## Yevamot Daf 118b

###### Yevamot 118b:1
[Yevamot 118b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:1)

**מַתְנִי׳** קִידֵּשׁ אַחַת מֵחָמֵשׁ נָשִׁים, וְאֵין יוֹדֵעַ אֵי זוֹ קִידֵּשׁ, כׇּל אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת: ״אוֹתִי קִידֵּשׁ״ — נוֹתֵן גֵּט לְכׇל אַחַת וְאַחַת, וּמַנִּיחַ כְּתוּבָּה בֵּינֵיהֶן, וּמִסְתַּלֵּק, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In relation to the dispute between Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva in the previous mishna, in which Rabbi Akiva states that one must avoid a possible transgression, the mishna cites two similar cases involving other topics. With regard to one who **betrothed one of five women, and he does not know which** of them **he betrothed,** and **each one** of them **says: He betrothed me,** if he does not want to marry any of them **he gives a bill of divorce to each and every one** of them so none will have the status of a woman with regard to whom there is uncertainty whether she is divorced. **And he leaves the marriage contract among them and departs.** The marriage contract remains in dispute between the women until they clarify which of them is entitled to the money. This is **the statement of Rabbi Tarfon.**


###### Yevamot 118b:2
[Yevamot 118b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:2)

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵין זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ מוֹצִיא מִידֵי עֲבֵירָה, עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן גֵּט וּכְתוּבָּה לְכׇל אַחַת וְאַחַת. גָּזַל אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה וְאֵין יוֹדֵעַ מֵאֵיזֶה גָּזַל, כׇּל אֶחָד אוֹמֵר ״אוֹתִי גָּזַל״ — מַנִּיחַ גְּזֵילָה בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמִסְתַּלֵּק, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵין זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ מוֹצִיא מִידֵי עֲבֵירָה, עַד שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם לְכׇל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Akiva says: This is not** the **way to spare** someone **from transgression,** as perhaps the woman he actually betrothed will not receive the money to which she is entitled. There is no remedy **unless he gives a bill of divorce and a marriage contract** payment **to each and every one.** And likewise, in the case of one who **stole** money **from one of five** people **and does not know from which** of them **he stole,** and **each one says: He stole from me, he leaves the stolen** money **among them and departs,** and they will decide among themselves how to distribute the money; this is **the statement of Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Akiva says: This is not** the **way to spare** him **from transgression;** there is no remedy **unless he pays each and every one of them.**


###### Yevamot 118b:3
[Yevamot 118b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:3)

**גְּמָ׳** ״קִידֵּשׁ״ — קָתָנֵי, ״בָּעַל״ — לָא קָתָנֵי. ״גָּזַל״ — קָתָנֵי, ״לָקַח״ — לָא קָתָנֵי. מַנִּי מַתְנִיתִין? לָא תַּנָּא קַמָּא וְלָא רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara infers: It **is taught** in the mishna that **he betrothed** one of five women, whereas **it is not taught** that **he had sexual intercourse** with one of five women, as a different ruling applies in this case. Similarly, with regard to the second case, it **is taught** that **he stole** from one of five people, and **it is not taught** that **he purchased** an item from one of five people. If so, **whose** opinion is expressed in **the mishna?** It is **not** in accordance with the opinion of **the first *tanna* and** it is also **not** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar.**


###### Yevamot 118b:4
[Yevamot 118b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:4)

דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא עַל שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ אַחַת מֵחָמֵשׁ נָשִׁים וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזוֹ קִידֵּשׁ, שֶׁמַּנִּיחַ כְּתוּבָּה בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמִסְתַּלֵּק. עַל מָה נֶחְלְקוּ — עַל שֶׁבָּעַל. רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר: מַנִּיחַ כְּתוּבָּה בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמִסְתַּלֵּק, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: עַד שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם לְכׇל אַחַת וְאַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates. **As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva did not dispute** the case **of** a man **who betrothed one of five women and he does not know which** of them **he betrothed,** as everyone agrees in this case **that he leaves** the money of **the marriage contract among them and departs. With regard to what did they disagree? With regard to** the case of one **who had sexual intercourse** with one of them for the purpose of betrothal. **Rabbi Tarfon says: He leaves the money among them and departs,** while **Rabbi Akiva says:** He does not fulfill his obligation **unless he pays each and every one of them.** Since he married in an inappropriate manner, the Sages penalized him by compelling him to pay all the women.


###### Yevamot 118b:5
[Yevamot 118b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:5)

לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא עַל שֶׁלָּקַח מִקָּח מֵחֲמִשָּׁה בְּנֵי אָדָם וְאֵין יוֹדֵעַ מֵאֵיזֶה מֵהֶן לָקַח — שֶׁמַּנִּיחַ דְּמֵי מִקָּח בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמִסְתַּלֵּק. לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁגָּזַל מֵחֲמִשָּׁה, שֶׁאָמַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן: מַנִּיחַ גְּזֵילָה בֵּינֵיהֶם וּמִסְתַּלֵּק, וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: עַד שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם גְּזֵילָה לְכׇל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Likewise, **Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva did not dispute** the case **of** one **who purchased an item from** one of **five people and he does not know from which of them he purchased it.** Everyone agrees in this case **that he leaves the price of the purchase among them and departs. They disagree only with regard to** one **who stole from five people, as Rabbi Tarfon says: He leaves the stolen** money **among them and departs, and Rabbi Akiva says:** He does not fulfill his obligation **unless he pays the stolen** money **to each and every one** of them. In this case, as he committed a transgression, he must ensure that the stolen money is restored to its proper owner.


###### Yevamot 118b:6
[Yevamot 118b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:6)

מִדְּקָאָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בְּ״קִידֵּשׁ״ וְ״לָקַח״ לָא פְּלִיגִי, מִכְּלָל דְּתַנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר פְּלִיגִי. מַנִּי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara states: **From** the fact **that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said** that Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva **do not disagree with regard to** the cases of one who **betrothed and** one who **purchased,** one may learn **by inference that the first *tanna*,** with whom he disagrees, **holds** that **they do disagree** about the cases of betrothed and purchased, whereas with regard to one who had sexual intercourse and one who stole an item Rabbi Tarfon agrees with Rabbi Akiva. With this in mind, **who is** the author of the mishna?


###### Yevamot 118b:7
[Yevamot 118b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:7)

אִי תַּנָּא קַמָּא — לִיתְנֵי ״קִידֵּשׁ״ וְ״לָקַח״. אִי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר — לִיתְנֵי ״בָּעַל״ וְ״גָזַל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **If** the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **the first *tanna*, let it teach** the cases of **betrothed and** also **purchased,** but not that of one who stole or one who had intercourse, as the first *tanna* maintains that Rabbi Tarfon agrees with Rabbi Akiva in those cases. **If** it is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, let it teach** the cases of one who **had sexual relations and** that of one who **stole.** Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds that Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva disagree in the case of one who had sexual relations, not in the case of a man who betrothed one of five women. Likewise, he maintains that they disagree in the case of one who stole from five people, not one who purchased an item from five people.


###### Yevamot 118b:8
[Yevamot 118b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:8)

לְעוֹלָם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר, וּמַאי ״קִידֵּשׁ״ — קִידֵּשׁ בְּבִיאָה. תְּנָא ״קִידֵּשׁ״, לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Actually,** the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, and what is** the meaning of the term: **Betrothed?** It means that **he betrothed** one of the women **by** means of **sexual intercourse.** And the mishna **taught** the term **betrothed to convey to you the far-reaching** nature of the stringent opinion **of Rabbi Akiva.**


###### Yevamot 118b:9
[Yevamot 118b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:9)

דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיסּוּרָא דְּרַבָּנַן עֲבַד, קָנֵיס! תְּנָא ״גָּזַל״, לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיסּוּרָא דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא עֲבַד, לָא קָנֵיס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **As, although** this man **performed** an act that violated **a prohibition** that applies **by rabbinic law,** i.e., he did not have licentious sexual relations with her but rather engaged in intercourse for the purpose of betrothal, which is in violation of a rabbinic prohibition that one may not betroth a woman by sexual intercourse *ab initio*, even so Rabbi Akiva **penalizes** him. And the mishna **taught** the case of one who **stole** so as **to convey to you the far-reaching** nature of the lenient opinion **of Rabbi Tarfon, as although he performed** an act that violated **a prohibition** that applies **by Torah law,** nevertheless **he does not penalize** him even in this case.


###### Yevamot 118b:10
[Yevamot 118b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:10)

**מַתְנִי׳** הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וּבְנָהּ עִמָּהֶם, וּבָאת וְאָמְרָה: ״מֵת בַּעְלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת בְּנִי״ — נֶאֱמֶנֶת. מֵת בְּנִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת בַּעְלִי״ — אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְחוֹשְׁשִׁין לִדְבָרֶיהָ, וְחוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In the case of **a woman who went, she and her husband, overseas, and her son** was **with them, and** later **she came** back **and said: My husband died and afterward my son died, she is deemed credible.** It is permitted for her to remarry, and she is exempt from levirate marriage. The reason is that she had children when she left, and therefore she retains her presumptive status of one who is exempt from levirate marriage. However, if she said: **My son died and afterward my husband died, she is not deemed credible,** i.e., she may not enter into levirate marriage. **And** yet **we are concerned** and give some credence **to her statement,** in case she was actually widowed by a childless husband, and therefore **she performs *ḥalitza*** to exempt her from the levirate bond with her *yavam*, **and she does not enter into levirate marriage.**


###### Yevamot 118b:11
[Yevamot 118b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:11)

״נִיתַּן לִי בֵּן בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם״, וְאָמְרָה: ״מֵת בְּנִי, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת בַּעְלִי״ — נֶאֱמֶנֶת. ״מֵת בַּעְלִי, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת בְּנִי״ — אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְחוֹשְׁשִׁין לִדְבָרֶיהָ, וְחוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If she went with her childless husband and returned alone and testified: **A son was born to me overseas, and she** further **said: My son died and afterward my husband died, she is deemed credible** and may even enter into levirate marriage, as she was presumed to be childless when she left and consequently she retains that presumptive status. However, if she said: **My husband died and afterward my son died, she is not deemed credible** for the purpose of exempting her from levirate marriage, **but** the court is **concerned about her statement. And** therefore **she must perform *ḥalitza* and she does not enter into levirate marriage.**


###### Yevamot 118b:12
[Yevamot 118b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:12)

״נִיתַּן לִי יָבָם בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם״, אָמְרָה: ״מֵת בַּעְלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת יְבָמִי״, ״יְבָמִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּעְלִי״ — נֶאֱמֶנֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If she said: **A *yavam* was born for me overseas,** i.e., when the family left the country her husband did not have a brother, and she claims that in the meantime a brother was born to her husband, and **she** also **said: My husband died and afterward my *yavam* died,** or: **My *yavam*** died **and afterward my husband** died, in either case **she is deemed credible.** This is because when she left she was not presumed to require levirate marriage, and the suggestion that her husband now has a brother is based solely on her testimony.


###### Yevamot 118b:13
[Yevamot 118b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:13)

הָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעְלָהּ וִיבָמָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, אָמְרָה: ״מֵת בַּעְלִי, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יְבָמִי״, ״יְבָמִי, וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּעְלִי״ — אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת, שֶׁאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר ״מֵת יְבָמִי״ שֶׁתִּנָּשֵׂא, וְלֹא ״מֵתָה אֲחוֹתָהּ״ שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לְבֵיתוֹ, וְאֵין הָאִישׁ נֶאֱמָן לוֹמַר ״מֵת אָחִי״ שֶׁיְּיַבֵּם אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְלֹא ״מֵתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ״, שֶׁיִּשָּׂא אֲחוֹתָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, if **she went, she and her husband and her *yavam*, overseas, and** upon her return she **said: My husband died and afterward my *yavam*** died, or: **My *yavam*** died **and afterward my husband** died, **she is not deemed credible, as a woman is not deemed credible** if she **says: My *yavam* died,** in order **that she may marry** another man. **And** she is **not** deemed credible if she says that **her sister died,** in order **that she may enter the house** of her sister’s husband. **And a man is not deemed credible** if he **says: My brother died, so that he may enter into levirate marriage with his** brother’s **wife, and** he is **not** deemed credible when he says that **his wife died,** in order **that** he **may marry** his wife’s **sister.** The Sages accepted impaired testimony of this kind only when there was a concern about creating a situation of a deserted wife.


###### Yevamot 118b:14
[Yevamot 118b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:14)

**גְּמָ׳** בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רָבָא מֵרַב נַחְמָן: הַמְזַכֶּה גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ בִּמְקוֹם יָבָם, מַהוּ? כֵּיוָן דְּסָנְיָא לֵיהּ — זְכוּת הוּא לָהּ, וְזָכִין לְאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו. אוֹ דִלְמָא: כֵּיוָן דְּזִימְנִין דְּרָחֲמָא לֵיהּ, חוֹב הוּא לָהּ, וְאֵין חָבִין לָאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rava raised a dilemma before Rav Naḥman:** In the case of a man **who confers possession** of **a bill of divorce to his wife,** i.e., he appoints an agent to take the bill of divorce to his wife, **when** she has a potential ***yavam*, what is** the *halakha* if her husband dies before she is divorced? One might say that **since she hates** her *yavam*, receiving the bill of divorce is **for her benefit,** as this act renders her prohibited to him, **and** it is a principle that **one may act in a person’s interest in his absence.** If so, as soon as the husband gives the bill of divorce to the agent she is divorced. **Or perhaps, since she sometimes loves** her *yavam*, **this** bill of divorce **is to her disadvantage, and one may not act against a person’s interest in his absence.** Consequently, she is not divorced until the bill of divorce reaches her possession.


###### Yevamot 118b:15
[Yevamot 118b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:15)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ, תְּנֵינָא: וְחוֹשְׁשִׁין לִדְבָרֶיהָ, וְחוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Naḥman **said to** Rava that **we learned** an answer to this dilemma in the mishna: **And we are concerned about her statement, and she** must **perform *ḥalitza* and she does not enter into levirate marriage.** The mishna states that the court gives her statement some credence in either case, both when her testimony would exempt her from levirate marriage and when it would allow her to marry her *yavam*. This indicates that levirate marriage is considered neither in her interest nor a disadvantage for her. Rather, its classification is uncertain.


###### Yevamot 118b:16
[Yevamot 118b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבִינָא לְרָבָא: הַמְזַכֶּה גֵּט לְאִשְׁתּוֹ בִּמְקוֹם קְטָטָה, מַהוּ? כֵּיוָן דְּאִית לַהּ קְטָטָה בַּהֲדֵיהּ — זְכוּת הוּא לָהּ. אוֹ דִּלְמָא, נְיָחָא דְּגוּפָא עֲדִיף לַהּ? תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: טָב לְמֵיתַב טַן דּוּ מִלְּמֵיתַב אַרְמְלוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Ravina said to Rava:** With regard to one **who confers possession** of **a bill of divorce to his wife** through an agent in a situation **when there was a quarrel** between them, **what is** the *halakha*? The Gemara explains both sides of the question: **Since she has a quarrel with him,** the bill of divorce might be considered **for her benefit. Or perhaps,** her **physical comfort is preferable to her,** as she prefers to remain married despite the quarrel between her and her husband. **Come** and **hear** a resolution, **as Reish Lakish said:** There is a popular idiom among women: **It is better to sit as two [*tan du*] than to sit** lonely as a **widow,** i.e., a woman prefers the companionship of any husband over being alone.


###### Yevamot 118b:17
[Yevamot 118b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:17)

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: דְּשׁוּמְשְׁמָנָא גַּבְרָא, כּוּרְסְיַהּ בֵּי חָרָתָא רָמוּ לַהּ. רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: דְּנַפָּצָא גַּבְרָא, תִּיקְרֵי בְּסִיפֵּי בָבָא וְתִיתִּיב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said** a similar popular expression: One **whose husband is** small **as an ant, she places her seat among the noblewomen,** as she considers herself important merely by virtue of being married. **Rav Pappa said** a different maxim: One **whose husband is a wool comber [*naftza*],** a lowly occupation, **she calls him to sit** with her **at the entrance to the house,** to display herself as a married woman.


###### Yevamot 118b:18
[Yevamot 118b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:18)

רַב אָשֵׁי אוֹמֵר: דְּקוֹלְסָא גַּבְרָא, לָא בָּעֲיָא טְלָפְחֵי לְקִידְרָא. תָּנָא: וְכוּלָּן מְזַנּוֹת וְתוֹלוֹת בְּבַעְלֵיהֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, **Rav Ashi says:** One **whose husband sells cabbage heads [*kulsa*] does not require lentils for her pot.** She is so happy she is married that she does not mind even if he does not provide her with food. The Gemara comments: A Sage **taught: And all of these** women who appear so satisfied with their marriage, they all **commit adultery and attribute** the children **to their husbands.** This is another reason why they are so keen to be married. This shows that even when there are quarrels between a couple, the wife still prefers the status of a married woman, and therefore the bill of divorce is not considered in her interest.


###### Yevamot 118b:19
[Yevamot 118b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/118b:19)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ הָאִשָּׁה שָׁלוֹם**