Children as enablers or blockers TB Yevamot 87

The Tosefot  ד"ה יש מותרות on TB Yevamot 84a comments that the ninth chapter of our massekhet is a succinct review of a previous discussed halakhot. Such is the case of the last Mishna in our chapter on today’s daf TB Yevamot 87. Depending on the status of the father and if the father is deceased, the couple’s child can either enable his mother to eat terumah or ma’aser or prevent her from doing so.

“MISHNA: An Israelite woman married to a priest may partake of teruma. If the priest died and she has a child from him, she may continue to partake of teruma. If she subsequently married a Levite, she may no longer partake of teruma but she may partake of the first tithe on his account. If he, too, died and she had a child from him, she may continue to partake of tithe on account of the child. If she then married an Israelite, she may partake of neither teruma nor tithe. If her Israelite husband died and she had a child from him, she still may partake of neither teruma nor tithe.

“If her child from the Israelite also died, while her son from the Levite remained alive, she may partake of tithe on account of the Levite’s child. If her child from the Levite died, leaving her with a son from the priest, she may once again partake of teruma. If her child from the priest died as well, she may no longer partake of either teruma or tithe.

“The daughter of a priest married to an Israelite may not partake of teruma. If the Israelite died and she has a son from him, she may not partake of teruma as long as that son is alive. If she subsequently married a Levite she may partake of tithe. If he died, and she had a son from him, she may still partake of tithe. If she subsequently married a priest, she may partake of teruma. If the priest died and she had a son from him, she may partake of teruma.

“If her son from the priest also died, she may not partake of teruma, but she may partake of tithe, as she has a son from a Levite. If her son from the Levite died, she may no longer partake of tithe. If her son from the Israelite died, she returns to her father’s house and may once again partake of teruma. And with regard to this woman, it is stated: “And she is returned unto her father’s house, as in her youth; she may eat of her father’s bread” (Leviticus 22:13).” (Sefaria.org translation)

Our chapter ends discussing the difference between terumah and yibum when the child has died. When it comes to terumah we look at the original status of the woman. A deceased child will impact her status and her ability to eat terumah. When it comes to yibum we look at the status of the man. If the husband dies childless, his brother-in-law must either do yibum or halitzah. However if the couple had a child and this child predeceases his father, the wife is exempt from either yibum or halitzah.

I am not advocating that we return to the time when women were best second-class citizens or at worst objects. I’m just sharing discussion found on today’s daf. The Talmud is not the last word on the subject I women’s rights. Judith Hauptman in her conclusion of her book Rereading The Rabbis: A Woman’s Voice writes: “AS A TALMUDIST, I HAVE TRIED, throughout this book, to read the sources in as accurate a fashion as possible, applying to them the comparative and contextual analytical techniques described in the Introduction. As a feminist, I have tried to ferret out from these texts the thinking about women, their social status, their relationship to men, and the impact of rabbinic law on them. In addition, I have tried to point out the flaws in the two reigning theories, namely, that the rabbis—in grossly oversimplified terms—either hated women or else loved and respected them. The situation, to my mind, is much more complicated: On the one hand, the rabbis operated in a patriarchal framework and continued to treat women as secondary to men; on the other, they instituted many significant changes to benefit women. Although at any given moment in time Jewish law assigns women fewer rights and lower status than men, not always treating them as well as surrounding cultures, when we trace developments in Jewish law over time we see distinct movement, in a wide variety of legal and social institutions, from lesser status for women to greater.” (https://www.sefaria.org/Rereading_the_Rabbis%3B_A_Woman's_Voice%2C_Conclusion.2?ven=Rereading_The_Rabbis:_A_Woman%27s_Voice._By_Judith_Hauptman&lang=bi)

 Further study is definitely required.