MISHNAH: A preliminarily married woman [Cf. Demai 4, Note 19.] or one who waits for her brother-in-law [Her husband died childless; she waits to be married by her brother-in-law. In the meantime, the brother-in-law declared his jealousy and brought witnesses that she had an illicit rendezvous. While a woman waiting for her brother-in-law is unable to marry outside the family without ḥalîṣah, her infidelity in her widowhood is not criminal adultery (cf. Yebamot, Chapter 2, Note 6). Nevertheless, if a brother-in-law “bespoke” her, she is as if preliminarily married to him and if she violates his demand that she not be with a suspected paramour, he cannot marry her unless she is cleared by the Soṭah ritual. Since this is impossible and she has brought the situation on herself by her action, she has to receive ḥalîṣah, be divorced, and cannot claim her ketubah money.] neither drinks nor collects her ketubah, since it is said [Num. 5:29. “Under her husband” is only a wife living with her husband. In Sifry Num. 20 (differently in Babli 24a, attributed to the same authors) there is a discussion on which woman is considered living with her husband.] : “.. who will deviate from under her husband,” which excludes a preliminarily married woman and one who waits for her brother-in-law. A widow [married to] a High Priest [Lev. 21:14.] , a divorcee [Lev. 21:7.] or one who received ḥalîṣah [She is a divorcee by rabbinic standards; cf. Mishnah Yebamot 2:4.] to a common priest, a female bastard [Cf. Yebamot Chapter 1, Note 176.] or a Gibeoness [Cf. Yebamot Chapter 2, Note 72.] to an Israel, or an Israel woman married to a bastard or a Gibeonite, neither drinks nor collects her ketubah [The Halakhah leaves open the possibility that this latter rule may be a rabbinic decree.] .
HALAKHAH: “A preliminarily married woman or one who waits for her brother-in-law,” etc. Why can he not make her drink? It is a decision of the verse: “The man shall bring his wife to the Cohen [Lev. 5:15. A man can bring his wife only if he is living with her.] .” Then he should not be able to declare his jealousy [If “his wife” in this paragraph means only the definitively married one, the entire procedure should be impossible for the preliminarily married woman.] ! The Torah said, “and he declared his jealousy to his wife,” “and he declared his jealousy to his wife, [Lev. 5:14; if the meaning of “his wife” were constant in this verse, the second clause should have read “and he declared his jealousy to her.” The woman who is a wife but not a wife in the first sense is the preliminarily married one. Therefore, the second mention of “wife” adds the preliminarily married one as object of jealousy.] ” even if she is only partially his wife.
Does our Mishnah follow the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say, “she takes her ketubah but does not drink” [Mishnah 4:3. If the husband died after she was in a secluded place with her paramour but before she could drink.] ? Rebbi Yose said, there the reason of the House of Shammai is that she may say, bring me my husband, then I shall drink [Since the verse requires the husband to bring his wife to the Temple, she can claim that it is not her fault that she could not cleanse herself.] . But here, she knew that the preliminarily married cannot drink [It is clear that the House of Shammai also hold that women have to study all the rules (and texts) of the oral law; cf. Berakhot Chapter 3, Note 181. If R. Eliezer in Halakhah 3:4 excludes women from the study of Torah, he can mean only the study of the Pentateuch, not that of the oral tradition.] ; why did she bring herself into that great doubt? In order to disqualify herself from receiving her ketubah [For the preliminarily married woman, this refers only to pre-talmudic times, when the ketubah was given at the time of qiddušin. But later practice was to deliver the document only at the time of the actual marriage (cf. Ketubot5:1).] .
Rebbi Jehudah asked: As you say, “and he declared his jealousy to his wife,” “and he declared his jealousy to his wife, [Lev. 5:14; if the meaning of “his wife” were constant in this verse, the second clause should have read “and he declared his jealousy to her.” The woman who is a wife but not a wife in the first sense is the preliminarily married one. Therefore, the second mention of “wife” adds the preliminarily married one as object of jealousy.] ” even if she is only partially his wife, similarly, “under your husband,” even if he is only partially your husband [R. Jehudah notes that “under your husband” is repeated (vv. 19,20). Therefore, if the repetition of “his wife” (cf. Note 12) also includes a partial wife ( preliminarily married or one who waits for her brother-in-law), the repetition here should also give the partial husband the right to bring his partial wife to the Temple. There is no answer given; R. Jehudah’s argument is contradicted by the verse he himself quotes, cf. Chapter 1, Notes 154–156.] . How is that? If he declared his jealousy to her while she was preliminarily married, then he wed her [“He took her in”, i. e., he brought her to his house in the final wedding ceremony to live with him.] , and she went to a secluded place, he makes her drink on the basis of his declaration of jealousy [The final wedding activates the prior declaration of jealousy. The Babli agrees, 25a.] . If he [The brother-in-law.] declared his jealousy to her while she was waiting for her brother-in-law, then he [The brother-in-law.] wed her, and she went to a secluded place, he makes her drink on the basis of his declaration of jealousy [The final wedding activates the prior declaration of jealousy. The Babli agrees, 25a.] . If he declared his jealousy to her while she was preliminarily married, then he took her in, she went to a secluded place, and after that he had sex with her, she has to leave with her ketubah [As stated in Mishnah 3:6, the ceremony is ineffective for a woman whose husband had slept with her while she was forbidden to him. Since it is his action that (a) keeps his wife permanently forbidden to him and, (b) prevents his wife from proving her innocence, he as the guilty party is forced to divorce her and to pay the full amount of the ketubah.] ; otherwise [If the husband did not sleep with his wife after she became forbidden to him, he has the choice to divorce her because of her fault, without paying any of his own money.] she has to leave without ketubah. [If he declared his jealousy to her while she was waiting for her brother-in-law, then he took her in, she went to a secluded place, and after that he had sex with her, she has to leave with her ketubah; otherwise without ketubah.] [From the Rome ms., probably omitted by the scribe of the Leiden ms. because of the parallel text.] If her husband declared his jealousy and died, she became destined for her brother-in-law who married her, then she went to a secluded place, he makes her drink on the basis of [the first husband’s] declaration of jealousy [Since by biblical standards the brother-in-law’s marriage is an automatic consequence of the first husband’s death.] . If her husband did not declare his jealousy and died, she became destined for her brother-in-law who declared his jealousy but did not manage to take her in before he died and she became destined for his brother, the latter cannot make her drink since she became destined for him only because of the first brother [Since the second brother never became her husband, his declaration is irrelevant to the third brother.] . But if her brother-in-law declared his jealousy, took her in, and died, then she became destined for a brother-in-law who took her in, when she went to a secluded place he makes her drink on the basis of his [The brother-in-law.] declaration of jealousy.
There [Mishnah 4:4; a fuller text in Tosephta 5:4 and Babli 26a as the minority opinion of R. Simeon ben Eleazar; as an alternative explanation in Sifry Num. 19.] , we have stated: “A she-ram [A woman lacking secondary female sex characteristics, cf. Yebamot, Chapter 1, Note 65.] , an old woman [A post-menopausal woman.] , or a sterile one neither drinks nor collects her ketubah,” as it is said [Num. 5:28.] : “She will be declared innocent and bear seed,” [this refers to] one able to bear seed; it excludes one who is unable to bear seed. They objected, is there not the widow [married to] the High Priest, is she not able to bear seed [Why is she excluded from drinking (Mishnah 2)?] ? There is a difference, since it is written [Lev. 21:15.] : “He may not desecrate his seed among his people. [Lev. 21:15.] ” There [Since any child of the widow will be desecrated, it is not counted as the High Priest’s child. Therefore, as far as he is concerned, his wife is unable to bear children.] , we have stated: “A bastard disables and enables to eat. How is this?” And here he says so? Rebbi Tanḥuma said, there, “she has no issue” of any kind, but here [Mishnah Yebamot7:7. An Israel woman widowed from a Cohen may eat heave as long as any Jewish descendant of her husband’s is alive; a Cohen woman widowed from an Israel may not eat heave as long as any Jewish descendant of her husband’s is alive.] one requires enabled seed, not disabled seed. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the water only serves to permit her to her house; but about this one one tells him to divorce once she went to a secluded place [He rejects the earlier attempt to find a biblical source to the rejection of the widow and explains Lev. 21:15 as: “He is forbidden to desecrate his seed.” The rule excluding the High Priest’s widow is rabbinical. If the Temple court refuses to administer the water, the widow remains permanently forbidden to her husband, who therefore is forced to divorce her.] .
MISHNAH: The following cannot drink or collect their ketubah: One who says, I am impure for you, or one for whom came witnesses declaring her to be impure [They are divorced for adultery; in this case no ketubah money is due.] ; one who says “I will not drink” [She accepts the monetary penalty for adultery without admitting guilt.] . But one whose husband refuses to make her drink, or whose husband copulated with her on the road, collects her ketubah but does not drink [In both cases the husband prevented her from clearing her name; he has to divorce her but must pay. Cf. Note 2.] . About those whose husbands died before she would drink, the House of Shammai say, they collect the ketubah but do not drink [Since the verse requires the husband to bring his wife to the Temple, she can claim that it is not her fault that she could not cleanse herself.] , but the House of Hillel say, they neither drink not collect the ketubah [She cannot drink because she has no husband to bring her to the Temple. But having brought her problem on herself by having had a secret rendez-vous, the husband’s heirs can tell her to prove her claim to the ketubah money by proving her innocence, following the general principle of monetary claims הַמּוֹצִיא מֵחֲבֵרוֹ עָלָיו הָרְאָיָה “the burden of proof is on the claimant” (Yerushalmi Sanhedrin3:9, fol. 21b; Babli Baba Qama 46b). The reading here is that of all Yerushalmi sources and a number of Mishnah mss.; the reading of the Babli here is “either they drink or they do not collect their ketubah”, but the text is emended in the Babli, Yebamot 38b, to conform to the Yerushalmi reading.] .
HALAKHAH: “The following cannot drink or collect their ketubah: One who says, I am impure for you,” etc. Rebbi Joshia said, Ze‘ira told me in the name of the people of Jerusalem [In the Babli (25a, Sanhedrin88a): Ze‘ira the Jerusalemite.] : In three cases, if they want to forgive, they may forgive. These are: The suspect wife [The Babli explains: The husband may repeal his declaration of jealousy; then there is no case. However, the Babli (25a) restricts this to the time before the wife had a secret rendez-vous whereas the Yerushalmi (Sanhedrin 8:6, fol. 26b) lets the husband rescind his action any time before the scroll was erased.] , the rebellious son [Described in Deut. 21:18–21; Sanhedrin Chapter 8.] , and the rebellious Elder [Deut. 17:8–12. The Babli in the name of “the colleagues in the South” and the Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 8:6 in the name of R. Jehudah ben Bathyra of Nisibis disagree in this case since the authority of the Supreme Court has to be upheld.] , etc.
MISHNAH: A woman pregnant by another man or nursing another man’s [child] [A pregnant widow or divorcee is (rabbinically) not permitted to remarry until the baby is weaned.] may neither drink nor collect her ketubah, the words of Rebbi Meïr, but the Sages say, he [The second husband may live separated from his wife until the baby is weaned and there is no risk that the life of the baby be endangered by another pregnancy and a premature stop of nursing.] may separate from her and take her back later. A she-ram [A woman lacking secondary female sex characteristics, cf. Yebamot, Chapter 1, Note 65.] , an old woman [A post-menopausal woman.] , or a sterile one, neither drinks nor collects her ketubah; Rebbi Eleazar says, he may marry another wife and be fruitful and multiply with her [He takes Num. 5:28 as a statement of fact, not a commandment.] . All other women either drink or cannot collect their ketubah [Since by not drinking they forbid themselves to their husbands; they would have the status of women refusing to live with their husbands who are divorced without payment of the ketubah (Mishnah Ketubot 5:7).] .
HALAKHAH: A woman pregnant by another man or nursing another man’s [child],” etc. A man should not marry a woman pregnant by another man or nursing another man’s [child], but if he did marry her, the verse says about him [Prov. 23:10.] : “Do not remove the eternal boundaries and do not enter the orphans’ field.” He who marries a woman pregnant by another man or nursing another man’s [child] has to divorce her and should never retake her, the words of Rebbi Meĩr, but the Sages say, he [The second husband may live separated from his wife until the baby is weaned and there is no risk that the life of the baby be endangered by another pregnancy and a premature stop of nursing.] may separate from her [In the Babli (26a, Yebamot 36b), the Sages require a divorce but permit a remarriage.] and take her back later. Does Rebbi Meїr always fine people [Since he has no biblical source for his prohibition of remarriage, it is purely a punitive measure against people who flout rabbinic maxims. Does he always prohibit remediation for actions of that kind?] ? Let us hear from the following: [Yebamot Chapter 12, Notes 103, 107, 108.] “The underage woman who performed ḥalîṣah should repeat ḥalîṣah once she becomes of age but if she did not repeat it, the ḥalîṣah is valid.” Rebbi Mana said it without attribution, Rebbi Isaac the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya the scribe [In Yebamot: מטי בה “turns to it”. The text here seems original.] in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan [In Yebamot: R. Jonah. The text here seems original.] : It is Rebbi Meїr who said that one does not perform ḥalîṣah or levirate with an underage girl because she might turn out to be a she-ram [Since R. Meїr accepts the validity after the fact; he does not always refuse remediation.] .
It was stated [Tosephta Nidda 2:2, Babli Ketubot 60b.] : “A nursing woman whose husband died should not remarry [In Tosephta, Babli, and sources dependent on the Babli: לא תינשא ולא תתארס “not remarry, not even preliminarily marry”. The Yerushalmi does not mention preliminary marriage.] until 24 months later, the words of Rebbi Meїr [Tosephta Nidda 2:1–3 notes that the normal period of nursing a baby is 24 months. Therefore, a normal contract for a wet-nurse is for 24 months.] . Rebbi Jehudah says, eighteen months [He holds that a baby may be weaned after 18 months without danger to his health even under the sanitary conditions of his time.] . Rebbi Jonathan ben Yose [In the mss. of the Babli, R. Nathan bar Yoseph or R. Nathan bar Yose, but in the Gaonic sources mostly R. Jonathan Bar Yose. In Ma‘serot 5:4, he is called R. Jonathan ben R. Yose and characterized as a student of R. Aqiba.] says, the House of Shammai say 24 months, but the House of Hillel say eighteen months. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, following him who said 24 months, she is permitted to remarry after 21 months; following him who said eighteen months, she is permitted to remarry after fifteen months, since the milk terminates only after three months [Of a new pregnancy. The baby is not hurt if his mother starts a new pegnancy within three months of the end of his projected nursing period.] .”
Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Aqabiah asked Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who instructed him: 24 months. Rebbi Jeremiah: Aqabiah asked Rebbi Ḥanina who instructed him: 24 months. How? Two cases were there, one in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina and one in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Mana instructed: eighteen months, and fasted that entire day [He felt uneasy about his decision even though in general R. Jehudah’s opinion is followed in a dispute with R. Meїr.] . Rebbi Mar Uqba instructed in Arbela: 24 months, even if the baby had died [In the Babli, he reports that R. Ḥanina had permitted him to marry after 15 months. The Babli (Note 55) decides on 24 months but permits immediate remarriage if the baby had died since Jewish women are not suspected to kill their children for a new husband.] .
The Sages agree with Rebbi Eleazar that if he had [another] wife and children, she drinks and collects her ketubah. [They only hold that the sterile woman cannot be made to drink on the possibility that the husband would at some time in the future marry a child-bearing wife.] If he had [another] wife and children but they died between the declaration of jealousy and her secret rendez-vous, she already was eligible to drink [The status at the time of the declaration of jealousy is determining.] . If he did not have [another] wife and children but they died between the declaration of jealousy and her secret rendez-vous, she already was barred from drinking [This sentence makes no sense. One may conjecture that the original text stated that if the husband acquired a child-bearing wife after declaring his jealousy, it has no influence on the status of his first wife.] .
MISHNAH: A Cohen’s wife drinks and is permitted to her husband [Since she is cleared, she is permitted to her husband who is forbidden to be married even to a rape victim.] ; the wife of a eunuch [As Tosaphot point out (26a, s. v. אשת סריס), the “eunuch” may be either a person born with defective testicles or a person castrated by chemical means. The verse prohibits only a surgically castrated man to marry into the congregation.] drinks. One may declare one’s jealousy with respect to any incest-‘prohibited person [Even a person who is entitled to be alone with the wife, such as her father, who is forbidden to her by an incest prohibition.] , except for a minor and a non-man [An animal, according to the Babli (26b) and the Rome ms.] .
HALAKHAH: “A Cohen’s wife drinks,” etc. Otherwise, what could we say? She drank and the water had no influence on her; she is pure! I could say, merit suspended for her [Cf. Chapter 3, Halakhah 5.] . That is according to him who says that merit suspends and it is not recognizable. But following him who says that merit suspends and it is recognizable? Rebbi Isaac said, really we deal with the case that she drank and the water had no influence on her; that you should not say since the water has no influence on a rape victim, but only on a seduced woman, this one is a rape victim. But a rape victim in the priesthood is like a willing one for an Israel, therefore it is necessary to say that she is permitted to her house [The same argument is anonymous in the Babli, 26a.] . From where that rape disables a married woman in the priesthood [For the Babli, the fact that a raped wife is forbidden to a Cohen is immediately obvious from Lev. 21:7 since the definition of a זוֹנָה, usually translated as “prostitute” is (Sifra Emor Pereq 1(7) = Babli Yebamot 61b) שֶּׁנִּבְעֲלָה בְּעִילַת זְנוּת “who was the object of an unlawful intercourse”. The formulation in the passive clearly implies that a rape victim is included.] ? Since in matters of crawling things, which are a trifling matter, He made forced [impurity] equal to intentional [impurity], in the weighty matter of the deviant not so much more [This argument is based on the identity of the word “impurity” used both for ritual impurity (in this case, by touching a dead reptile) and guilt; cf. M. Cohen, מונחי טומאה וטהרה בלשון המקרא ויחסם למושגי איסור והיתר של לשון חכמים, 306.–289 ,בית מקרא כה,ד [קלה] תשנג Touching a dead reptile is a minor impurity which can be repaired immediately by immersion in water before sundown. There is no difference between intentional or unintional defilements. By contrast, sexual defilement has far-reaching consequences. In an elliptic version the argument is in Sifry Num. 7. One needs the detailed argument here to understand the text there.] ? Rebbi Jacob bar Idi stated before Rebbi Jonathan: “If you deviated from under your husband and became defiled,” that excludes rape. How do you understand this? He said to him, just as “under your husband” is by consent, so “if you became defiled” is by consent. “She was not raped”, she is forbidden. Therefore, if she was raped, she is permitted [This second argument is accepted in the Babli (26a, Yebamot 56b).] . But there is a rape victim which is forbidden for an Israel. Who is that? That is one who started by consent and ended up raped [She started playing with another man and ended up being raped against her will. The Babli does not consider this case as one of consensual sex.] . And there is one who is not a rape victim which is permitted to an Israel. Who is that? That is one who started as a rape victim and ended up consenting [This case is accepted by the Babli, Ketubot 51b.] . Like that woman who came to Rebbi Joḥanan and said to him, I was raped. He said to her, but was it not sweet to you in the end [He wanted to forbid her to her (Israel) husband, following the opinion of Samuel’s father (Abba bar Abba) who considers rape that in the end is accepted by the victim as consensual sex; Babli Ketubot 51b.] ? She said to him, if a person dips a finger into honey and puts it into his mouth on the Day of Atonement, does he not feel bad about it and at the end it is sweet? He accepted her [She is permitted to her husband. This argument is reproduced in the Babli by Rava who is known as a frequent mouthpiece of Yerushalmi arguments. The same argument used in the opposite sense in a tannaїtic statement is in Babli, Niddah 45a.] .
“If you deviated from under your husband and became defiled, [Num. 5:20.] ” that excludes [One would have expected “includes” since her husband has a penis if he is permitted to her (Note 68). Babli 26a, Sifry Num. 13 read: “Other than your husband”, that includes a eunuch’s wife.] a castrate’s wife. “And a man ejaculated into you [Num. 5:20.] ”, that includes a castrate. “Except for a minor and a non-man,” e. g., an ape.
MISHNAH: For the following the court will declare jealousy: One whose husband had become a deaf-mute, or insane, or was confined in a jail; not to make her drink but to make her ineligible for her ketubah [Since Num. 5:14 requires the husband to declare his jealousy in order to bring her to the Temple. R. Yose requires the presence of the husband only for the trip to the Temple and the ceremony (vv. 15 ff.)] . Rebbi Yose says, also to make her drink: When her husband will be freed from jail he should make her drink.
HALAKHAH: “For the following the court will declare jealousy,” etc. “The children of Israel. [This paragraph is copied verbally from Halakhah 1, Notes 10–12, but the meaning is different.] ”
[This paragraph is copied verbally from Halakhah 1, Notes 10–12, but the meaning is different.] Why can he not make her drink [Why does the majority not empower the freed or healed husband to make his wife drink?] ? It is a decision of the verse: “The man shall bring his wife to the Cohen [Num. 5:15.] .” Then he should not be able to declare his jealousy [The court as guardian of the incapacitated man should not be able to do what he himself could not do at the moment.] ! The Torah said, “and he declared his jealousy to his wife,” “and he declared his jealousy to his wife, [Num. 5:14; the court is empowered even if the man is temporarily disabled from acting as a husband.] ” even if she is only partially his wife.
From where that the intercourse of a disabled disables [Disables a woman of the priestly clan (a wife or a daughter) from eating sanctified food such as heave; cf. Yebamot 7:5.] ? What are we talking about? If about a married woman, there is a serious [offense]. [Adultery is a capital crime.] If about a widow married to the High Priest, it already is written “The man shall bring his wife to the Cohen. [Cf. Note 87. Mishnah 1 already stated that a forbidden wife is not counted as a wife and we just have established that the intercourse with a man who cannot be legally married bars a woman from priesthood.] ” What is equal between them is: Everybody’s intercourse disqualifies those whose descendant would be disqualified [The child of the otherwise married woman is a bastard, the child of the widow married to the High Priest is desecrated.] . [This text is from Yebamot 7:5, Notes 111–116.] These are: “A child of nine years and one day, an Ammonite, Moabite, Edomite, or Egyptian proselyte, or a bastard, desecrated, Gibeonite, Samaritan, and Gentile who had intercourse with the daughter of a Cohen, a Levite, or an Israel, disqualified her for the priesthood. Rebbi Yose said, everybody’s intercourse disqualifies those whose descendant would be disqualified; his intercourse does not disqualify those whose descendant would not be disqualified. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, in all cases, if his daughter is permitted to you, so is his widow; if his daughter is not permitted to you, neither is his widow.”