24F the Soncino Babylonian Talmud
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
YEVOMOS – 107a-122b 24f The Soncino Babylonian Talmud YYEEVVOOMMOOSS BOOK VI Folios 107a-122b CHAPTERS XIII-XVI TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH WITH NOTES BY R E V . D R . I srael W. SLOTKI, M.A., Litt.D. UNDER THE EDITORSHIP OF R A B B I D R I. EPSTEIN B.A., Ph.D., D. Lit. Reformatted by Reuven Brauner, Raanana 5772 www.613etc.com 1 YEVOMOS – 107a-122b bridal chamber. 16 What reason, however, could be advanced 13 where the father 17 Yebamoth 107a entrusted her to the representatives of the husband? 18 — The Rabbis made no CHAPTER XIII distinction. 19 And Beth Hillel? 20 — It is well known that the marriage of a minor is only MISHNAH . BETH SHAMMAI RULED: Rabbinically valid. 21 ONLY THOSE 1 WHO ARE BETROTHED 2 Both Rabbah and R. Joseph declared: The MAY EXERCISE THE RIGHT OF reason of Beth Shammai 22 is that no man REFUSAL; 3 BUT BETH HILLEL RULED: wishes to treat his cohabitation as mere BOTH THOSE WHO ARE BETROTHED fornication. 23 What, however, can be the AND THOSE WHO ARE MARRIED. BETH reason 22 where she only entered the bridal SHAMMAI RULED: [A DECLARATION chamber and no cohabitation took place? 24 OF REFUSAL 3 MAY BE MADE] AGAINST No man would like his bridal chamber to be A HUSBAND BUT NOT AGAINST A [an introduction to] a forbidden act. 25 What LEVIR; 4 BUT BETH HILLEL RULED: reason, 22 then, could be advanced where the EITHER AGAINST A HUSBAND OR father 26 had entrusted her to the AGAINST A LEVIR. BETH SHAMMAI representatives of the husband? 27 — The RULED: [THE DECLARATION] 5 MUST Rabbis made no distinction. 28 And Beth BE MADE IN HIS PRESENCE, BUT BETH Hillel? 29 — Since [a minor's marriage] HILLEL RULED: EITHER IN HIS involves 30 betrothal and Kethubah no one PRESENCE OR NOT IN HIS PRESENCE. would suggest that her husband's BETH SHAMMAI RULED: [THE cohabitation was an act of fornication. DECLARATION 5 MUST BE MADE] BEFORE BETH DIN , BUT BETH HILLEL R. Papa explained: Beth Shammai's reason 31 RULED: EITHER BEFORE BETH DIN OR is because of the usufruct, 32 and Beth Hillel's NOT BEFORE BETH DIN . BETH HILLEL reason also is because of the usufruct. 32 'Beth SAID TO BETH SHAMMAI: [A GIRL] Shammai's reason is because of the usufruct', MAY EXERCISE THE RIGHT OF for should you say that a married minor may REFUSAL WHILE SHE IS A MINOR EVEN exercise the right of refusal, [her husband] 33 FOUR OR FIVE TIMES. 6 BETH might [indiscriminately] pluck [the fruit] and SHAMMAI, HOWEVER, ANSWERED consume it, [knowing as he does] that she THEM: THE DAUGHTERS OF ISRAEL might leave him at any moment. 34 Beth Hillel, ARE NOT OWNERLESS PROPERTY, 7 however, [say]: On the contrary; since it is BUT, [IF ONE] MAKES A DECLARATION laid down that she may exercise the right of OF REFUSAL, SHE MUST WAIT TILL refusal, [her husband] would make every SHE IS OF AGE, AND DECLARE HER effort to improve her property, fearing that if REFUSAL 8 AND MARRY AGAIN. [he should] not [do this], her relatives might give her their advice [against him] and thus GEMARA . Rab Judah stated in the name of take her away from him. Samuel: What is Beth Shammai's reason? 9 Because no stipulation is attachable to a Raba stated: The real reason 31 of Beth marriage; 10 and were a married minor to be Shammai is because no man would take the allowed to exercise the right of refusal, it trouble to prepare a meal 35 and then spoil it. 36 would come to be assumed 11 that a stipulation And Beth Hillel? 37 — Both are pleased [to be is attachable to a marriage. 12 What reason, married to each other] 38 in order that they however, could be advanced 13 where she only may be known as married people. 39 entered the bridal chamber 14 and no cohabitation had taken place? 15 Because no BETH SHAMMAI RULED … AGAINST A condition is attachable to an entry into the HUSBAND, etc. R. Oshaia stated: She may 40 2 YEVOMOS – 107a-122b make a declaration of refusal in respect of his even in the case of one who is of age a Ma'amar 41 but she has no right to make a condition attached is valid. 17. I.e., his successors in authority over the minor, declaration of refusal in respect of his levirate after his death, viz., his wife and sons. (Cf. 42 bond. supra p. 738, n. 2). Where a father is alive the law of Mi'un (with the exception of the case Said R. Hisda: What is R. Oshaia's reason? — mentioned supra p. 2, n. 6) does not apply, She has the power to annul a Ma'amar which since he has the right to give her away in is effected with her consent; she has no power, perfect and proper marriage while she is a however, to sever the levirate bond since it is minor. 43 18. An act which, though regarded as marriage, is binding on her against her will. But, surely, a stage preceding that of entry into the bridal [levirate marriage by] cohabitation may be chamber, where a condition is valid, even in effected against her will 44 the case of a bride who is of age. 19. Between a marriage fully consummated and 1. Young girls who are minors and whose fathers one in its earlier stage. Since both are cases of are dead. v. infra n. 2. marriage, permissibility of Mi'un in the latter 2. With the permission of their mother or might lead to an erroneous conclusion brothers into whose charge they pass after the concerning the former. death of their fathers. 20. Why do they not provide against the possibility 3. Mi'un (v. Glos. ) and no divorce is required. of erroneous conclusions. 4. The levirate bond with whom can he severed 21. No one would draw comparisons between a by Halizah only. BaH deletes 'but not … levir'. marriage the validity of which is only 5. Cf. supra n. 3. Rabbinical and one which is Pentateuchally 6. And may marry again after each refusal. binding. 7. To be taken up by man after man without 22. V. Supra p. 739, n. 1. receiving proper divorce from the one before 23. Which would be the case were a married being betrothed or married to the other minor to be allowed to leave her husband by 8. This is explained in the Gemara infra . Mi'un only without a proper divorce. Mi'un 9. For ruling that ONLY BETROTHED was, therefore, forbidden in order to WOMEN MAY EXERCISE THE RIGHT OF encourage the marriage of orphan minors who, REFUSAL and that consequently a married if they remain unmarried, are subject to the minor may not exercise the right. dangers of immorality and prostitution. Cf. 10. And the validity of the marriage is not in any infra 112b. way impaired even if the condition that was 24. In which case the reason given is inapplicable. attached to it was not fulfilled. The law 25. Retrospective prostitution. assumes that the man tacitly renounces, on 26. V. Supra p. 739, n. 9. cohabitation, the condition. 27. Though such an act on the part of the minor's 11. The invalidity of her marriage being assumed mother or brothers constitutes marriage in to be due, not to her minority, but to some accordance with Rabbinic law, as does such an unfulfilled stipulation that was attached to her act on the part of the father even in the case of marriage. one who is of age (cf. Keth. 48b), nevertheless 12. Even in the case of one who is of age. Hence the question of fornication does not in such a Beth Shammai's ruling in our Mishnah. Cf. case arise. Why, then, do Beth Shammai forbid supra note 1. Mi'un even at this stage of marriage? 13. For the prohibition of Mi'un . V. Glos. 28. Cf. supra p. 739, n. 11. 14. Huppah, v. Glos. 29. How, in view of the reason advanced, could 15. In such a case, since consummation of they allow Mi'un even in marriage! marriage has not taken place, there is, surely, 30. Lit., 'there is'. no need to provide against the erroneous 31. V. supra p. 739, n. 1. assumption of the validity of a stipulation in 32. Of the minor's Melog (v. Glos. ) property. consummated marriage! 33. Who after marriage is entitled to the usufruct 16. If a minor at such a stage in her marriage were of his wife's Melog property. allowed Mi'un it might be assumed that the 34. Lit., 'for in the end she stands to go out'. reason why her union was severed without a 35. The wedding feast. divorce was not because of her minority but 36. Had Mi'un been allowed after a marriage no owing to an unfulfilled condition that was one would, for this reason, ever marry a attached to her entry into the bridal chamber, minor; and this might lead to immoral and so it would be concluded erroneously that consequences. Cf. supra p. 740, n. 2. 37. v. p. 740, n. 8. 3 YEVOMOS – 107a-122b 38. Despite the objections pointed out by Beth marriage she is looked upon as his daughter's Shammai. rival. 15 39. The possible loss does not, therefore, prevent a man from marrying a minor. Rab stated: If she 16 made a declaration of 40.