Yevamot 42b — the Talmud in English

She is destined to give birth to a viable child, and will need to nurse him. Therefore the Sages prohibited her from marrying immediately after her husband's death—and if she marries immediately, without waiting, there is concern

perhaps she became pregnant

from her husband during the period of nursing,

and

then

it will spoil her milk,

the milk will be spoiled and the infant will not want to nurse from it,

and it will kill him,

with the result that she will kill her son through starvation.

And we challenge this:

If so,

with regard to his nurse

as well

a man should likewise be prohibited from having relations with her throughout the entire period of her nursing, lest she become pregnant from him, and the infant have no milk to nurse, and die!

And we answer: The infant

is his,

and if his mother's milk ceases because of her pregnancy, he will not die, since his mother

will mash food for him,

she will feed him instead of nursing,

with eggs

and

milk,

and the infant will not die because of the absence of his mother's milk.

And we challenge this: If so, with regard to her infant

as well,

we have no need to be concerned lest the milk become spoiled. Since he will not die, because she

will mash food for him,

his mother will feed him

with eggs and milk!

And we answer: For her infant,

the husband will not give her

money to buy eggs and milk for him, because he is not his son.

And we challenge this:

Let her sue him

the woman

before the heirs

of her first husband, so that they will give her money to buy eggs and milk, since the obligation to provide the infant's sustenance rests upon his father's assets.

Abaye said: A woman is embarrassed to come to court

in order to claim from her husband's heirs sustenance of eggs and milk for the infant,

and

against her will she ends up

killing her son

because of hunger.

We learned in the Mishna that all must wait:

both virgins and non-virgins.

Both married women and betrothed women.

And we examined it:

Which are the virgins, and which are the betrothed women?

After all, the virgin and the betrothed woman are the same woman, for there cannot be a distinction between a virgin and a betrothed woman: how can there be a virgin yevama, unless she is betrothed and not married?

And furthermore,

which are the non-virgins, and which are the married women?

The non-virgin and the married woman are likewise the same woman, since anyone who has married is a non-virgin.

Rav Yehuda said,

Do not read: “both virgins and betrothed women, both non-virgins and married women,” which implies that the virgin and the betrothed woman, and likewise the non-virgin and the married woman, are two distinct things.

Rather,

this is what the tanna said:

the tanna:

Both virgins and non-virgins who were widowed or divorced.

And the tanna explains his words, for example, women who were widowed or divorced:

Whether from betrothal,

that is, virgins,

or from marriage,

that is, non-virgins.

And the Gemara brings an incident involving

Rabbi Elazar,

who

did not ascend

to the study hall for one day

to the beit midrash.

He found

Rabbi Elazar

Rav Asi.

He said to him,

Rabbi Elazar said to him:

What did the Sages say in the study hall

today?

He said to him,

Rav Asi said to him:

This is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei,

who permits all married women to become betrothed, and all betrothed women to marry, because there is no matter of ascertainment in their case.

Rabbi Elazar said to him:

By implication,

from Rabbi Yoḥanan's saying that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei, you learn

that an individual disagrees with him!

For the first tanna in the Mishna, who disagrees with Rabbi Yosei, has the view of an individual, since he holds that even a betrothed widow may not become betrothed, because they decreed concerning all women, even where there is no need for ascertainment.

And it is not the view of the Sages. For if so, the halakha would have been in accordance with them, as the majority.

Rav Asi said to him:

Yes!

Indeed, that is so. And there is proof for this from a beraita:

And it was taught:

A woman who was not with her husband for a long time before his death, and there is no concern that she became pregnant from him, for example:

If she was eager

and accustomed

to go to her father's house

for an extended period.

Or if she had anger in

her being in

her husband's house,

and she did not have relations with him.

Or if her husband was imprisoned in a prison.

Or if her husband was old or ill,

so that he was unable to have relations.

Or if she was ill,

and was unable to have relations.

Or if she miscarried

her fetus

after her husband's death.

Or if she was barren,

whose womb had been removed.

Or old, or a minor, or an aylonit,

who does not give birth.

Or if she is incapable of giving birth

because of illness or because of a drug that she took—

nevertheless she

must wait three months, these are the words of Rabbi Meir.

Since they decreed concerning one who is incapable of giving birth because of one who is capable of giving birth.

Rabbi Yehuda permits her to become betrothed and to marry immediately,

since they did not decree concerning one who is incapable of giving birth because of one who is capable of giving birth.

And it is demonstrated that the dispute whether they decreed concerning all women or only where there is a need for ascertainment is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda, and not a dispute between the many and an individual.

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: Rabbi Yoḥanan retracted

from what he had ruled, that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei.

Rav Yosef said: If he retracted,

if Rabbi Yoḥanan retracted, then

because of

the

Mishna of the vineyard

which was taught in the vineyard of Yavneh,

he retracted.

For it was taught: Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, said: I heard from the Sages in the vineyard in Yavneh:

All

of them,

including those who do not require ascertainment,

—

must wait three months!

Rabbi Yirmeya said to Rabbi Zerika: When you enter before Rabbi Abbahu, raise before him

whether

that is, is it possible that

Rabbi Yoḥanan said that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei?

But Rabbi Yoḥanan said

that

the halakha is in accordance with an unattributed Mishna.

And we learned

in an unattributed Mishna here:

All women may neither marry nor become betrothed until they have three months.

Both virgins and non-virgins!

He said to him: The one who raised this

the person who posed this contradiction to you

did not take care with his flour,

he was not concerned with grinding his words—that is, he speaks without paying attention to his words.

For our Mishna is not merely an unattributed Mishna, whose ruling is followed.

Rather, our Mishna

is an unattributed ruling followed by a dispute,

since at the end of the Mishna Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda disputed the matter.

And

in an unattributed ruling followed by a dispute,

the halakha does not follow the unattributed ruling!

As Rav Pappa said, and some say Rabbi Yoḥanan:

A dispute followed by an unattributed ruling—

the halakha follows the unattributed ruling.

An unattributed ruling followed by a dispute—

the halakha does not follow the unattributed ruling.

And our Mishna is an unattributed ruling followed by a dispute, and the halakha does not follow the unattributed ruling; there is therefore no difficulty from here concerning how Rabbi Yoḥanan ruled in accordance with Rabbi Yosei.

And the Gemara brings an incident:

Rabbi Abbahu was leaning

on

and walking

along

on the shoulders

while leaning on the shoulders

of Rabbi Naḥum his attendant,

who served him.

And Rabbi Naḥum was

collecting

and

going

along, and in this manner he was collecting

halakhot,

decisive rulings,

from him,

from Rabbi Abbahu.

Rabbi Naḥum asked him

Rabbi Abbahu:

A dispute followed by an unattributed ruling—

what

is the halakha?

He said to him: The halakha follows the unattributed ruling.

An unattributed ruling followed by a dispute—

what?

He said to him: The halakha does not follow the unattributed ruling.

An unattributed ruling in the Mishna, and a dispute in a beraita—

what?

He said to him: The halakha follows the unattributed ruling.

A dispute in the Mishna and an unattributed ruling in a beraita—

what?

He said to him: