Midrash · Halachah
Sifrei Devarim 288/ספרי דברים רפ״ח
א(דברים כה ה) כִּי יֵשְׁבוּ אַחִים, פְּרָט לְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּעוֹלָמוֹ. מִכָּן אָמְרוּ: שְׁנֵי אַחִים וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶם וְנוֹלַד לָהֶם אָח, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִבֵּם הַשֵּׁנִי, כּוּלַּ׳ מַתְנִי׳.
1Pisqa’ 2884491. “If brothers are living as one” (Dt. 25:5).This excludes [from the levirate privilege]marriage to the widow of a childless brotherwho died before the birth of his surviving brother.450; literally, “the wife of his brother who died before he entered his world.” That is, a brother born after the death of the childless brother, is not obliged to engage in the levirate relationship.On this basis they taught:If there were two [married] brothers,and one of them died,and another brother was born to them,and afterwards, the survivorexercised the levirate privilege{with his brother’s wife,whereupon he also died—the first wife [of the deceased first brother] is expelledas the widow of a childless brotherwho died before his survivingbrother had been born,and the second is expelled becauseshe is now a rival of the first[so that both women are released from obligationunder the rule of levirate privilege.]}451
ביַחְדָּו, פְּרָט לְאָחִיו מֵאִמּוֹ. לְפִי שֶׁמָּצִינוּ שֶׁיֵּשׁ אַחִים בַּתּוֹרָה שֶׁעָשָׂה בָהֶם אָח מִן הָאֵם כְּאָח מִן הָאָב, יָכוֹל אַף כָּאן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: יַחְדָּו, פְּרָט לְאָחִיו מֵאִמּוֹ.
22. “As one” (Dt. 25:5)—[this verse] excludes, [from the levirate privilege,]the maternal brother [of the deceased].Now, we have found cases [in which]the Torah extends to maternal brothersthe status of paternal brothers.Is it possible to say that here, too,[the maternal brother may enjoythe levirate privilege reserved by Scripture for the paternal brother]?The Teaching states:“As one” (Dt. 25:5)—[this verse] excludes, from the levirate privilege,the maternal brother [of the deceased].
גוּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶם, אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵם שְׁנַיִם וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶם, מִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ הֵם מְרֻבִּים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: וּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶם. מִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ מֵתוּ כֻלָּם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: וּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶם. אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר אַחַד מֵהֶם? אֵשֶׁת אֶחָד מִתְיַבֶּמֶת וְלֹא אֵשֶׁת שְׁנַיִם. מִכָּן אָמְרוּ: שְׁלֹשָׁה אַחִים נְשׂוּאִים שָׁלֹשׁ נָשִׁים נָכְרִיּוֹת וּמֵת אֶחָד מֵהֶם וְעָשָׂה בָהּ שֵׁנִי מַאֲמָר וּמֵת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ חוֹלְצוֹת וְלֹא מִתְיַבְּמוֹת. וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ, אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בֵּן, בֶּן הַבֵּן וּבַת הַבֵּן וּבֶן הַבַּת וּבַת הַבַּת מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ מִכָּל מָקוֹם. אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ? פְּרָט לְשֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַשִּׁפְחָה וּמִן הַנָּכְרִית.
3“And one of them dies” (Dt. 25:5)—I might infer only that [the levirate privilege] applieswhen there are two brothers, one of whom dies.How do I know [to apply it] even if there are many brothers?The Teaching states:“And one of them dies” (Dt. 25:5)—[one of them implies “one of many”].How do I know [to apply it] even if all of them die, [leaving one]?The Teaching states:“And one of them dies” (Dt. 25:5)—[even if “one of them” is the only surviving brother].If so, why is it stated:“And one of them dies” (Dt. 25:5)?Only one widow is subjectto the levir’s privilege [of marrying or releasing her],but not two widows [of the same brother].On this basis they taught:Three brothers are married to three unrelated women.If one of these brothers dies [without an heir],and the second brother declares[to the widow his intention to take her in marriageunder the terms of levirate privilege],but then he dies childless,[leaving the third childless brother to survive]—indeed, these women “loosen the shoe” [of the surviving brother]452and are no longer obliged [to marry him]under the rule of levirate privilege.453“Without a son” (Dt. 25:5)—I might infer only thatthe lack of a son[to inherit the father imposes the levirate bond].How do I know thatthe lack of a son’s son,or the lack of a son’s daughter,or the lack of a daughter’s son,or the lack of a daughter’s daughter[also imposes this bond]?454The Teaching states:“Without a son” (Dt. 25:5)—[without heirs] of any kind.If so, why is it stated:“Without a son?” (Dt. 25:5)This excludes [from inheriting the dead brother]any children [he has sired] by a slave-girl or a gentile woman.
דלֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר, לָמָּה אֲנִי צָרִיךְ? לְפִי שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ לְהַלָּן אֵשֶׁת אֶחָד מִתְיַבֶּמֶת וְלֹא אֵשֶׁת שְׁנַיִם, יָכוֹל אַף כָּאן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר, כֵּיצַד הִיא עוֹשָׂה? אוֹ חוֹלֶצֶת אוֹ מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. הַנּוֹתֵן גֵּט לִיבִמְתּוֹ פְּסָלָהּ לְעַצְמוֹ וּפְסָלָהּ עַל יְדֵי אַחִים, יָכוֹל יְהֵא גֵּט פּוֹטְרָהּ? וְדִין הוּא, וּמָה חֲלִיצָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ פּוֹטֶרֶת בָּאִשָּׁה פּוֹטֶרֶת בַּיָּבָם, גֵּט שֶׁפּוֹטֵר בָּאִשָּׁה אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּפְטֹר בַּיָּבָם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר אֶלָּא בַּחֲלִיצָה.
43. “The wife of the deceased may not seek beyond her borders for a foreign man” (Dt. 25:5).Now, why do I need this verse?For we have taught elsewhere:455 289.2The widow of only one brothercan be subject to levirate privilege,but not two widows.But is it possible to say thatthis principle applies here as well?The Teaching states:“The wife of the deceased may not seek beyond her borders for a foreign man”456; literally, “a stranger.” That is, to a man previously unknown to the woman’s family. (Dt. 25:5).Well, then, what should she do?She must either “loosen the shoe”[releasing the levir from his privilege,]or marry the levir,[but not a foreign man].4. One who hands a divorce-document toa woman he married under levirate privilege—he disqualifies her from re-marriage to himself,457as well as to any of his brothers.Is it possible to say thatthe divorce-document frees her[to remarry one she likes]?It is, after all, a simple matter of reason!Just as the “loosening of the shoe”does not free a womanfrom a conventional marriage,but does free a childless widowfrom the levirate bond,isn’t it only reasonable thata divorce-document,which does free a womanfrom a conventional marriage,should also free a childless widowfrom the levirate bond [to marry as she pleases]?The Teaching states:“The wife of the deceased may not seek beyond her borders for a foreign man” (Dt. 25:5).Not until she “releases the shoe.”5. One who declares his intention[to exercise the levirate privilege]has thereby acquired her for himself,and disqualified her [from marriage] to any of his brothers.458Is it possible to say thathis declaration concludes the acquisition[of the widowed sister-in-law as his new bride]?The Teaching states:“Her levir shall consort 459; literally, “shall come upon her.” The root is: b-w-‘.with her” (Dt. 25:5)—sexual penetration460 literally, “entry.” The word-play is obvious. concludes the acquisition,but his declaration of intent does not.
היְבָמָהּ יָבֹא עָלֶיהָ, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד בֵּין בְּאֹנֶס בֵּין בְּרָצוֹן, וַאֲפִלּוּ הוּא שׁוֹגֵג וְהִיא מְזִידָה הוּא מֵזִיד וְהִיא שׁוֹגֶגֶת.
5“Her levir shall consort with her” (Dt. 25:5)—whether inadvertently or intentionally,whether by force or eagerly.And even if he consorts inadvertently[without intention to fulfill a commandment],and she consorts intentionally,or if he consorts intentionally,and she consorts inadvertently.461
ווְלָקַח וּלְקָחָהּ, וְיִבֵּם וְיִבְּמָהּ – פְּרָט לְצָרַת כָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת. מִכָּן אָמְרוּ: חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה נָשִׁים פּוֹטְרוֹת צָרוֹתֵיהֶן וְצָרוֹת צָרוֹתֵיהֶן מִן הַחֲלִיצָה וּמִן הַיִּבּוּם.
66. [Instead of] “take” [the verse specifies]:“Take her” (Dt. 25:5).And [instead of] “exercise the levirate privilege” [the verse specifies]:“Exercise . . . through her” (Dt. 25:5)—through her excludes [from the levirate bond]any rival-wife who is closely related to her.On this basis they taught:Fifteen types of womenfree their rivals,as well as the rivals of their rivalsfrom“loosening the shoe”as well as from the rule of levirate privilege.462