## Sifrei Devarim Paragraph 215

###### Sifrei Devarim 215:1
[Sifrei Devarim 215:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:1)

(דברים כא טו) **כִּי תִהְיֶיןָ לְאִישׁ שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים** – שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם הֲוָיָה. יָצְאוּ שִׁפְחָה וְנָכְרִית שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם הֲוָיָה. מַשְׁמָע מוֹצִיא אֶת אֵלּוּ וּמוֹצִיא אֶת הַיְבָמָה וּמוֹצִיא אֶת הָאֲרוּסָה, שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן הֲוָיָה, [תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים**].

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
**Pisqa’ 215**¹¹
1. “Should a man have two *wives*” (Dt. 21:15)—
*wives* implies that
the marriages are legitimate.
Excluded are marriages to
a slave-girl or a gentile,
for such marriages are not legitimate.
Does this mean that
we exclude [the marriages of] these two?
Then let us also exclude
—from the category of *wife*—
the childless widow of a deceased brother,¹². She must marry her brother-in-law unless he releases her to marry another man. See Dt. 25:5-11, *Pisqa’* 291.
and a betrothed woman
[as yet unmarried, but who requires a document of divorce]?
The Teaching states:
“*Two* wives” (Dt. 21:15)—
[both marriages must be in good standing
in order to fall under the present rule of inheritance].

footnotes:
¹¹ H:225-226;JN2:116-118.
¹² Heb; yevamah


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:2
[Sifrei Devarim 215:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:2)

רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: בְּדֶרֶךְ אֶרֶץ הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, מַגִּיד שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לִהְיוֹת שׂוֹנֵא אוֹתָהּ וְאוֹהֵב אַחֶרֶת.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
R. Ishmael says:
The verse describes the way things are.
It explains that, in the end,
[the man taking a second wife]
will hate her and love another!


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:3
[Sifrei Devarim 215:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:3)

**וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ בָנִים**, לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַסָּפֵק בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
2. “And they bear him *children*” (Dt. 21:15)—
The [birth-dates] will resolve any doubts about
a nine-month child of the first marriage
or a seven-month child of the second marriage.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:4
[Sifrei Devarim 215:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:4)

אֵין לִי אֶלָּא הַיּוֹצֵא מִמְּקוֹם הַלֵּידָה. יוֹצֵא דֹפֶן מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ**, מִכָּל מָקוֹם.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
I might infer only that
the verse speaks of a child born from the birth canal.
On what basis do I know about
a child born from its mother’s side?
The Teaching states:
“And they *bear* him children” (Dt. 21:15)—
by *any* kind of birth.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:5
[Sifrei Devarim 215:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:5)

דָּבָר אַחֵר: **כִּי תִהְיֶיןָ לְאִישׁ שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים**, אֵין לִי אֶלָּא שֶׁהֵן שְׁתַּיִם. מִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ הֵן מְרֻבּוֹת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **נָשִׁים**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Another word:¹³ 215.1-2 is unevenly represented in textual witnesses. See F:247, n.12.
“Should a man have two wives” (Dt. 21:15).
I might infer only that
this rule applies when there are only two wives.
How do I know that it applies as well to more?
The Teaching states:
“*Wives*” (Dt. 21:15)—
[*at least* two].

footnotes:
¹³ The material from Pisqa’


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:6
[Sifrei Devarim 215:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:6)

אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵן מְרֻבּוֹת, וּמִקְצָתָן אֲהוּבוֹת וּמִקְצָתָן שְׂנוּאוֹת, מִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ כֻּלָּן אֲהוּבוֹת, כֻּלָּן שְׂנוּאוֹת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **אֲהוּבָה – הָאֲהוּבָה**, **שְׂנוּאָה – הַשְּׂנוּאָה**, רִבָּה הַכָּתוּב.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
I might infer only that
this rule applies when there are many wives,
but *some* of them are favored,
and *some* of them are rejected.
How do I know that it applies as well
when *all* of them are favored
or when *all* of them are rejected?
The Teaching states:
“*One* is favored” and “The *favored* one” (Dt. 21:15);
“*One* is rejected” and “The *rejected* one” (Dt. 21:15)—
this redundancy permits expansion of the rule
[to include many wives in varying degrees of favor].


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:7
[Sifrei Devarim 215:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:7)

אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵן מְרֻבּוֹת, וְכֻלָּן אֲהוּבוֹת אוֹ כֻלָּן שְׂנוּאוֹת, מִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ הֵן שְׁתַּיִם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים**.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
But I still might infer only that
this rule applies when there are *many* wives
*all* of whom are favored,
or *all* of whom are rejected.
How do I know that it applies as well
even when there are *two* wives?
The Teaching states:
*two wives* (Dt. 21:15).


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:8
[Sifrei Devarim 215:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:8)

אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן שֶׁהֵן **שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים**, **אַחַת אֲהוּבָה וְאַחַת שְׂנוּאָה**, מִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ אַחַת וְהִיא אֲהוּבָה, אֲפִלּוּ אַחַת וְהִיא שְׂנוּאָה? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **אֲהוּבָה** – **אֲהוּבָה**, **שְׂנוּאָה** – **שְׂנוּאָה**; רִבָּה הַכָּתוּב.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
But I still might infer only that
this rule applies when there are *two* wives,
*one* of whom is favored
and *one* of whom is rejected?
And how do I know that it applies as well
even if there is only *one* wife and she is favored,
or there is only *one* wife and she is rejected?
The Teaching states:
*Favored* and the *favored* (Dt. 21:15),
*rejected* and the *rejected*—
the redundancy of the verse permits expansion of the rule
[to include many wives
in various degrees of favor].


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:9
[Sifrei Devarim 215:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:9)

אֵיזוֹ הִיא **אֲהוּבָה**? אֲהוּבָה לִפְנֵי הַמָּקוֹם; **שְׂנוּאָה**? שְׂנוּאָה לִפְנֵי הַמָּקוֹם. יָכוֹל אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אֲנוּסָה וּמְפֻתָּה, שֶׁאֵינָן לוֹ כְּדֶרֶךְ כָּל הַנָּשִׁים, מִנַּיִן אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **שְׂנוּאָה** – **שְׂנוּאָה**; רִבָּה אֶת הָעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁהֵן בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
3. Which is the *favored*?
One who is favored in the eyes of
the All-Present [for her virtues].
And the *rejected*?
One who is rejected in the eyes of
The All-Present [for her vices].
Is it possible to say that
[at issue is the love of the All-Present]? I might infer only that
[at issue is] a woman who has been raped
or one who has been seduced,
since a husband’s way with her
is different than it is with other women.
On what basis do I know that
[marriages between] a widow and a High Priest,
or between a divorcee or a Shoe-loosener¹⁴. This is a widow whose levir has refused to marry her. She must perform the “Shoe-loosening rite” (*khalitzah*) before re-marrying. See *Pisqa’* 288-291 and a common Priest
are legitimate?
The Teaching states:
“Favored”¹⁵ and with the direct article, *ha’ahuvah;* literally, “beloved.” and “the favored” (Dt. 21:15);
“Rejected”¹⁶ and with the direct article, *hasenu’ah;* literally, “hated.” and “the rejected”—
this redundancy permits expansion of the rule
[to include the wives of Priests who
should not have married into priestly families].

footnotes:
¹⁴ Heb: khalutzah
¹⁵ Heb: ‘ahuvah
¹⁶ Heb: senu’ah


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:10
[Sifrei Devarim 215:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:10)

וַעֲדַיִן לֹא אֲרַבֶּה אֶת הָעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁחַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶן כָּרֵת בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **שְׂנוּאָה** – **שְׂנוּאָה**, רִבָּה אֶת הָעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁחַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶן כָּרֵת בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם; וַעֲדַיִן לֹא אֲרַבֶּה אֶת הָעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁחַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶן מִיתַת בֵּית דִּין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **שְׂנוּאָה** – **שְׂנוּאָה**, רִבָּה.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
4. Now, should I include proscribed marriages
between close relatives,
[for which the Torah itself provides no penalty,]
but not include marriages between close relatives
for which the penalty is heavenly excision?
The Teaching states:
“Rejected” and “the rejected” (Dt. 21:15)—
Does this redundancy permit expansion of the rule
to include marriages between close relatives
for which the penalty is *heavenly excision*,
but *not* include marriages between close relatives
for which the penalty is *judicial execution*?
The Teaching states:
“Rejected” and “the rejected” (Dt. 21:15)—
this redundancy permits expansion of the rule
[to include all marriages that are illegitimate].


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:11
[Sifrei Devarim 215:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:11)

יָכוֹל אֲפִלּוּ שִׁפְחָה, אֲפִלּוּ נָכְרִית? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **כִּי תִהְיֶיןָ לְאִישׁ**, מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בָּהֶן הֲוָיָה; יָצְאוּ אֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶן הֲוָיָה.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Is it possible to say, then, that
this rule applies even to a slave-girl, and even to a gentile?
The Teaching states:
“Should a man have two *wives*” (Dt. 21:15)—
this refers to a man who is legitimately married to the women.
But it excludes these two,
[namely, the slave-girl and the gentile,]
for their marriages are not legitimate.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:12
[Sifrei Devarim 215:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:12)

**וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ בָנִים**, מִי שֶׁהַוְּלָדוֹת שֶׁלּוֹ; יָצְאוּ אֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין הַוְּלָדוֹת שֶׁלּוֹ.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
5. “And they bear *him* children” (Dt. 21:15)—
the children must be his,
thereby excluding the children of these two,
who [under the rules of inheritance] are not considered his.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:13
[Sifrei Devarim 215:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:13)

דָּבָר אַחֵר: **וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ בָנִים** – הַבָּנִים בַּתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת, וְאֵין הַבָּנוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת. לְפִי שֶׁמָּצִינוּ שֶׁהַבָּנוֹת נִכְנָסוֹת לְנַחֲלָה תַּחַת הָאַחִים, לַחֲלוֹק בְּשָׁוֶה, יָכוֹל תְּהֵא בְּכוֹרָה נוֹהֶגֶת בָּהֶן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: **וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ בָנִים**, הַבָּנִים בַּתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת וְאֵין הַבָּנוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
Another word:
**“And they bear him *children*”**¹⁷ can mean “male children” or children of either sex. **(Dt. 21:15)—**
**sons are covered by this Teaching,**
**but daughters**¹⁸. **are *not* covered by this Teaching.**
Yet we find that
**daughters may claim their inheritance**
**in place of their dead brothers,**
**to take an equal share**
**[with relatives yet living]** ¹⁹ (Nu. 27:1-12).
Is it possible to say that
the right of the First-born son applies to them?
The Teaching states:
**“And they bear him *children*” (Dt. 21:15)—**
**sons are covered by this Teaching,**
**but daughters are not covered by this Teaching.**

footnotes:
¹⁷ Heb: banim,
¹⁸ Heb: banot
¹⁹ Cf. M. BB. 8:2.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:14
[Sifrei Devarim 215:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:14)

**וְהָיָה הַבֵּן** – וְלֹא טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
“Then, the *son*” (Dt. 21:15)—
but not a child of undetermined sex,²⁰
or one with male and female sexual organs²¹.

footnotes:
²⁰ Heb: tumtum.
²¹ Heb: androgynos.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:15
[Sifrei Devarim 215:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:15)

**הַבְּכוֹר** – וְלֹא הַסָּפֵק.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
“Born *first*” (Dt. 21:15)—
but not one [whose birth-order] is in doubt.


###### Sifrei Devarim 215:16
[Sifrei Devarim 215:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sifrei%20Devarim/r/215:16)

**לַשְּׂנִיאָה** – הַכָּתוּב מְבַשֶּׂרְךָ שֶׁבֵּן הַבְּכוֹר לַשְּׂנִיאָה.

**Trans. by Marty Jaffee, 2015:**
“Is *assigned to* the rejected wife” (Dt. 21:15)—
the verse announces to you that
the First-born son, [who is your principal heir,]
*belongs to* the rejected wife!