## Yevamot Daf 35b

###### Yevamot 35b:1
[Yevamot 35b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:1)

**הַחוֹלֵץ** לִיבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — הוּא מוּתָּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא מוּתֶּרֶת בִּקְרוֹבָיו, וְלֹא פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** When a man who has a brother dies childless, his widow [*yevama*] and one of his brothers [*yavam*] may perform a ritual through which she is freed of her levirate bonds [*ḥalitza*]. It is then considered, with regard to forbidden relationships, as though they had been married and divorced. Therefore, he is forbidden to her relatives, and she to his. However, with regard to **one who performs *ḥalitza* with his *yevama* and** then **she is found** to have been **pregnant** at the time of the *ḥalitza* **and she gave birth, in the event that the offspring is viable,** the deceased husband has been survived by offspring and so there was never any levirate bond; consequently, the *ḥalitza* that was performed was entirely unnecessary and a meaningless act. As such, **he** remains **permitted to her relatives and she** remains **permitted to his relatives.** Furthermore, since the *ḥalitza* was meaningless, she is not afforded the status of a *ḥalutza*, i.e., a *yevama* who performed *ḥalitza*, a status akin to that of a divorcée. Therefore, the *ḥalitza* **does not disqualify her from** marrying into **the priesthood.**


###### Yevamot 35b:2
[Yevamot 35b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:2)

אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִּקְרוֹבָיו, וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **the offspring is not viable,** then it emerges that the *ḥalitza* was indeed necessary. Therefore, **he is forbidden** to engage in relations **with her relatives and she is forbidden** to engage in relations **with his relatives,** as though they had been married and divorced, **and** the *ḥalitza* **disqualifies her from** marrying into **the priesthood,** as she is afforded the status of a *ḥalutza*.


###### Yevamot 35b:3
[Yevamot 35b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:3)

הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְיָלְדָה, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — יוֹצִיא, וְחַיָּיבִין בְּקׇרְבָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **one who consummates** the levirate marriage with **his *yevama*,** i.e., he had intercourse with her under the assumption that there is a levirate bond and so there is a mitzva to do so, **and** then **she is found to** have been **pregnant** at the time of the intercourse **and she gave birth, in the event that the offspring is viable** the deceased brother has been survived by offspring and it is evident that there was never any levirate bond. In that case, the relations they had, rather than being a mitzva, were a violation of the prohibition against engaging in relations with one’s brother’s wife. Therefore, the *yavam* **must send** her **out,** i.e., they must separate, as she is forbidden to him as his brother’s wife, **and** to atone for the forbidden relations that they had, **they are** each **obligated** to bring a sin-**offering,** as is the *halakha* for all who inadvertently transgress a prohibition that, when performed intentionally, is punishable by *karet*.


###### Yevamot 35b:4
[Yevamot 35b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:4)

וְאִם אֵין וָלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — יְקַיֵּים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if the offspring is not viable,** and therefore there was in fact a levirate bond, **he may maintain** her as his wife since his intercourse with her was a valid consummation of levirate marriage.


###### Yevamot 35b:5
[Yevamot 35b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:5)

סָפֵק בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן, סָפֵק בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן — יוֹצִיא, וְהַוָּלָד כָּשֵׁר. וְחַיָּיבִין בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If they consummated the levirate marriage and seven months later she gave birth, there is **uncertainty whether** the child **is nine** months **old,** i.e., counting from conception, and is the offspring **of the first** husband, and as such there was no levirate bond, or **whether** the child is only **seven** months **old** and is the offspring **of the latter** husband, i.e., the *yavam*, and not of the deceased, in which case there was a levirate bond. In that case, due to the possibility that she is forbidden to him as his brother’s wife, **he must send** her **out.** However, the lineage of **the child is unflawed,** since regardless of whether it was born of the first or second husband, there was no transgression involved in its conception. Furthermore, to atone for the possibility that they had forbidden relations **they are** both **obligated to bring a guilt-**offering for **uncertainty,** as is the *halakha* for anyone who is uncertain whether they inadvertently transgressed a prohibition that would require one to bring a sin-offering.


###### Yevamot 35b:6
[Yevamot 35b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:6)

**גְּמָ׳** אִיתְּמַר: הַחוֹלֵץ לִמְעוּבֶּרֶת וְהִפִּילָה, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה מִן הָאַחִין. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה מִן הָאַחִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** An amoraic dispute **was stated** with regard to **one who performs *ḥalitza* with a pregnant woman and she** later **miscarried.** Since she miscarried, she was certainly bound to the *yavam* by a levirate bond and may not marry anyone else; rather, she is obligated to consummate the levirate marriage or perform *ḥalitza*. The question is whether the *ḥalitza* that was performed while she was still pregnant is effective in releasing her from the levirate bond. **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: She does not require** another ***ḥalitza* from the brothers. Reish Lakish said: She requires** another ***ḥalitza* from the brothers.**


###### Yevamot 35b:7
[Yevamot 35b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:7)

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה מִן הָאַחִין, חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, וּבִיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה. וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה מִן הָאַחִין, חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, וּבִיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **Rabbi Yoḥanan said** that **she does not require** another ***ḥalitza* from the brothers** because he holds: ***Ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman** who later miscarries **is considered** effective ***ḥalitza*** in order to release her from the levirate bond. **And** similarly, **intercourse with a pregnant woman** who later miscarries **is considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse,** such that she and the *yavam* are considered to be married. **And Reish Lakish said she requires** another ***ḥalitza* from the brothers** because he holds: ***Ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman is not considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, and intercourse with a pregnant woman is not considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse.** Therefore, after she miscarries, another *ḥalitza* must be performed in order to release her from the levirate bond.


###### Yevamot 35b:8
[Yevamot 35b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:8)

בְּמַאי קָמִפַּלְגִי? אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא קְרָא, וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא סְבָרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**With regard to what** principle **do they disagree? If you wish, say** that they disagree over the interpretation of **a verse. And if you wish, say** that they disagree on a point of **logical reasoning.**


###### Yevamot 35b:9
[Yevamot 35b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:9)

אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא סְבָרָא, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן סָבַר: אִם יָבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ וְיֹאמַר דְּהָא דְּאִיעַבַּרָא אַפּוֹלֵי מַפְּלָה, מִי לָאו בַּת חֲלִיצָה וְיִבּוּם הִיא? הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי תִּגַּלֵּי מִילְּתָא לְמַפְרֵעַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If you wish, say** that that they disagree over a point of **logical reasoning** in that **Rabbi Yoḥanan holds: If Elijah** the prophet **were to come** at the moment of the *ḥalitza* **and say that this** woman **who is pregnant will miscarry, is she not eligible for *ḥalitza* or levirate marriage,** even though she is currently pregnant, since her husband died and will not be survived by offspring? **Now, too,** even though when the *ḥalitza* or levirate marriage is performed it is not known whether or not she will miscarry, **the matter will be revealed retroactively,** i.e., if she ultimately miscarries then it is apparent the *ḥalitza* or levirate marriage was always necessary and is therefore valid.


###### Yevamot 35b:10
[Yevamot 35b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:10)

וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: תִּגַּלֵּי מִילְּתָא לְמַפְרֵעַ לָא אָמְרִינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Reish Lakish said: We do not say** that **the matter will be revealed retroactively** in order to validate the levirate marriage or *ḥalitza*. Since at the time of the levirate marriage or *ḥalitza* it was still unknown whether she would miscarry, the act is considered premature and ineffective.


###### Yevamot 35b:11
[Yevamot 35b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:11)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא קְרָא, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן סָבַר: ״וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, וְהָא לֵית לֵיהּ. וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ סָבַר: ״וּבֵן אֵין לוֹ״ — עַיֵּין עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** that they disagree over the interpretation of **a verse** in that **Rabbi Yoḥanan holds: The Merciful One states** in the Torah: “If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies, **and he has no child”** (Deuteronomy 25:5), i.e., the obligation to consummate a levirate marriage or perform *ḥalitza* applies whenever a husband dies and is not survived by offspring. **And this** man, whose wife is currently pregnant, **does not have** any children who will survive him. Therefore, there is an obligation to consummate a levirate marriage or perform *ḥalitza*, and if done, they will be effective. **And Reish Lakish holds:** The phrase **“and he has no [*ein*] child”** is expounded by the Sages to teach that one should **inspect [*ayein*] him** carefully to determine if he is survived by offspring of any form, and currently he is in fact survived by the fetus. Therefore, there is currently no obligation to consummate a levirate marriage or perform *ḥalitza*, and consequently, even if done, they are ineffective.


###### Yevamot 35b:12
[Yevamot 35b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:12)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִּקְרוֹבָיו, וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי, דְּאָמֵינָא חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה — מִשּׁוּם הָכִי פָּסְלָה, אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ, דְּאָמְרַתְּ חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, אַמַּאי פָּסְלָה מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan raised an objection to** the opinion of **Reish Lakish** from the mishna: If *ḥalitza* was performed with a pregnant woman, and **the offspring is not viable,** then **he is forbidden to her relatives and she is forbidden to his relatives, and** the *ḥalitza* **disqualifies her from the priesthood.** Rabbi Yoḥanan explains the challenge: **Granted, according to my** opinion, **as I say** that ***ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman** who later miscarries **is considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, it is due to that** reason that the *ḥalitza* **disqualifies her** from the priesthood. **However, according to your** opinion, **as you say that *ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman is not considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, why** should the *ḥalitza* **disqualify her from the priesthood?** According to your opinion, shouldn’t the *ḥalitza* be entirely disregarded?


###### Yevamot 35b:13
[Yevamot 35b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:13)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִדְּרַבָּנַן, וּלְחוּמְרָא בְּעָלְמָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Reish Lakish **said to** Rabbi Yoḥanan: Indeed, by Torah law the *ḥalitza* is to be entirely disregarded. The mishna’s ruling that she is disqualified from the priesthood is **by rabbinic** decree **and is merely a stringency** lest people not realize that she was pregnant and think that a *ḥalutza* is permitted to marry a priest.


###### Yevamot 35b:14
[Yevamot 35b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:14)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — הוּא אָסוּר בִּקְרוֹבוֹתֶיהָ, וְהִיא אֲסוּרָה בִּקְרוֹבָיו, וּפְסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי, דְּאָמֵינָא חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי ״פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה״ — לְחוּמְרָא, וְלָא קָתָנֵי ״אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה מִן הָאַחִין״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** an alternate version of the dispute: **Reish Lakish raised an objection to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan** from the mishna: If *ḥalitza* was performed with a pregnant woman and **the offspring is not viable,** then **he is forbidden to her relatives and she is forbidden to his relatives, and** the *ḥalitza* **disqualifies her from the priesthood.** Reish Lakish explains the challenge: **Granted, according to my** opinion, **as I say that *ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman is not considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, this is** consistent with **that which is taught** in the mishna: The *ḥalitza* **disqualifies her from the priesthood,** which should be understood **as** a rabbinic **stringency, and** it is understandable that the mishna **does not teach: She does not require** another ***ḥalitza* from the brothers,** because according to my opinion, once she miscarries, she does indeed require another *ḥalitza* from the brothers.


###### Yevamot 35b:15
[Yevamot 35b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:15)

אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ, ״אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה חֲלִיצָה מִן הָאַחִין״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין הָכִי נָמֵי. וְאַיְּידֵי דִּתְנָא רֵישָׁא ״לֹא פְּסָלָהּ״ — תְּנָא [נָמֵי] סֵיפָא ״פְּסָלָהּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However, according to your** opinion that *ḥalitza* performed with a pregnant woman is an effective *ḥalitza*, the mishna **should have** taught the full extent of her permissible status, i.e., that **she does not** even **require** another ***ḥalitza* from the brothers** after she miscarries because the original *ḥalitza* was effective. Rabbi Yoḥanan **said to** Reish Lakish: **Yes, it is indeed so** that she does not require another *ḥalitza* from the brothers, **but since the first clause taught:** The *ḥalitza* **does not disqualify her** from the priesthood, therefore **the latter clause taught:** The *ḥalitza* **disqualifies her** from the priesthood, in order to directly contrast with the first clause rather than teach the greater novelty.


###### Yevamot 35b:16
[Yevamot 35b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:16)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — יְקַיֵּים. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי, דְּאָמֵינָא חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, וּבִיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי קָתָנֵי ״יְקַיֵּים״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan raised an objection to** the opinion of **Reish Lakish** from the mishna: If a *yavam* had intercourse with his *yevama*, who was pregnant, and **the offspring is not viable,** and therefore she was bound by a levirate bond, **he may maintain** her as his wife. Rabbi Yoḥanan explains the challenge: **Granted, according to my** opinion, **as I say *ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman is considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, and** similarly, **intercourse with a pregnant woman is considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse,** it is **due to that** reason that the mishna **teaches: He may maintain** her as his wife, because the levirate marriage was indeed valid.


###### Yevamot 35b:17
[Yevamot 35b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:17)

אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ, דְּאָמְרַתְּ חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, וּבִיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה, ״יַחְזוֹר וְיִבְעוֹל וִיקַיֵּים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! מַאי ״יְקַיֵּים״ — יַחְזוֹר וְיִבְעוֹל וִיקַיֵּים, דְּלָא סַגִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However, according to your** opinion, **as you said** that ***ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman is not considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, and intercourse with a pregnant woman is not considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse,** the mishna **should have** taught that **he should proceed to engage in intercourse** with her again in order to consummate the levirate marriage **and** only then **may he maintain** her as his wife. Reish Lakish responded: **What is** the intention of the mishna when it teaches: **He may maintain** her as his wife? Perforce it means that **he should proceed to engage in intercourse** again with her **and** then **he may maintain** her as his wife, **as** any other way **is insufficient** to release her from the levirate bond. Therefore, it is unnecessary for the mishna to teach this explicitly.


###### Yevamot 35b:18
[Yevamot 35b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:18)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אֵין הַוָּלָד שֶׁל קַיָּימָא — יְקַיֵּים. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי, דְּאָמֵינָא חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, וּבִיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה, הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי ״יְקַיֵּים״, ״יַחְזוֹר וְיִבְעוֹל וִיקַיֵּים״, דְּלָא סַגִּי בְּלָאו הָכִי,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** an alternate version of the dispute: **Reish Lakish raised an objection to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan** from the mishna: If a *yavam* had intercourse with his *yevama*, who was pregnant, and **the offspring is not viable,** and therefore she was bound by a levirate bond, **he may maintain** her as his wife. Reish Lakish explains how the mishna poses a challenge to Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion: **Granted, according to my** opinion, **as I say** that ***ḥalitza*** performed **with a pregnant woman is not considered** effective ***ḥalitza*, and intercourse with a pregnant woman is not considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse, this is** consistent with **that which is taught** in the mishna: **He may maintain** her as a wife, which perforce means **he should proceed to engage in intercourse** with her again **and** then **he may maintain** her as his wife, **as** any other way **is insufficient** to release her from the levirate bond **without this** additional intercourse.


###### Yevamot 35b:19
[Yevamot 35b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:19)

אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ — ״רָצָה יוֹצִיא, רָצָה יְקַיֵּים״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ! אִין הָכִי נָמֵי, אַיְּידֵי דִּתְנָא רֵישָׁא ״יוֹצִיא״, תְּנָא נָמֵי סֵיפָא ״יְקַיֵּים״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However, according to your** opinion that intercourse with a pregnant woman is considered a valid consummation of levirate marriage and therefore she is certainly considered to be his wife, the mishna **should have** taught: **If he wishes he may send** her **out,** through divorce, or **if he wishes he may maintain** her as a wife. Rabbi Yoḥanan replied: **Yes, it is indeed so, but since the first clause taught: He should send** her **out,** therefore **the latter clause taught: He may maintain** her as a wife, in order to directly contrast the first clause, rather than teach the full *halakha* with all its details.


###### Yevamot 35b:20
[Yevamot 35b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:20)

מֵיתִיבִי: הַכּוֹנֵס אֶת יְבִמְתּוֹ וְנִמְצֵאת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תִּנָּשֵׂא צָרָתָהּ, שֶׁמָּא יְהֵא וְלָד בֶּן קַיָּימָא. אַדְּרַבָּה, כִּי הָוֵי הַוָּלָד בֶּן קַיָּימָא, מִיפַּטְרָה צָרָתָהּ! אֶלָּא אֵימָא: שֶׁמָּא לֹא יְהֵא הַוָּלָד בֶּן קַיָּימָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan from a *baraita*: In the case of **one who consummates** the levirate marriage with **his *yevama*,** and he does so under the assumption that there is a levirate bond and he is obligated to consummate a levirate marriage with her, **and** then **she is found to** have been **pregnant** at the time of the intercourse, **a rival wife of this** *yevama* **may not marry, lest the offspring be viable.** Before explaining the challenge, the Gemara notes that the reasoning of the *baraita* appears flawed: **On the contrary, when the offspring is viable,** that is a reason for **her rival wife to be released** from the levirate bond, and she should be able to marry any man. **Rather,** emend the *baraita* and **say: Lest the offspring not be viable.**


###### Yevamot 35b:21
[Yevamot 35b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:21)

וְאִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ בִּיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה, אַמַּאי לֹא תִּנָּשֵׂא צָרָתָהּ? תִּיפְּטַר בְּבִיאָה שֶׁל חֲבֶירְתָּהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now explains how the *baraita* poses a challenge to Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion: **And if it enters your mind** to say that **intercourse with a pregnant woman is considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse, why should her rival wife not** be permitted to **marry?** Indeed, her rival wife **should be released** from the levirate bond **by** virtue **of the intercourse of her fellow** wife. If the deceased had several rival wives, all of them become bound by the levirate bond. However, it is sufficient for one of them to either consummate a levirate marriage or perform *ḥalitza* in order to release the rest of them from their bond and thereby permit them to marry any man.


###### Yevamot 35b:22
[Yevamot 35b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:22)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: בְּבִיאָה כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דְּלָא פָּטְרָה, כִּי פְּלִיגִי בַּחֲלִיצָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara defends Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion: **Abaye said** that the opinion ascribed to Rabbi Yoḥanan above is not an accurate portrayal of his opinion. Rather, **with regard to intercourse** with a *yevama* who is pregnant at the time, **everyone agrees that it does not release** her and her rival wives from the levirate bond; **when they disagree** it is only **with regard to** whether ***ḥalitza*** performed with a *yevama* who is pregnant at the time is effective in releasing her and her rival wives from the levirate bond.


###### Yevamot 35b:23
[Yevamot 35b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:23)

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן סָבַר: חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה, בִּיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת — לֹא שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ סָבַר: בִּיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת לֹא שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה, וַחֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Abaye continues to explain his opinion: **Rabbi Yoḥanan holds** that ***ḥalitza* with a pregnant woman is considered** effective ***ḥalitza*,** but **intercourse with a pregnant woman is not considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse** and therefore does not release her and her rival wives from the levirate bond. And **Reish Lakish holds** that **intercourse with a pregnant woman is not considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse, and *ḥalitza* with a pregnant woman is not considered** effective ***ḥalitza*.** Therefore, the *baraita* cited above does not pose a challenge, since all agree that intercourse with a pregnant woman will not free her or her rival wives from the levirate bond.


###### Yevamot 35b:24
[Yevamot 35b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35b:24)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא, מָה נַפְשָׁךְ: אִי בִּיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה — חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה. וְאִי בִּיאַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת לֹא שְׁמָהּ בִּיאָה — חֲלִיצַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת נָמֵי לֹא שְׁמָהּ חֲלִיצָה. דְּהָא קַיְימָא לַן,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said to him: Whichever way you** look at it, one cannot differentiate between the validity of consummating the levirate marriage through intercourse and the validity of *ḥalitza*. **If intercourse with a pregnant woman is considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse** because if she miscarries it is apparent that there was always an obligation to perform levirate marriage or *ḥalitza*, then perforce ***ḥalitza* with a pregnant woman** should also **be considered** effective ***ḥalitza*. And if intercourse with a pregnant woman is not considered** a valid consummation of levirate marriage through **intercourse** because in her currently pregnant state there is no obligation to perform levirate marriage or *ḥalitza*, then perforce ***ḥalitza* with a pregnant woman** should also **not be considered** effective ***ḥalitza*. As we maintain**