💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Shulchan%20Arukh%2C%20Even… captured on 2024-05-10 at 13:39:11. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
158 ‎[1] Similar to that a woman is believed to say: "my husband died", [in order] that she may marry, so she is believed to say: "my husband died", [in order that] she may be married in a levirate marriage, and the yovom (brother who enters into a levirate marriage) enters into the inheritance on her word. But she is not believed to say: "my yovom died" [in order] that she marry to the market. And the man is not believed to say: "my brother died and I will enter into levirate marriage with his wife". Therefore, if she went with her husband and her yovom to a country of the sea, and she came and said: "my husband died and then my yovom died", or, "my yovom died and then my husband died", she is not believed. ‎[2] If she and her husband went overseas by themselves, and she came [back] and said "a *yavam* was given to me, and he died," whether she said "my husband died, and then my *yavam*," or whether she said "my *yavam* died, and then my husband died," she is believed. ‎[3] A single witness witness is trusted to testify that a *yevamah's* husband died, and she can enter levirate marriage based on his testimony. Or, [to testify] that her husband died, [permitting her] to marry [anyone from] the marketplace. Or to say "Your husband died, and afterward, your son died." And even a male slave, female slave, woman, Samaritan speaking off-the-cuff, or a witness [testifying to] what another witness said is trusted to testify that the *yavam* died, just as he is trusted regarding the death of the husband. And the rule for this testimony is the same as the rule for that testimony regarding witnesses who contradict each other about the death of the *yavam*, for all matters. Rem"a: And there are those who say that a single witness id not trusted to say that her *yavam* died, to permit her to [marry anyone in] the world. ‎[4] The five women who cannot testify for each other that [one's] husband died, similarly cannot testify that [one's] *yavam* died. ‎[5] Two sisters-in-law who came from a country [over]seas, this one saying her husband had died and the [other] saying her husband had died -- the [one] is forbidden because of the [other]'s husband and the [other] is forbidden because of the [first one]'s husband. [This is] because one's sister-in-law is not believed to testify for her that her brother-in-law died, as will be explained. [If] one of them had a witness that her husband had died, [then] the one who had a witness is forbidden because of her brother-in-law; the one had no [witness] is permitted, for the witness testified that her brother-in-law had died and she is believed to say her husband died. If the [one] had children and the [other] had no children -- and both had no witnesses -- the one who has no children is forbidden and the one who has children is permitted. ‎[6] If they had neither witnesses nor children, and a brother-in-law or brothers-in-law were present and effected levirate marriage with them and [then] died also without children and without further brothers, [then] they are barred from marrying an outsider as they were from the outset. But if these left children or divorced them with a bill [of divorce], they are permitted to marry an outsider.
Version: Sefaria Community Translation
Source: https://www.sefaria.org
License: CC0