Yerushalmi Yevamot 1:6 ירושלמי יבמות א׳:ו׳

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai permit the co-wives to the brothers¹⁸⁶They dispute the validity of Mishnaiot 1–4. The schools of Hillel and Shammai existed for about 100 years in the first Century C. E. The Babli (17a) dates the public permission of the co-wives to the brothers to the short time of ascendancy of the House of Shammai shortly before the outbreak of the revolt against the Romans., but the House of Hillel forbid. If they took ḥalîṣah, the House of Shammai disqualify them for the priesthood¹⁸⁷A divorcee is forbidden to a Cohen (Lev. 21:7) and ḥalîṣah is the equivalent of a divorce (Mishnah 2:4). but the House of Hillel declare them qualified¹⁸⁸Since the marriage is impossible, so is the corresponding divorce. Lev. 21:7 prohibits the marriage of a Cohen with “a woman divorced from her husband”, but not a woman divorced from a non-husband.. If they entered levirate, the House of Shammai declare them qualified¹⁸⁹The children are legitimate. For the House of Hillel the children are bastards and excluded from endogamous marriage. but the House of Hillel as disqualified. Even though these forbid and those permit, these declare disqualified and those qualified, the House of Shammai did not refrain from marrying women from the House of Hillel nor the House of Hillel from the House of Shammai. Regarding all purities and impurities which these were declaring as pure and those as impure¹⁹⁰The differences in the interpretation of laws of purity are noted in the sixth order of the Mishnah., these did not refrain to process pure foods with the help of those¹⁹¹They lent one another pure vessels..

HALAKHAH: “The House of Shammai permit the co-wives to the brothers,” etc. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Yose in the name ofNehorai: The reason of the House of Shammai, “the outside wife of the deceased shall not belong to a strange man¹⁹²Deut. 25:5. The verse reads לֹא־תִהְיָה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. In the masoretic text, הַחוּצָה is adverbial לֹא־תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר and therefore is stressed on the penultimate syllable. The House of Shammai read an unlikely adjective לֹא־תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. Following masoretic grammar, הַחוּצָה then should be stressed on the last syllable. As E. Y. Kutscher has shown in his study of the Isaiah scroll, one may assume that in the last century of the Jewish state the stress was penultimate irrespective of meaning. Therefore, in Mishnaic times there may not have been an audible difference between the two versions.
The House of Shammai would translate: “The deceased man’s wife who is outside [the family of the levir] shall not be to a strange man,” implying that only the widow who already belongs to the levir’s family is free from the obligations of the levirate. The argument is quoted in the Babli, 13b.,” the “outer one” should not be another man’s. It turns out that the House of Shammai hold like those Samaritans who perform levirate with the betrothed but remove the married, for they explain “outside” as “the outer one¹⁹³Having received qiddushin but not yet finally married, she is not yet part of the family. This interpretation avoids any appearance of conflict between Lev. 18:16, declaring relations with the brother’s wife incestuous, and Deut. 25:5, requiring marriage to the brother’s wife.
In rabbinic Hebrew, ארוסה “the betrothed one”, is a seldom used synonym of מקודשת “who had received qiddushin”..” How do the House of Shammai¹⁹⁴The commentators want to replace “House of Shammai” by “Samaritans”, but it was stated before that the House of Shammai accepts the reading of the Samaritans while giving it another interpretation. confirm “when he has no child¹⁹⁵Deut. 25:5. You do not expect a man to have a child before marriage.”? Rebbi Jacob the Southerner said before Rebbi Yose, “when he has no child” from the married one, “the outer one shall not belong outside to a strange man.¹⁹⁶In this interpretation, the “outside” wife is the woman betrothed, legally a wife, but not married to live in her husband’s family. For them, a woman widowed after marriage is never subject to levirate, only one becoming a widow from betrothal to a childless man. This eliminates any conflict between Deut. 25:5 and Lev. 18:16. The practice of the Samaritans is confirmed in the Babli, Qiddušin 75b–76a.” He said to him, will not the Samaritans love you that you confirm their interpretations! Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar stated: I told the learned Samaritans, what did cause you to err? That you did not explain following Rebbi Neḥemiah, since it was stated in the name of Rebbi Neḥemiah: Anything which needs a ל as a prefix but did not get it, we give it a ה at the end, e. g., to the outside חוּצָה, to Se‘ir¹⁹⁷Gen. 33:16. שְׂעִירָה, to Succoth¹⁹⁸Gen. 33:17. סוּכּוֹתָה. They objected to Rebbi Neḥemiah, is it not written: “The wicked shall return to the pit לִשְׁאוֹלָה¹⁹⁹Ps. 9:18; one of the two signs of direction is superfluous..” Rabba bar Zabda said, to the lowest living space²⁰⁰Greek δίαιτα. in Sheol.

²⁰¹Tosephta 1:9–10, Babli 14b, 27a, 13b. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, look how this practice is widespread in Israel! If one upholds the words of the House of Shammai, the child is a bastard following the words of the House of Hillel²⁰²For them the co-wife is forbidden because of the incest prohibition.. If one upholds the words of the House of Hillel, the child is a bastard²⁰³In Tosephta and Babli: “damaged”; of questionable origin and unfit for the priesthood but not a bastard. The co-wife who married outside the husband’s family did breach a simple prohibition, Deut. 25:5, which only R. Aqiba declares to result in bastards. The baraita of the Yerushalmi must come from R. Aqiba’s school and cannot represent practice. following the words of the House of Shammai. Come and let us institute that the co-wife perform ḥalîṣah but not be admitted to levirate²⁰⁴Ḥalîṣah would let the co-wife marry outside the family for the House of Shammai and be ineffective for the House of Hillel.. It was stated: They did not manage to institute this before the time became unsuitable²⁰⁵The revolt of Bar Kokhba and its aftermath intervened.. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, if it were so, what would one have done with the earlier co-wives who married²⁰⁶After the restitution of the patriarchate, R. Simeon ben Gamliel refused to follow R. Joḥanan ben Nuri since he would characterize women who had married following the House of Shammai as lawbreakers. The Babli, 27a, asserts that later generations followed R. Joḥanan ben Nuri. This is not the position of the Yerushalmi.?

²⁰⁷Tosephta 1:10 (which proves that R. Eleazar ben Shamua, the Tanna, is the author); Babli 14a. Rebbi Eleazar said, even though the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai disagreed about co-wives, they agree that the child is not a bastard²⁰⁸The House of Shammai agree with the House of Hillel, against R. Aqiba and R. Joḥanan ben Nuri, that the child of a co-wife married according to the House of Hillel is not a bastard since even for the House of Shammai only a simple prohibition is involved. In the shortened version of the Babli it is easy to read into the text a one-sided version, implying that the children according to the House of Shammai are indeed bastards. It is difficult to read this into the Yerushalmi and the Tosephta text., since a bastard is only from a woman which is forbidden to [a man] by an incest prohibition and one is subject to extirpation for [sinning with] her²⁰⁹This extends even to incestuous relationships that are capital crimes since in absence of two witnesses to the forbidden act, when there can be no prosecution, the guilty pair still faces divine retribution in the form of extirpation.. Rebbi Tarphon said, I would love to have a daughter’s co-wife to marry her into priesthood²¹⁰In the Babli, “that I would marry her”, being a Cohen, to invalidate the position of the House of Shammai.. They asked Rebbi Joshua, what are children of a daughter’s co-wife? He said to them, you bring my head between two large mountains, between the words of the House of Shammai and those of the House of Hillel, that they should smash my brain. But I testify about the family ‘Anubai from Bet Ṣeba‘im and the family Neqipai from Bet Meqošeš²¹¹In the Tosephta (1:10): בית עלובי (עליבאי) מבית צבאים (צביים), בית קיפאי (קיפא) מבית מקושש. In the Babli (15b): משפחת בית צבועים מבן עכמאי ומשפחת בית קופאי מבן מקושש. The town of צבעים is mentioned in Neh. 11:34 as settled by the returnees from the tribe ofBenjamin; cf. B. Z. Luria, ערי הכהנים בימי בית שני, HUCA 44 (1973) א-יח. that they were sons of co-wives and their grandchildren were High Priests officiating on top of the altar²¹²Even though he did not want to express any opinion of the co-wives themselves, he was adamant that the children were untainted..

²¹³A different version of the entire paragraph in Babli, 16a. Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: It happened that the Sages visited Rebbi Dosa ben Hyrkanos²¹⁴A contemporary of Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai, already old at the time of the destruction of the Temple. He was almost blind in his old age. to ask him about the daughter’s co-wife. They said to him, are you the one who permits co-wives? He said to them, what did you hear? Dosa ben Hyrkanos? They said to him, ben Hyrkanos. He said to them, my brother Jonathan is exceedingly sharpminded²¹⁵Interpretation of Rashi. and of the students of the House of Shammai. Be careful with him, he has three hundred arguments about the daughter’s co-wife. They went to him. He sent and wrote to him²¹⁶R. Dosa to Jonathan., be careful because the Sages of Israel will visit you. They came and he placed them before him. He lectured²¹⁷About his 300 reasons to permit the co-wives to the brothers. but they did not understand, repeatedly. They started to get drowsy. He said to them, why are you getting drowsy? He started pelting them with pebbles. But some people said, they entered in one door and left in three²¹⁸Defeated.. He sent to say to him²¹⁹Jonathan to Dosa., why did you send to me, the people want to learn and you said to me, these are the Sages of Israel? They came to him²²⁰R. Dosa. and said to him, what do you say in the matter? He said, on this stone²²¹A stone used to crush spices. sat the prophet Ḥaggai and testified to three things: On the daughter’s co-wife that she can be married into priesthood²²²Following the House of Hillel., on Ammon and Moab that they tithe for the poor in a Sabbatical year²²³Mishnah Yadayim 3:3., and on proselytes of Palmyra that they are acceptable to marry into the congregation²²⁴They are reputedly the children of Gentiles from Jewish women. The statement objects to the opinion (Halakhah 7:6) that the child of a Gentile and a Jewish woman, who certainly has to be counted as Jewish, is a bastard. It is known from the Babli that the soldiers of Odenathus of Palmyra in his campaigns in Babylonia abducted Jewish women for their own use.. He said, lift my eyelids so I can see the Sages of Israel. He saw Rebbi Joshua and said to him: “To whom will one teach knowledge²²⁵Is. 28:9. “To whom will one teach knowledge, to whom impart understanding, to those weaned from milk, removed from the breasts.” This determines the start of school for outstanding scholars at age 2. As usual, the part of the verse not quoted is the one intended.?” I remember that his mother brought his crib to the Synagogue that his ears should cling to the words of the Torah. [He saw] Rebbi Aqiba, and said to him: “Lion cubs will be poor and hungry²²⁶Ps. 34:11: “Lion cubs will be poor and hungry, but those who seek the Lord will not lack any good thing.” R. Aqiba at the outset was an ignorant seeker of the Lord..” I know of him that he is a man strong in Torah. He saw Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and said to him: “I was a youth but became an elder²²⁷Ps. 37:25. A pun is intended; זָקַנְתִּי “I grew old” is turned into “I was appointed as an elder” at age 16, cf. Berakhot 4:1, Note 118..” I know of him that he is the tenth generation from Ezra and their eyes are similar. Rebbi Ḥanina from Sepphoris said, Rebbi Tarphon also was with them and he addressed him as he did Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah.

²²⁹A similar text in Babli Yebamot16a/b, Niddah 56b. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob said, one accepts proselytes from Kurds²³⁰From Corduene. Again, the problem exists only for those who hold that the child of a Gentile from a Jewish mother is a bastard. and Palmyrenians. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A Mishnah said that the proselytes from Palmyra are acceptable²³¹As marriage partners for Jews.. There, we have stated²³²Mishnah Niddah 7:6, 56b. If a stain is found on a garment, it might be from menstrual blood and therefore would be impure. As a precaution, any stain on a garment from Jewish sources is considered impure. Gentiles are unable to be impure in biblical law; their impurity is only rabbinical. Considering stains of Gentile origin to be impure would be superimposing one rabbinical decree over another, which is inadmissible.: “All stains coming from Petra are pure.” Therefore²³³This looks like a non sequitur. One has to admit the version, tentatively offered in the Babli, “from Petra and Palmyra”. This would either clear the inhabitants of Palmyra from any suspicion of Jewishness (Rashi’s opinion) or make it clear that the descendents of Jewish mothers were raised as Jews but that a Jewish woman would not give away an unwashed cloth (opinion of Tosaphot, R. Elieser from Tuchheim). Therefore, even following Tosaphot, a proselyte will never be a bastard., the proselytes from Palmyra are acceptable.

Text of the parallel Qiddušin4:1:
²³⁴A parallel to the paragraph in Babli Qiddušin 71b. The origin of the paragraph is in Qiddušin, the readings of the parallel from there seem to be slightly better. Since the canals of Antiquity all decayed after the Arab conquest, the names cannot be reconstructed. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa presented traditions: Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, one declares permissible and the other admits. He who declares permissible admits. But he who admits does not declare admissible²³⁵Anybody can become a proselyte. But only a person not descendent from Jews is sure not to be really Jewish and, according to the earlier opinion, a bastard. This problem is most urgent in Media, place of exile of the Ten Tribes, but also in Palmyra, part of Solomon’s empire.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Naḥman bar Jacob: Babylonia, as far as family pedigree is concerned, extends up to the zrvq²³⁶In the Babli: עזק. canal. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rav and Samuel, one said up to the zrvq canal, the other said up to the Wani canal. Rav Jehudah said, between the rivers is like Nahardea²³⁷The place of exile of King Jojachin and the nobles of Jerusalem, usually called “exile”. The rivers are Euphrates and Tigris. as far as family pedigree is concerned. Rebbi Ḥanina ben Beroqa in the name of Rav Jehudah: The people of Mesene²³⁸The province of the confluence of Tigris and Euphrates. are questionable only because of doubts of desecrated women²³⁹Women desecrated by a forbidden union with Cohanim: Divorcees, harlots, and daughters of such marriages.. The Cohanim amongst them did not care about divorcees. There²⁴⁰In Babylonia. There seems to be a pun involved if מתה and מישא both are pronounced mēsā. Neubauer (La Géographie du Talmud, Paris 1868, p. 325) thinks that the pun about Media connects the name of Media with the root דוה “to be unwell”., they called Mesene dead, Media sick, Elam and gbby dying. The maritime district²⁴¹It might be “the Western district”, but the West of Babylonia is desert. Neubauer conjectures that it might be the lake region of upper Mesopotamia. Since the meaning and location is unknown, the places cannot be determined. Purple-blue is the most costly of colors. is the purple-blue of Babylonia. Šny’, gbby’, and ṣrry²⁴²In the Babli, Qiddušin 72b, שוניא גוביא, ציצורא. are purple-blue of the maritime district.

²⁴³Tosephta 1:10, Babli 14b.“Even though the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel disagreed about co-wives²⁴⁴Discussed in the Mishnah here., and sisters²⁴⁵Mishnah 3:1, about two sisters married to two brothers who both die childless at the same time., and an old bill of divorce²⁴⁶The House of Hillel hold that if a man divorces his wife and then spends time with her under circumstances that permit sexual relations, the bill of divorce is invalidated and the woman needs a new one to marry again. The House of Shammai disagree and hold that if they sleep with one another they do it in intended promiscuity. What the Tosephta calls “an old bill of divorce”, Mishnah Giṭṭin 8:8 calls “he who divorces his wife and spends the night with her in a hostelry.”, and a woman doubtfully married²⁴⁷There are several cases of disagreement about the status of a woman in the Mishnah, and Rashi, R. Ḥananel, and S. Lieberman all have their own preferences. Probably this refers to all instances., and one who gives qiddushin in the value of a peruṭa,²⁴⁸Mishnah Qiddušin 1:1. In qiddushin, the man has to give the woman something of value to make the act legally binding. The value according to the House of Hillel must be at least a peruṭah, the smallest copper coin in Hasmonean times, long out of circulation in Mishnaic times. The House of Shammai require a denar, the larger Roman silver coin in the early Empire. i. e., he who divorces his wife and spends the night with her in a hostelry, and that a woman receives qiddushin for at least a denar or the value of a denar, the House of Shammai did not refrain from marrying women from the House of Hillel or the House of Hillel from the House of Shammai but they behave truthfully and in peace, as it is said²⁴⁹Zach. 8:19.: ‘Love truth and peace.’ ” Bastardy is between them and you say so? How is that? If a first man gives her qiddushin for a peruṭa and a second for a denar, in the opinion of the House of Shammai she is betrothed to the second and the child of the first is a bastard. In the opinion of the House of Hillel she is betrothed to the first and the child of the second is a bastard²⁵⁰In the Babli, the discussion is about the more realistic case of the daughter’s co-wife, where the child is a bastard for the House of Hillel in a levirate following the House of Shammai but only damaged (unfit for a Cohen) for the House of Shammai if married outside following the House of Hillel.. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The House of Shammai concede to the House of Hillel as a restriction²⁵¹They would never permit a new marriage if an existing one is valid for the House of Hillel. There remains the difference that, if it happened, the qiddushin of the second are invalid, the woman remains permitted to the first, but for the House of Shammai the court would have to force the second to write a bill of divorce.. In that case, the House of Shammai should marry women from the House of Hillel since they concede to them. But the House of Hillel should not marry women from the House of Shammai since they do not concede to them. Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They all followed the same practice²⁵²Following the House of Hillel.. If they followed the same practice, in this case we stated²⁵³Mishnah Miqwa’ot 4:5. If there is a trough in a rock too small to be a miqweh (40 seah), one may drill holes in the rock to lead the water to a miqweh. The House of Hillel require that the hole be slightly more than 2 fingers in diameter; the House of Shammai require that most of the bottom be removed. In a case in Jerusalem known as “trough of Jehu”, the House of Shammai actually did enlarge the hole even though practice should follow the House of Hillel.: “The House of Shammai sent and diminished it, since the House of Shammai says unless most of it is missing?” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the House of Shammai acted before the question came before the House of Hillel. After a question came before the House of Hillel, the House of Shammai were not touching it. Rebbi Abba Mari said, that is correct. Did we not state²⁵⁴It is unknown where this is stated.: “They declared impure all purities from before”, but not in the future. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rav and Samuel, one said both acted according to valid practice²⁵²Following the House of Hillel.; the other said, each party followed its own practice. Bastardy is between them and you say so? The Omnipresent watched and no case ever happened²⁵⁵The Babli, 14a, disagrees and holds that they informed one another in case the child of a family should not be married by a person of the other House. Since the ascendancy of the House of Shammai was so shortlived, the position of the Yerushalmi seems justified. One has to wonder what the rules were for marriages between Sadducees and Pharisees in late Temple times..

In this matter²⁵⁶As R. Moses Margalit points out, this kind of reference fits the style of the Yerushalmi. Those who want to delete כהדא ד are lead astray by the style of the Babli., it was stated²⁵⁷Tosephta Sukkah 2:3, Yebamot1:13, Idiut 2:3. Babli Eruvin 6b, Roš Haššanah 14b, Ḥulin 43b.: “About anybody who wants to take upon himself the stringencies both of the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel it was said²⁵⁸Eccl. 2:14.: ‘The silly one walks in darkness’. The leniencies of both of them, he is called wicked. Only either following the words of the House of Shammai in their leniencies and stringencies, or following the words of the House of Hillel in their leniencies and stringencies.” That is, before there came the disembodied voice²⁵⁹The collective agreement of the people, over the heads of the rabbinic establishment.. But after the disembodied voice was heard, “practice follows the House of Hillel forever²⁵⁷Tosephta Sukkah 2:3, Yebamot1:13, Idiut 2:3. Babli Eruvin 6b, Roš Haššanah 14b, Ḥulin 43b..” And any who transgresses the words of the House of Hillel is deserving of death²⁶⁰Cf. Mishnah Berakhot 1:7.. It was stated: There came the disembodied voice and said: Both of them are the words of the Living God, but practice follows the House of Hillel forever. Where was the disembodied voice heard? Rav Bebai in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The disembodied voice was heard at Yabneh²⁶¹Between the two wars against the Romans..