## Yevamot Daf 24a

###### Yevamot 24a:1
[Yevamot 24a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:1)

הָתָם, אִי לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יֵשׁ זִיקָה — יֵשׁ זִיקָה, וְאִי לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אָסוּר לְבַטֵּל מִצְוַת יְבָמִין — אָסוּר לְבַטֵּל מִצְוַת יְבָמִין. הָכָא — כׇּל חַד וְחַד אֵימוֹר דִּידֵיהּ קָא מִתְרַמְיָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There,** in that mishna, **if** it is **according to the one who said** that the levirate **bond is substantial,** then **there is a bond** in that case, as two sisters were certainly married to the brothers and require levirate marriage. **And if** it is **according to the one who said that it is prohibited to nullify the levirate mitzva** through marrying the sister of the *yevama*, then the explanation of that mishna is that **it is prohibited to nullify the levirate mitzva** and for this reason they must perform *ḥalitza* and may not enter into levirate marriage. However, **here,** in this mishna, there is uncertainty concerning the betrothal such that with regard to **each one** of the brothers, one could **say that** possibly he **encountered his own** *yevama*. Perhaps each brother took his own brother’s wife in levirate marriage, and for this reason the Sages did not issue a decree.


###### Yevamot 24a:2
[Yevamot 24a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:2)

קָדְמוּ וְכָנְסוּ אֵין מוֹצִיאִין כּוּ׳. תָּנֵי שֵׁילָא: וַאֲפִילּוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם כֹּהֲנִים. מַאי טַעְמָא — חֲלוּצָה דְּרַבָּנַן הִיא, וְסָפֵק חֲלוּצָה לָא גְּזַרוּ בְּהוּ רַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states that if **they married** their wives **before** consulting the court, the **court does not remove them** from the marriage. **Sheila teaches** a *baraita* that clarifies the mishna: **And** this is the case **even** if **both of** the brothers were **priests.** A woman who performed *ḥalitza* is normally forbidden to a priest, yet in this case, although the brother of the other man performed *ḥalitza*, they are not required to divorce. **What is the reason** for this *halakha*? It is as follows: **A *ḥalutza* is** forbidden to a priest by **rabbinic law** because her status is similar to that of a divorcée, who is forbidden to a priest by Torah law. **And** in a case of **uncertainty** as to whether she is a ***ḥalutza*,** since it may not have been her *yavam* who performed the ceremony, **the Sages did not issue a decree.**


###### Yevamot 24a:3
[Yevamot 24a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:3)

וַחֲלוּצָה דְּרַבָּנַן הִיא? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״גְּרוּשָׁה״, אֵין לִי אֶלָּא גְּרוּשָׁה, חֲלוּצָה מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאִשָּׁה״! מִדְּרַבָּנַן הוּא, וּקְרָא אַסְמַכְתָּא בְּעָלְמָא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And is** the prohibition against a ***ḥalutza*** marrying a priest really **by rabbinic** law**? But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: “They shall not take a woman that is a harlot, or profaned; neither shall they take a woman **divorced** from her husband; for he is holy unto his God” (Leviticus 21:7). **I have** derived **only a divorcée; from where** do I derive that a priest may not marry **a *ḥalutza*? The verse states:** “Neither shall they take **a woman.”** The repetition of the word “woman” extends the *halakha* to include a *ḥalutza*. The Gemara answers: **This** prohibition **is by rabbinic** law, **and the verse is a mere support.**


###### Yevamot 24a:4
[Yevamot 24a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:4)

**מַתְנִי׳** מִצְוָה בַּגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֵּם, וְאִם קָדַם הַקָּטָן — זָכָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **It is a mitzva for the eldest to consummate the levirate marriage,** i.e., the eldest takes precedence over the other brothers, though they too are obligated. **But if the younger** brother consummated the levirate marriage **first, he acquires** the *yevama* as his wife.


###### Yevamot 24a:5
[Yevamot 24a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:5)

**גְּמָ׳** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְהָיָה הַבְּכוֹר״ — מִיכָּן שֶׁמִּצְוָה בַּגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֵּם. ״אֲשֶׁר תֵּלֵד״ — פְּרָט לְאַיְלוֹנִית, שֶׁאֵין יוֹלֶדֶת. ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו״ — לְנַחֲלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **The Sages taught** the following interpretation of the verse: **“And it shall be that the firstborn** that she bears shall be established in the name of his dead brother and his name will not be blotted out of Israel” (Deuteronomy 25:6). **From here** the Sages derive **that the mitzva to consummate the levirate marriage is upon the eldest.** The next phrase: **“That she bears,”** is interpreted **to exclude** levirate marriage in the case of a widow who is **an *aylonit*, who cannot bear children.** From the next phrase: **“Shall be established in the name of his dead brother,”** it is derived that the same brother who performs the mitzva of levirate marriage is established in his brother’s name with regard **to inheritance,** i.e., he inherits his brother’s property.


###### Yevamot 24a:6
[Yevamot 24a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:6)

אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לְנַחֲלָה, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם: יוֹסֵף — קוֹרִין אוֹתוֹ יוֹסֵף, יוֹחָנָן — קוֹרִין אוֹתוֹ יוֹחָנָן. נֶאֱמַר כָּאן ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו״, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן: ״עַל שֵׁם אֲחֵיהֶם יִקָּרְאוּ בְּנַחֲלָתָם״, מָה שֵׁם הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן — נַחֲלָה, אַף שֵׁם הָאָמוּר כָּאן — לְנַחֲלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues and asks: Do **you say** that he succeeds in the name of his brother **for inheritance, or** perhaps **it is only to** inherit **his name?** If, e.g., the deceased brother was named **Yosef, they** must **call** the son born from levirate marriage **Yosef,** or if his name was **Yoḥanan,** then **they** must **call him Yoḥanan.** The *baraita* answers: **It is stated here: “He shall succeed in the name of his brother,” and it is stated there: “They shall be called after the name of their brothers in their inheritance”** (Genesis 48:6). **Just as** the word **“name” stated there** in Genesis is referring explicitly to **inheritance, so too,** the word **“name” stated here** in Leviticus means with regard **to inheritance.**


###### Yevamot 24a:7
[Yevamot 24a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:7)

״וְלֹא יִמָּחֶה שְׁמוֹ״ — פְּרָט לְסָרִיס שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ מָחוּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues to expound the next phrase of the verse: **“And his name will not be blotted out** of Israel” (Deuteronomy 25:6). This **excludes** the case where the deceased was **a eunuch, as his name is** already **blotted out,** since it is impossible for him to have children.


###### Yevamot 24a:8
[Yevamot 24a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:8)

אָמַר רָבָא: אַף עַל גַּב דִּבְכׇל הַתּוֹרָה כּוּלָּהּ אֵין מִקְרָא יוֹצֵא מִידֵי פְשׁוּטוֹ — הָכָא אֲתַאי גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה אַפֵּיקְתֵּיהּ מִפְּשָׁטֵיהּ לִגְמָרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Even though in the entire Torah a verse does not depart from its literal meaning,** and even if the Sages offer a homiletical interpretation of the verses, the literal meaning remains intact, **here the verbal analogy** teaching that the word “name” is referring to inheritance **comes to remove** the verse **from its literal meaning altogether.**


###### Yevamot 24a:9
[Yevamot 24a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:9)

וְאִי לָאו גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא ״שֵׁם״ — שֵׁם מַמָּשׁ? לְמַאן קָמַזְהַר רַחֲמָנָא? לְיָבָם — ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיךָ״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אִי לְבֵי דִינָא — ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אֲחִי אָבִיו״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Were it not for the verbal analogy, would I have said** that the meaning of the word **“name” is the actual name?** The verse would be incomprehensible according to the literal reading. **Whom is the Merciful One instructing** in this verse? To whom does the possessive pronoun in the phrase “his brother” apply? If He is speaking **to the *yavam*, He should have** stated: **Shall succeed in the name of your dead brother. And if** the verse is instructing **the court** about the *halakha* in general, **it should have** said: **Shall succeed in the name of his father’s brother.**


###### Yevamot 24a:10
[Yevamot 24a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:10)

וְדִלְמָא הָכִי קָאָמַר לְהוּ רַחֲמָנָא לְבֵית דִּין: אֱמַרוּ לֵיהּ לְיָבָם ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו״. אֶלָּא אֲתַאי גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה אַפֵּיקְתֵּיהּ לִגְמָרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this question: **And perhaps this is what the Merciful One is saying to** the **court: Say to the *yavam*** that the child born to him **shall be established in the name of his brother.** Were it not for the verbal analogy, the verse could have been understood according to its literal meaning. **Rather, the verbal analogy comes to remove it** from its literal meaning **altogether.**


###### Yevamot 24a:11
[Yevamot 24a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:11)

הַשְׁתָּא דְּאָמְרַתְּ קְרָא בְּגָדוֹל כְּתִיב, אֵימָא: בְּכוֹר — לְיַיבֵּם, פָּשׁוּט — לָא לְיַיבֵּם!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges the *baraita*: **Now that you say that the verse:** “And it shall be that the firstborn that she bears” **is written** in reference to **the eldest** brother, **say** that **the firstborn** brother **consummates the levirate marriage** but that **an ordinary** brother, i.e., not the firstborn, **may not consummate the levirate marriage,** and that if the firstborn son is unable to enter into levirate marriage or is no longer alive, no one else may perform the mitzva.


###### Yevamot 24a:12
[Yevamot 24a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:12)

אִם כֵּן, אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּעוֹלָמוֹ דְּמִיעֵט רַחֲמָנָא — לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **If so** that the mitzva of levirate marriage applies only to the firstborn, then in the case of **a wife of a brother with whom he did not coexist,** which **the Merciful One excluded** by the verse: “If brothers dwell together,” **why do I** need such an exclusion? If only the firstborn is obligated to perform levirate marriage, then there is no need to separately exclude the case of a wife of one’s brother with whom one did not coexist, because by definition one in that position cannot be the firstborn.


###### Yevamot 24a:13
[Yevamot 24a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:13)

פָּרֵיךְ רַב אַחָא: וְאֵימָא לְמַעוֹטֵי בּוּכְרָא דְאִמָּא! הָהוּא לָא מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ — דְּיִבּוּם בְּנַחֲלָה תְּלָה רַחֲמָנָא, וְנַחֲלָה מִן הָאָב וְלֹא מִן הָאֵם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa refutes** the Gemara’s answer: **But say that** the verse comes **to exclude** the case of a brother with whom one did not coexist when one is nevertheless **the firstborn of the mother,** e.g., if the father had two wives. The Gemara rejects this: **You cannot say that, as the Merciful One made levirate marriage dependent upon inheritance, and inheritance** comes **from the father and not from the mother.**


###### Yevamot 24a:14
[Yevamot 24a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:14)

וְאֵימָא: כִּי אִיכָּא בְּכוֹר תִּתְקַיֵּים מִצְוַת יִבּוּם, כִּי לֵיכָּא בְּכוֹר לֹא תִּתְקַיֵּים מִצְוַת יִבּוּם! אָמַר קְרָא: ״וּמֵת אַחַד מֵהֶם״, מִי לָא עָסְקִינַן דְּמִית בְּכוֹר, וְאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא: לְיַיבֵּם קָטָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara again challenges the *baraita*: **Then say** that **when there is a firstborn the mitzva of levirate marriage can be fulfilled** by any of the brothers, **but that when there is no firstborn,** e.g., if he had already died, **the mitzva of levirate marriage may not be fulfilled** by any of the younger brothers. The Gemara answers: **The verse states: “And one of them dies”** (Deuteronomy 25:5), without specifying which brother dies. **Are we not dealing** even **with** the case **where the firstborn died, and** yet **the Merciful One states** that **the younger** brother **should consummate the levirate marriage?**


###### Yevamot 24a:15
[Yevamot 24a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:15)

וְאֵימָא דְּמִית קָטָן, וְאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא לְיַיבֵּם בְּכוֹר? הָא מִיעֵט רַחֲמָנָא אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְּעוֹלָמוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara refutes this answer: **Say that** the case in the Torah is referring to when **the younger** brother **died, and** only then **the Merciful One states that the firstborn must consummate the levirate marriage.** The Gemara answers: **Didn’t the Merciful One** explicitly **exclude the wife of a brother with whom he did not coexist,** which can apply only to a brother who was not the firstborn?


###### Yevamot 24a:16
[Yevamot 24a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:16)

וְאֵימָא: כִּי לֵיכָּא בְּכוֹר, קְדַם קָטָן — זְכָה. וְאִי אִיכָּא בְּכוֹר, קְדַם קָטָן — לָא זְכָה! אָמַר קְרָא: ״כִּי יֵשְׁבוּ אַחִים יַחְדָּו״ — הוּקְּשָׁה יְשִׁיבַת אַחִים זֶה לָזֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges the *halakha*: **Say** that **when there is no firstborn** brother, if **a younger** brother **went ahead** and consummated the levirate marriage, then **he acquires** his *yevama* as a wife. **But if there is a firstborn,** and **the younger** brother **went ahead** and performed levirate marriage first, then **he does not acquire** his *yevama* as a wife, because the Torah specifies that the firstborn brother must perform the mitzva. The Gemara rejects this: **The verse states: “If brothers dwell together”** (Deuteronomy 25:5), implying that **the brothers’ dwellings were equated one with the other,** and all the brothers are equally obligated in this mitzva.


###### Yevamot 24a:17
[Yevamot 24a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:17)

וְאֵימָא: כִּי אִיכָּא בְּכוֹר — לֶיהְדַּר אַגָּדוֹל. כִּי לֵיכָּא בְּכוֹר — אֵין חוֹזְרִין אֵצֶל גָּדוֹל! אַלְּמָה תָּנֵי אַבָּיֵי קַשִּׁישָׁא: מִצְוָה בַּגָּדוֹל לְיַיבֵּם, לֹא רָצָה — הוֹלְכִים אֵצֶל אָחִיו הַקָּטָן, לֹא רָצָה — חוֹזְרִין אֵצֶל גָּדוֹל!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges the *halakha* again: **Then say: When there is a firstborn, let** the mitzva **return to the eldest** brother if the other brothers refuse to perform levirate marriage. But **when there is no firstborn,** the court **does not return to the eldest,** as the mitzva primarily applies specifically to the firstborn, and if there is no firstborn, none of the brothers take precedence. **Why did Abaye the Elder teach: It is a mitzva for the eldest** of the brothers **to consummate the levirate marriage? If** the eldest **did not wish** to do so, then the court **goes to his younger brother.** If **he** also **did not wish** to do so, the court **returns** again **to the eldest.** This implies that the eldest, even if he is not the firstborn, has a greater mitzva than the younger brothers.


###### Yevamot 24a:18
[Yevamot 24a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:18)

כִּבְכוֹר: מָה בְּכוֹר — בְּכוֹרָתוֹ גָּרְמָה לוֹ, אַף גָּדוֹל — גְּדוּלָּתוֹ גָּרְמָה לוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Since it is derived that the eldest brother takes precedence from the verse about the firstborn, then **just as** with regard to the firstborn, **his status as firstborn causes him** to take precedence, **so too,** with regard to **the eldest, his status as eldest causes him** to take precedence.


###### Yevamot 24a:19
[Yevamot 24a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:19)

וְאֵימָא: כִּי מְיַיבֵּם בְּכוֹר — לִישְׁקוֹל נַחֲלָה, כִּי מְיַיבֵּם פָּשׁוּט — לָא לִישְׁקוֹל נַחֲלָה. אָמַר קְרָא: ״יָקוּם עַל שֵׁם אָחִיו״, וַהֲרֵי קָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges the *halakha* again: **Then say** that **if the firstborn consummates the levirate marriage he receives** his deceased brother’s **inheritance,** but **if an ordinary brother consummates the levirate marriage he does not receive the inheritance.** The Gemara answers that **the verse states:** “The firstborn that she bears **shall be established in the name of his** dead **brother”** (Deuteronomy 25:6), **and** if the younger brother performs levirate marriage he has **established** his brother’s name and thereby earns the inheritance.


###### Yevamot 24a:20
[Yevamot 24a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/24a:20)

וְאֶלָּא ״בְּכוֹר״ דְּקַרְיֵיהּ רַחֲמָנָא,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** if there is no difference between the firstborn and the eldest, why does **the Merciful One call** the brother who enters levirate marriage the **firstborn?**