הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ, וְנִמְצֵאת מְעֻבֶּרֶת וְיָלָדָה, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוָּלָד שֶׁל קְיָמָא, הוּא מֻתָּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא מֻתֶּרֶת בִּקְרוֹבָיו, וְלֹא פְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה. אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קְיָמָא, הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִקְרוֹבָיו, וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהֻנָּה: When a man who has a brother dies childless, his widow [yevama] and one of his brothers [yavam] may perform a ritual through which she is freed of her levirate bonds [ḥalitza]. It is then considered, with regard to forbidden relationships, as though they had been married and divorced. Therefore, he is forbidden to her relatives, and she to his. However, with regard to one who performs ḥalitza with his yevama and then she is found to have been pregnant at the time of the ḥalitza and she gave birth, in the event that the offspring is viable, the deceased husband has been survived by offspring and so there was never any levirate bond; consequently, the ḥalitza that was performed was entirely unnecessary and a meaningless act. As such, he remains permitted to her relatives and she remains permitted to his relatives. Furthermore, since the ḥalitza was meaningless, she is not afforded the status of a ḥalutza, i.e., a yevama who performed ḥalitza, a status akin to that of a divorcée. Therefore, the ḥalitza does not disqualify her from marrying into the priesthood. If the offspring is not viable, then it emerges that the ḥalitza was indeed necessary. Therefore, he is forbidden to engage in relations with her relatives and she is forbidden to engage in relations with his relatives, as though they had been married and divorced, and the ḥalitza disqualifies her from marrying into the priesthood, as she is afforded the status of a ḥalutza.
הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ, וְנִמְצֵאת מְעֻבֶּרֶת וְיָלָדָה, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוָּלָד שֶׁל קְיָמָא, יוֹצִיא וְחַיָּבִין בַּקָּרְבָּן. וְאִם אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קְיָמָא, יְקַיֵּם. סָפֵק בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן, סָפֵק בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן, יוֹצִיא וְהַוָּלָד כָּשֵׁר, וְחַיָּבִין בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי: With regard to one who consummates the levirate marriage with his yevama, i.e., he had intercourse with her under the assumption that there is a levirate bond and so there is a mitzva to do so, and then she is found to have been pregnant at the time of the intercourse and she gave birth, in the event that the offspring is viable the deceased brother has been survived by offspring and it is evident that there was never any levirate bond. In that case, the relations they had, rather than being a mitzva, were a violation of the prohibition against engaging in relations with one’s brother’s wife. Therefore, the yavam must send her out, i.e., they must separate, as she is forbidden to him as his brother’s wife, and to atone for the forbidden relations that they had, they are each obligated to bring a sin-offering, as is the halakha for all who inadvertently transgress a prohibition that, when performed intentionally, is punishable by karet. And if the offspring is not viable, and therefore there was in fact a levirate bond, he may maintain her as his wife since his intercourse with her was a valid consummation of levirate marriage. If they consummated the levirate marriage and seven months later she gave birth, there is uncertainty whether the child is nine months old, i.e., counting from conception, and is the offspring of the first husband, and as such there was no levirate bond, or whether the child is only seven months old and is the offspring of the latter husband, i.e., the yavam, and not of the deceased, in which case there was a levirate bond. In that case, due to the possibility that she is forbidden to him as his brother’s wife, he must send her out. However, the lineage of the child is unflawed, since regardless of whether it was born of the first or second husband, there was no transgression involved in its conception. Furthermore, to atone for the possibility that they had forbidden relations they are both obligated to bring a guilt-offering for uncertainty, as is the halakha for anyone who is uncertain whether they inadvertently transgressed a prohibition that would require one to bring a sin-offering.
שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ נְכָסִים, מוֹדִים בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּבֵית הִלֵּל שֶׁמּוֹכֶרֶת, וְנוֹתֶנֶת, וְקַיָּם. מֵתָה, מַה יַּעֲשׂוּ בִכְתֻבָּתָהּ וּבַנְּכָסִים הַנִּכְנָסִים וְיוֹצְאִין עִמָּהּ, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, יַחֲלֹקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, נְכָסִים בְּחֶזְקָתָן, כְּתֻבָּה בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל, נְכָסִים הַנִּכְנָסִים וְיוֹצְאִים עִמָּהּ בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב: With regard to a widow waiting for her yavam to either consummate a levirate marriage or perform ḥalitza with her, i.e., a yevama, to whom property was bequeathed: Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel both agree that she may sell or give away that property ab initio, and that if she did, the transfer is valid. Since she has only a levirate bond with the yavam, she retains total control of the property. This is in contrast to a betrothed woman, concerning whom Beit Hillel rule that she may not sell such property because her betrothed also has rights to it (Ketubot 78a). If she died, what should be done with the money assured to her in her marriage contract by her deceased husband and with her property that enters and leaves the marriage with her, in which a husband only ever has a usufructuary interest? Beit Shammai say: The husband’s heirs, i.e., the yavam, who stands to inherit from the husband when he consummates the levirate marriage, should divide up the property together with her father’s heirs, i.e., the woman’s family. And Beit Hillel say: The property retains its previous ownership status. Therefore, money assured to her in her marriage contract remains in the possession of the husband’s heirs. Since it was to be paid from the husband’s own property, the money is retained by his estate and passes to his heirs. And her property that enters and leaves the marriage with her remains in the possession of the father’s heirs. Since those properties belonged to her, upon her death they are inherited by her father or his heirs.
כְּנָסָהּ, הֲרֵי הִיא כְאִשְׁתּוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא כְתֻבָּתָהּ עַל נִכְסֵי בַעְלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן: If the yavam consummated the levirate marriage with her, then her legal status is that of his wife in every sense, and therefore the yavam has the same rights to her property as in a regular marriage. And the only exception to this is that her marriage contract will still be payable from the property of her first husband and not from the property of the yavam.
מִצְוָה בַגָּדוֹל לְיַבֵּם. לֹא רָצָה, מְהַלְּכִין עַל כָּל הָאַחִין. לֹא רָצוּ, חוֹזְרִין אֵצֶל גָּדוֹל וְאוֹמְרִים לוֹ, עָלֶיךָ מִצְוָה, אוֹ חֲלֹץ אוֹ יַבֵּם: The mitzva of levirate marriage is for the eldest of the brothers to consummate the levirate marriage. If the eldest does not want to do so, the court goes to each of the other brothers and requires them to do so. If they do not want to do so, the court returns to the eldest brother and says to him: The mitzva is incumbent upon you; either perform ḥalitza or consummate the levirate marriage.
תָּלָה בַקָּטָן עַד שֶׁיַּגְדִּיל, אוֹ בַגָּדוֹל עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם, אוֹ בַחֵרֵשׁ, אוֹ בַשּׁוֹטֶה, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ, אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, עָלֶיךָ מִצְוָה, אוֹ חֲלֹץ אוֹ יַבֵּם: If a brother made his decision dependent upon the possibility that one of his other brothers will eventually consummate the levirate marriage, saying that he will do so only if they do not, then whether he makes it dependent upon a brother who is currently a minor, meaning that the yevama should wait until he matures, or upon his eldest brother, who is not currently present, meaning the yevama should wait until he comes from overseas, or upon a brother who is a deaf-mute or an imbecile, as perhaps they will recover from their disability, the court does not listen to him; rather, the judges of the court say to him: The mitzva is incumbent upon you; either perform ḥalitza or consummate the levirate marriage.
הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ, הֲרֵי הוּא כְאֶחָד מִן הָאַחִין לַנַּחֲלָה. וְאִם יֶשׁ שָׁם אָב, נְכָסִים שֶׁל אָב. הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ, זָכָה בַנְּכָסִים שֶׁל אָחִיו. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ, אִם יֶשׁ שָׁם אָב, נְכָסִים שֶׁל אָב. הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ, הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִקְרוֹבָיו. הוּא אָסוּר בְּאִמָּהּ, וּבְאֵם אִמָּהּ, וּבְאֵם אָבִיהָ, וּבְבִתָּהּ, וּבְבַת בִּתָּהּ, וּבְבַת בְּנָהּ, וּבַאֲחוֹתָהּ בִּזְמַן שֶׁהִיא קַיֶּמֶת. וְהָאַחִין מֻתָּרִין. וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בְאָבִיו, וּבַאֲבִי אָבִיו, וּבִבְנוֹ, וּבְבֶן בְּנוֹ, בְּאָחִיו, וּבְבֶן אָחִיו. מֻתָּר אָדָם בִּקְרוֹבַת צָרַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ, וְאָסוּר בְּצָרַת קְרוֹבַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ: One who performs ḥalitza with his yevama is like any one of the other brothers with respect to the inheritance of the deceased brother’s estate, i.e., each of the brothers takes an equal share of the inheritance. And if there is a father of the deceased, who is still alive, the property of the deceased belongs to the father. One who consummates levirate marriage with his yevama thereby acquires his deceased brother’s property solely for himself. Rabbi Yehuda says: In either case, whether he consummated the levirate marriage or performed ḥalitza, if there is a father who is still alive, the property belongs to the father. In the case of one who performs ḥalitza with his yevama, by rabbinic decree it is as though she had been married to him and then he divorced her. Consequently, he is forbidden to engage in relations with her relatives and she is forbidden to engage in relations with his relatives. Accordingly, he is forbidden to engage in relations with her mother, and with her mother’s mother, and with her father’s mother, and with her daughter, and with her daughter’s daughter, and with her son’s daughter, and with her sister while his yevama is still alive. However, the other brothers who did not perform ḥalitza are permitted to her relatives. And she is forbidden to engage in relations with his father, and with his father’s father, and with his son, and with his son’s son, and with his brother, and with his brother’s son. The mishna states an additional principle: A man is permitted to engage in relations with a relative of a rival wife of his ḥalutza, i.e., his yevama with whom he performed ḥalitza. Since he did not perform ḥalitza with her, she is not regarded as though she had actually been married to him. However, he is forbidden to engage in relations with a rival wife of a relative of his ḥalutza, i.e., in addition to being forbidden to the relatives of his ḥalutza, he is also forbidden to their rival wives.
הַחוֹלֵץ לִיבִמְתּוֹ, וְנָשָׂא אָחִיו אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ, וָמֵת, חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. וְכֵן הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְנָשָׂא אָחִיו אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ, וָמֵת, הֲרֵי זוֹ פְּטוּרָה מִן הַחֲלִיצָה וּמִן הַיִּבּוּם: In the case of a yavam who performed ḥalitza with his yevama and then his brother married her sister and died, the sister performs ḥalitza with the yavam, but she may not enter into levirate marriage with him, since as a sister of his ḥalutza she is forbidden to him. And similarly, in the case of one who divorced his wife and his brother married her sister and died, then that woman is exempt both from ḥalitza and from consummating levirate marriage, since as the sister of his former wife she is forbidden to him.
שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁקִּדֵּשׁ אָחִיו אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ, מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶן בְּתֵירָא אָמְרוּ, אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, הַמְתֵּן עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה אָחִיךָ הַגָּדוֹל מַעֲשֶׂה. חָלַץ לָהּ אָחִיו, אוֹ כְנָסָהּ, יִכְנֹס אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. מֵתָה הַיְּבָמָה, יִכְנֹס אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. מֵת יָבָם, יוֹצִיא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ בְגֵט, וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו בַּחֲלִיצָה: In the case of a widow waiting for her yavam to consummate levirate marriage or perform ḥalitza with her, and the brother of the yavam betrothed her sister, they said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira: They say to the brother: Wait and do not marry the woman you betrothed until your brother performs an act, either of ḥalitza or of consummating the levirate marriage, as until he does there remains a levirate bond between the yevama and each of the brothers, and it is prohibited to marry the sister of a woman to whom one is bound by a levirate bond. If a brother of the one who betrothed the sister of the yevama performed ḥalitza with the yevama or consummated a levirate marriage with her, since by doing so the levirate bond between the yevama and the one who betrothed her sister is dissolved, he may then enter into marriage with his wife, who until that point was only betrothed to him, as she is no longer the sister of a woman to whom he is bound by a levirate bond. Similarly, if the yevama died, since his levirate bond to her is dissolved upon her death, he may proceed to enter into marriage with his betrothed wife. However, if the yavam died without performing an act that would have dissolved the levirate bond, he must divorce his wife with a bill of divorce, as she is forbidden to him as the sister of a woman to whom he is bound by a levirate bond, and his brother’s wife he must send out with ḥalitza, as she is forbidden to him as the sister of his divorcée.
הַיְבָמָה לֹא תַחֲלֹץ וְלֹא תִתְיַבֵּם, עַד שֶׁיֶּשׁ לָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. וְכֵן כָּל שְׁאָר הַנָּשִׁים לֹא יִתְאָרְסוּ וְלֹא יִנָּשְׂאוּ, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ לָהֶן שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. אֶחָד בְּתוּלוֹת וְאֶחָד בְּעוּלוֹת, אֶחָד גְּרוּשׁוֹת וְאֶחָד אַלְמָנוֹת, אֶחָד נְשׂוּאוֹת וְאֶחָד אֲרוּסוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הַנְּשׂוּאוֹת יִתְאָרְסוּ, וְהָאֲרוּסוֹת יִנָּשְׂאוּ, חוּץ מִן הָאֲרוּסוֹת שֶׁבִּיהוּדָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלִּבּוֹ גַּס בָּהּ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַנָּשִׁים יִתְאָרְסוּ, חוּץ מִן הָאַלְמָנָה, מִפְּנֵי הָאִבּוּל: A yevama may neither perform ḥalitza nor enter into levirate marriage until she has waited three months from the time of her husband’s death. And similarly, all other women may not be betrothed and may not marry until they have waited three months since their previous marriage ended. This waiting period is necessary so that, should a woman give birth shortly after remarrying, it will be obvious who the father of the child is. This applies both to virgins and non-virgins, both to divorcées and widows, and both to women who were married to their previous husbands and women who were only betrothed. All of these women must wait three months before remarrying even though for some of them the reason for doing so does not apply. Rabbi Yehuda says: The women who were married to their previous husbands may be betrothed, and the women who were only betrothed to their previous husbands may marry without waiting three months. This is true except for the betrothed women that are in the area of Judea, due to the fact that the groom is familiar with her. The custom in Judea was for the couple to be secluded together before the marriage so that they would become familiar with each other. This led to the possibility that they might cohabit even during their betrothal period. Rabbi Yehuda holds that one does not need to wait three months whenever the reason for doing so does not apply. Rabbi Yosei says: All of the women may be betrothed within three months even if they were previously married, except for a widow, due to the mourning period she must observe for her deceased husband.
אַרְבָּעָה אַחִין נְשׂוּאִין אַרְבַּע נָשִׁים, וָמֵתוּ, אִם רָצָה הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבָּהֶם לְיַבֵּם אֶת כֻּלָּן, הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ. מִי שֶׁהָיָה נָשׂוּי לִשְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים, וָמֵת, בִּיאָתָהּ אוֹ חֲלִיצָתָהּ שֶׁל אַחַת מֵהֶן פּוֹטֶרֶת צָרָתָהּ. הָיְתָה אַחַת כְּשֵׁרָה, וְאַחַת פְּסוּלָה, אִם הָיָה חוֹלֵץ, חוֹלֵץ לַפְּסוּלָה. וְאִם הָיָה מְיַבֵּם, מְיַבֵּם לַכְּשֵׁרָה: In a case of four brothers married to four women and some of the brothers died childless, their wives thereby become yevamot. If the eldest of the brothers who survived wished to consummate the levirate marriage with all of his yevamot, he has permission to do so. In the case of one who was married to two women and died childless, the intercourse or ḥalitza of either one of the wives with the yavam releases her rival wife from the levirate bond, and the rival wife need not enter into levirate marriage or perform ḥalitza. If one of these women was fit to marry into the priesthood and one was unfit, then if he performs ḥalitza, he should perform ḥalitza with the unfit woman rather than with the one who is fit for the priesthood, since doing so with the woman who is fit would needlessly disqualify her from marrying into the priesthood. But if he consummates the levirate marriage, he may consummate the levirate marriage with the one who is fit.
הַמַּחֲזִיר גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ, וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא חֲלוּצָתוֹ, וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא קְרוֹבַת חֲלוּצָתוֹ, יוֹצִיא, וְהַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין הַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר. וּמוֹדִים בְּנוֹשֵׂא קְרוֹבַת גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ, שֶׁהַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר: With regard to one who remarries his divorcée after she had been married to another man from whom she was then widowed or divorced, or one who marries the woman with whom he performed ḥalitza [ḥalutza], or one who marries a relative of his ḥalutza, since all such marriages are forbidden he must divorce her, and the offspring born from such unions is a mamzer; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. He holds that even the offspring from relations forbidden by a prohibition punishable by lashes is a mamzer. The Rabbis say: The offspring in those cases is not a mamzer, but they concede with regard to one who marries a relative of his divorcée, a union forbidden by a prohibition entailing karet, that the offspring is a mamzer. They hold that only the offspring from relations forbidden by a prohibition entailing karet is a mamzer.
אֵיזֶהוּ מַמְזֵר, כָּל שְׁאֵר בָּשָׂר שֶׁהוּא בְלֹא יָבֹא דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. שִׁמְעוֹן הַתִּימְנִי אוֹמֵר, כָּל שֶׁחַיָּבִין עָלָיו כָּרֵת בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. וַהֲלָכָה כִדְבָרָיו. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, כָּל שֶׁחַיָּבִים עָלָיו מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי, מָצָאתִי מְגִלַּת יֻחֲסִין בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם וְכָתוּב בָּהּ, אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי מַמְזֵר מֵאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, לְקַיֵּם דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה, מֻתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. גֵּרְשָׁהּ וָמֵתָה, מֻתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. נִשֵּׂאת לְאַחֵר וָמֵתָה, מֻתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. יְבִמְתּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה, מֻתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ. חָלַץ לָהּ וָמֵתָה, מֻתָּר בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ: Which offspring of forbidden relations have the status of a mamzer? It is the offspring of a union with any next of kin that is subject to a Torah prohibition that he should not engage in sexual relations with them; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Shimon HaTimni says: It is the offspring of a union with any forbidden relation for which one is liable to receive karet at the hand of Heaven. And the halakha is in accordance with his statement. Rabbi Yehoshua says: It is the offspring of a union with any forbidden relation for which one is liable to receive court-imposed capital punishment. Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I found a scroll recording people’s lineages in Jerusalem, and it was written in it that so-and-so is a mamzer from an adulterous union with a married woman, a sin punishable by court-imposed capital punishment. The only reason for the scroll to state the reason that this individual is a mamzer is in order to support the statement of Rabbi Yehoshua. The mishna delineates the circumstances in which it is prohibited to engage in relations with the sister of one’s wife and the sister of one’s yevama: If a man’s wife died, he is permitted to her sister. If he divorced her and then she died, he is permitted to her sister. If he divorced his wife and then she was married to another and then died, he is permitted to her sister. If his yevama died, he is permitted to her sister. If he performed ḥalitza with her and then she died, he is permitted to her sister. If after ḥalitza she was married to another and then died, he is permitted to her sister. The principle underlying all these cases is that the prohibition against engaging in relations with her sister only applies while the wife or yevama remain alive, irrespective of their current relationship to the man.