Przysłów 1:5 Odniesienia do Talmudu: Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot & Jerusalem Talmud Sotah

Rebbi Yudan asked: Following him who says that everybody agrees about the co-wife that he is guilty, if somebody from the market gave qiddushin to one of them and then the levir came and performed ḥalîṣah with her or had intercourse with her, did the qiddushin become invalid? If he performed ḥalîṣah with her companion but then had intercourse with her, were qiddushin validated retroactively? Rebbi Shammai said, did not Rebbi Yannai say the following: More than 30 elders voted, from where that qiddushin have no legal effect on a sister-in-law? The verse says, ⁹³Deut. 25:5.“the wife of the deceased may not belong to any outside unrelated man”, that she cannot have any existence with another man⁹⁴This is the unquestioned doctrine of the Yerushalmi. In the Babli, 92b, it is the position only of Rav; Samuel doubts whether the verse invalidates qiddushin or simply makes them sinful like other non-incestuous forbidden unions. The editors of the Babli explicitly follow Samuel and reject the opinion of the Yerushalmi. That a transgression which is not a capital crime either before the human or the heavenly court is invalid is a very exceptional statement.. Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, is that not a Mishnah? ⁹⁵Qiddušin 3:5. The Mishnah enumerates situations in which consummation of the marriage is impossible at the moment but may become possible later on. If consummation of the marriage is impossible then qiddushin are impossible since they make the bride a wife for all aspects of criminal law. She becomes a wife for matters of civil law only by entering the husband’s house in nissuïn, the marriage ceremony. (R. Meїr disagrees and acknowledges inoperative qiddushin which become activated once the impediment to marriage is removed. The second question of R. Yudan must refer to R. Meїr’s position.)“Or after your levir will have performed ḥalîṣah with you, she is not preliminarily married.” And Rebbi Yannai⁹⁶The text here reads “R. Joḥanan”. This has been changed in the translation following the parallel text in Soṭah 2:1 and a similar text in Kilaim 8:1 (p. 258). praised him “those who pour out gold from the wallet⁹⁷Is. 46:6.,” “my son, they should not be removed from your eyes,⁹⁸Prov. 3:21.” “get wise, my son, and make me happy⁹⁹Prov. 27:11.”, “give to the wise that he shall become wiser¹⁰⁰Prov. 9:9.,” “let the wise listen that he increase in knowledge.¹⁰¹Prov. 1:5.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, after all these praises I can explain it following Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba said that there exists a bastard from a sister-in-law³⁰R. Aqiba holds that any child born of any forbidden union is a bastard; the majority opinion is that bastards are created only by incestuous relations that either are capital crimes or sanctioned by extirpation (cf. Halakhot 4:15, 11:1). Since it is written (Deut. 25:5) “the wife of the deceased may not belong to any outside unrelated man” he holds that any marriage of a widow not released from levirate duty to another man is invalid and her relationship is one of whoring.
A parallel, but more differentiated, statement is in the Babli 92a.! But there¹⁰²Mishnah Qiddušin. is one sister-in-law, here are two sisters-in-law. The prohibition of a single sister-in-law is different from that of two sisters-in-law¹⁰³The biblical argument of R. Yannai does not imply anything about the status of a co-wife; cf. Note 92 for the opposition of the Babli.!

Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, who stated “the one waiting for her levir”? Rebbi Aqiba! For Rebbi Aqiba said, there exists a bastard from a sister-in-law¹⁷⁵Cf. Yebamot, Chapter 1, Note 30; Babli Y ebamot 92a. R. Aqiba declares as a bastard any child from a union not explicitly permitted.. Rebbi Ilai said to him, why should a bastard be relevant for jealousy? The Torah said: “He shall declare his jealousy to his wife”, even a partial wife¹⁷⁶Since the widow of a childless man cannot possibly marry any man but her levir (unless she is released by the latter), and she can be married by the levir without any ceremony, she may be considered as engaged to be married by him.. ¹⁷⁷This text is from Yebamot 1:1, explained there in Notes 93–101. Rebbi Shammai said, did not Rebbi Yannai say the following: More than 30 Elders voted, from where that qiddushin have no legal effect on a sister-in-law? The verse says, “the wife of the deceased may not belong to any outside unrelated man, her levir shall come to her”, that she cannot have any existence with another man. Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, is that not a Mishnah? “Or after your levir will have performed ḥalîṣah with you, she is not preliminarily married.” And Rebbi Yannai praised him “those who pour out gold from the wallet,” “my son, they should not be removed from your eyes,” “get wise, my son, and make me happy”, “give to the wise that he shall become wiser,” “let the wise listen that he increase in knowledge.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, after all these praises I can explain it following Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba said that there exists a bastard from a sister-in-law! Could he not object: Why should a bastard be relevant for jealousy? The Torah said: “He shall declare his jealousy to his wife”, even a partial wife. A woman waiting for her levir who whored, Rebbi Eleazar said she is permitted to her house, Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said she is forbidden to her house¹⁷⁸“Her house” is really her future house, that of her levir. This is the answer to the question asked if we follow R. Eleazar.
The opinion of R. Joshua ben Levi is in the Babli ascribed to Rav Hamnuna (Yebamot 81a,92b,95a,96a; Giṭṭin 80b; Soṭa 18b.) In the last source, the decision that practice does not follow Rav Hamnuna is explicitly attributed to Yerushalmi sources.. What do the rabbis say? Rebbi Mana said, did not Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa say in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, if a woman waiting for her levir died, her mother is permitted to [the levir]¹⁸⁰Since a man is forbidden to marry his deceased wife’s mother, even if the wife died while being only preliminarily married to him, it follows that the one waiting for her levir is unrelated to the levir for R. Eleazar. She is unable to be unfaithful to him and the question of R. Ilai cannot be asked., since we have stated: “This is the rule: He cannot stipulate about any intercourse she could have had and would not be forbidden to him.¹⁸¹Mishnah 7. R. Abba bar Mamal is correct in the tradition of R. Eleazar. For him, only R. Aqiba could let the levir include a question about the time between the first husband’s death and his marriage.”