; since the fetus cannot perform the act of acquisition, no real estate can be transferred to him on the death bed.. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Eleazar. “31A similar baraita in Babli Baba batra 142a. If a proselyte has no children after he became Jewish, his estate has no heirs; so anybody who wants to may take it. It is assumed here that if the deceased had a wife, he died without a will and she was not present since either way she immediately could lay claim to the entire property. Therefore, it is stated that only later it became known that the widow was pregnant. If a proselyte died and Jews plundered his estate, then it became known that he had a son overseas or that [his wife] was pregnant, everybody is required to return [what he took].” What does Rebbi Eleazar do with this32The unborn baby inherits his father’s estate. This is a biblical decree (Numbers.27.8">Num. 27:8).? There is a difference because it is his child. The second part [of the Mishnah] disagrees with Samuel in the interpretation of Rebbi Yose: “If they returned everything and then the son died33And again there are no legal heirs. or she had a miscarriage34If a fetus cannot acquire, then the first group of people who had returned what they had taken, simply should be given back what they had returned. If a fetus can acquire, then the first group took the possession illegally and they should not be considered as owners., anybody who takes first after that acquires it.” The first group did not acquire. Even at the beginning they should not have acquired! Did not Rebbi Yose say, even though Samuel said, one can transfer benefits to fetuses, he agrees that most of [the fetus’s] head and body must come out alive. He was not living35In the interpretation of R. Yose, the return was in error and the people who took first should take their property back.! Rebbi Isaac bar Eleazar36In Bava Batra 9:1:2-7" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Bava_Batra.9.1.2-7">Baba batra 9:1 this is an anonymous statement of the editors. In ms A: R. Eleazar. Cf. Berakhot 7:117. said, because of abandoning37The owners had given up hope to recover their property. Then they had given up ownership. Loss of ownership by giving up hope of recovery is the topic of Baba meṣi‘a 2.. The rabbis of Caesarea, R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Abba bar Natan38A Babylonian in Galilee, older than R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, student of Rav Huna. The next name, R. Nathan, seems to be corrupt; possibly one should read “R. Eleazar”. Unfortunately, two lines are missing here in ms. A.: Rebbi Natan changed his mind because of that Mishnah: “If a male, a mina, if a female, 200.” Is a female in this situation not like an outsider39Since in the presence of sons she does not inherit (but can claim support from the estate and a dowry).? Bar Qappara stated: “On transfers benefit to a one day old.40He denies that an unborn child can inherit or receive gifts; cf. Mishnah Niddah 5:3.”