Study Yevamot folio 9B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
דפליגי רבי שמעון ורבנן, וקתני!
This is a case concerning which R' Shimon and the Rabbis disagree, and yet it is taught. If this halakha is taught, evidently this Mishnah does deal with matters subject to dispute. The Talmud answers that R' Shimon does not disagree with the Rabbis concerning all cases of a wife of a brother with whom he did not coexist. If this yavam was born after his brother’s death, he concedes that the obligation of levirate marriage does not apply to the newborn yavam. Rather, the yevama is prohibited to him as his brother’s wife.
בנולד ולבסוף ייבם — לא פליג רבי שמעון.
Furthermore, in a case where he was born and at the end, i.e., afterward, a second older brother entered into levirate marriage with the yevama and subsequently died as well, and the same woman again came before that same younger brother, R' Shimon did not disagree with the opinion of the Rabbis here either, as he admits that this woman is permanently forbidden to him because when he was born she was classified as the wife of a brother with whom he did not coexist.
והאמר רבי אושעיא: חלוק היה רבי שמעון אף בראשונה!
In fact, R' Shimon disagreed only with regard to a different case, when there were two brothers, one of whom died, and the second took the yevama in levirate marriage. If a third brother was subsequently born and afterward the second brother died, R' Shimon maintains that the youngest brother may enter into levirate marriage with this woman because she was never forbidden to him, as what occurred prior to his birth is of no relevance. Since even in R' Shimon’s opinion it is possible to find a case in which the wife of a brother with whom he did not coexist is forbidden to him, it can be claimed that the Mishnah is taught in accordance with all opinions. The Talmud raises a difficulty: But didn’t R' Oshaya say that R' Shimon disagreed even with regard to the first case? In other words, R' Shimon disagreed not only in the case of a woman who entered into levirate marriage before the young brother was born, but even if the young brother was born before the initial levirate marriage took place.