## Yevamot Daf 12b

###### Yevamot 12b:1
[Yevamot 12b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:1)

הִלְכְתָא: צָרַת אַיְלוֹנִית מוּתֶּרֶת, וַאֲפִילּוּ הִכִּיר בָּהּ. וַאֲפִילּוּ צָרַת בִּתּוֹ אַיְלוֹנִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the ***halakha* is** that the **rival wife of an *aylonit* is permitted, and** this is the case **even if** her first husband **knew** of **her** status and her marriage was fully valid. The mitzva of levirate marriage does not apply to an *aylonit*, but her rival wife is not forbidden. **And even** in the case of **the rival wife of his *aylonit* daughter** who was recognized as such, the other wife is not considered the rival wife of a forbidden relative.


###### Yevamot 12b:2
[Yevamot 12b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:2)

וְאֶלָּא הָא דְּקָתָנֵי ״שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ״ — תְּנִי ״שֶׁהָיוּ״. כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אַחַת צָרַת מְמָאֶנֶת, וְאַחַת צָרַת אַיְלוֹנִית, וְאַחַת צָרַת מַחֲזִיר גְּרוּשָׁתוֹ — כּוּלָּן מוּתָּרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **However,** with regard to **that which** the mishna **teaches: Were found to be,** from which it was inferred that there is a difference between an *aylonit* whose condition was known by the husband beforehand and one who was recognized by him only later, how is this to be explained? The Gemara answers that one should emend this and **teach** simply: **That were,** and not: Were found to be. **When Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael **he said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** There is **one** *halakha* with regard to the **rival wife of a girl who refused** her husband, and **the rival wife of an *aylonit*, and also** the **rival wife of one who remarries his divorcée: They are all permitted.**


###### Yevamot 12b:3
[Yevamot 12b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:3)

תָּנֵי רַב בִּיבִי קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, שָׁלֹשׁ נָשִׁים מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת בְּמוֹךְ: קְטַנָּה, מְעוּבֶּרֶת, וּמְנִיקָה. קְטַנָּה — שֶׁמָּא תִּתְעַבֵּר וְשֶׁמָּא תָּמוּת. מְעוּבֶּרֶת — שֶׁמָּא תַּעֲשֶׂה עוּבָּרָהּ סַנְדָּל. מְנִיקָה — שֶׁמָּא תִּגְמוֹל בְּנָהּ וְיָמוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ Incidental to the case of refusal, the Gemara cites a related *halakha*. **Rav Beivai taught** a *baraita* **before Rav Naḥman: Three women** may **engage in relations with** a contraceptive **resorbent,** a soft fabric placed at the entrance to their wombs to prevent conception, despite the fact that this practice is generally prohibited. They are as follows: **A minor,** a woman who is already **pregnant, and a nursing woman.** The *baraita* specifies the reason for each exception: **A minor** may do so **lest she become pregnant and perhaps die; a pregnant woman, lest** she be impregnated a second time and **her** previous **fetus becomes** deformed into the shape of **a sandal** fish by being squashed by the pressure of the second fetus. As for **a nursing woman,** she does so **lest** she become pregnant and her milk dry up, in which case **she will wean her son** too early, thereby endangering him, **and he will die.**


###### Yevamot 12b:4
[Yevamot 12b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:4)

וְאֵיזוֹ הִיא קְטַנָּה — מִבַּת אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד עַד שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד. פָּחוֹת מִכֵּאן וְיָתֵר עַל כֵּן — מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת כְּדַרְכָּהּ וְהוֹלֶכֶת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אַחַת זוֹ וְאַחַת זוֹ מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת כְּדַרְכָּהּ וְהוֹלֶכֶת, וּמִן הַשָּׁמַיִם יְרַחֲמוּ, מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״שׁוֹמֵר פְּתָאִים ה׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the *baraita* continues: **Who is** considered **a minor?** It is a girl **from the age of eleven years and one day until** the age of **twelve years and one day.** If she was **younger than this or older than this, she may go ahead and engage in relations in her usual manner.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.** Since it is assumed that a minor who is less than eleven years old cannot become pregnant, she is considered to be in no danger. **And the Rabbis say: Both this** one **and that** one, i.e., in all these cases, she **may go ahead and engage in relations in her usual manner, and Heaven will have mercy** upon her and prevent any mishap, **since it is stated: “The Lord preserves the simple”** (Psalms 116:2).


###### Yevamot 12b:5
[Yevamot 12b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:5)

מִדְּקָאָמַר שֶׁמָּא תִּתְעַבֵּר וְשֶׁמָּא תָּמוּת, מִכְּלָל דְּאִיכָּא קְטַנָּה דְּמִיעַבְּרָא וְלָא מֵתָה. אִם כֵּן, מָצִינוּ חֲמוֹתוֹ מְמָאֶנֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes the *baraita*: **From** the fact that the *baraita* **states: Lest she become pregnant and perhaps die,** this indicates **by inference that there is a minor who can become pregnant and will not die,** although the conditions for this scenario of a minor giving birth and surviving are unclear. **If so,** that a minor might be impregnated and give birth, **we find** the case of **one’s mother-in-law who refused** her husband. Since it is possible for a woman to give birth to a daughter while still a minor, if a man betroths this daughter while still an infant, the mother might be a mother-in-law who performed refusal.


###### Yevamot 12b:6
[Yevamot 12b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:6)

וּתְנַן: אִי אַתָּה יָכוֹל לוֹמַר בַּחֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חָמִיו שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ אַיְלוֹנִית אוֹ שֶׁמֵּיאֲנוּ! אֵימָא: שֶׁמָּא תִּתְעַבֵּר וְתָמוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** yet **we learned** in the mishna: **You cannot say,** i.e., the possibility does not exist, in the case **of his mother-in-law, his mother-in-law’s mother, and his father-in-law’s mother, that they were found to be an *aylonit* or performed refusal,** as refusal may be performed only by a minor, who cannot give birth. If so, there is apparently a contradiction between the mishna and the *baraita*. The Gemara answers: Do not say: Lest she become pregnant and perhaps die, which indicates that it is possible for her not to die from the impregnation. Rather, **say: Lest she become pregnant and die.** In other words, although it is uncertain whether she will be impregnated, if she does become pregnant she will certainly die, which means that there is no case in which a minor could give birth and live.


###### Yevamot 12b:7
[Yevamot 12b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:7)

דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר לֵיוַאי: גְּבוּל יֵשׁ לָהּ, קוֹדֶם הַזְּמַן הַזֶּה — אֵינָהּ מִתְעַבֶּרֶת כׇּל עִיקָּר, תּוֹךְ הַזְּמַן הַזֶּה — הִיא מֵתָה וְעוּבָּרָהּ מֵת, לְאַחַר זְמַן הַזֶּה — הִיא חַיָּה וְעוּבָּרָהּ חַי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As Rabba bar Livai said: There is a limit with regard to her** pregnancy, i.e., that of a young girl. **Before this time,** the age of eleven, **she cannot be impregnated at all. During this time,** from age eleven to twelve, **she dies and her fetus dies. After this time,** from twelve onward, **she lives and her fetus lives.**


###### Yevamot 12b:8
[Yevamot 12b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:8)

אִינִי? וְהָא תָּנֵי רַבָּה בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל: אִי אַתָּה יָכוֹל לוֹמַר בַּחֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חָמִיו שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ אַיְלוֹנִית אוֹ שֶׁמֵּיאֲנוּ — שֶׁכְּבָר יָלְדוּ. אֶלָּא לְעוֹלָם: שֶׁמָּא תִּתְעַבֵּר וְשֶׁמָּא תָּמוּת. וְאֶלָּא קַשְׁיָא הָךְ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a difficulty: **Is that so? But didn’t Rabba bar Shmuel teach: You cannot say** in the case **of his mother-in-law, and his mother-in-law’s mother, and his father-in-law’s mother that they were found to be an *aylonit* or performed refusal, as they already gave birth.** This indicates that a minor can give birth, as otherwise he should have stated: As they are already mature. **Rather, actually,** the original version of the *baraita* is correct: **Lest she become pregnant and perhaps die. But this** is **difficult** with regard to the mishna, which indicates that this scenario is impossible.


###### Yevamot 12b:9
[Yevamot 12b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/12b:9)

אָמַר רַב סָפְרָא: בָּנִים הֲרֵי הֵם כְּסִימָנִים. וְאִית דְּאָמְרִי: בָּנִים עֲדִיפִי מִסִּימָנִים. לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ? דַּאֲפִילּוּ לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה דְּאָמַר עַד שֶׁיִּרְבֶּה הַשָּׁחוֹר, בְּבָנִים מוֹדֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Safra said: Children are equivalent to signs** of puberty. In other words, a girl who gives birth does not retain the legal status of a minor, as the very fact that she bore children is equivalent to a physical sign of maturity, usually in the form of pubic hairs. **And some say: Children are preferable to signs** of puberty. The Gemara asks: **What is the practical difference** that arises from the question of whether bearing children is equivalent or preferable to signs of maturity? The Gemara answers: The difference is **that even according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who said** that a minor may perform refusal even after she develops two pubic hairs, **until the black** hairs of her genitals **are more plentiful** than the hairless skin, in the case **of children he concedes** that she is considered mature and may not perform refusal.