|  |  | Previous Folio / Yebamoth Directory / Tractate List / Navigate Site # Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Yebamoth ### Folio 100a since either of them is a peculiar creature; the slave, too, because owing to the terumah 1 he might be raised to the priesthood;2 the uncircumcised and the unclean also, owing to their repulsiveness; and the priest who married a woman unsuitable for him, as a penalty. But why should not a woman [be given a share of terumah]? — On this question R. Papa and R. Huna son of R. Joshua differ. One explains: Owing [to possible abuse by] a divorced woman;3 and the other explains: Owing to [the necessity of avoiding] privacy between the sexes.4 What is the practical difference between them? — The practical difference between them is the case of a threshing-floor that is near a town but is unfrequented by people,5 or one that is distant [from a town] but frequented by people.6 'In the case of all these, however, [terumah] may be sent to their houses, with the exception of the one who is levitically unclean and one who married a woman who is unsuitable for him'. [May terumah], then, be sent to the uncircumcised?7 What is the reason! [Is it] because he is a victim of circumstances? The man who is levitically unclean is also a victim of circumstances!8 — The force of circumstances in the former case is great;9 in the latter, the force is not so great.10 Our Rabbis taught: Neither to a slave nor to a woman may a share in terumah be given at the threshing-floors. In places, however, where a share is given. It is to be given to the woman first, and she is immediately dismissed. What can this mean?11 — It is this that was meant: The12 poor mans tithe which is distributed at home13 is to be given to the woman first.14 What is the reason? — That the degradation [of the woman may be avoided].15 Raba said: Formerly, when a man and a woman16 came before me for a legal decision, I used to dispose of the man's lawsuit first, because I thought a man is subject to the fulfilment of all the commandments;17 since, however, I heard this,18 I dispose of a woman's lawsuit first. Why? In order [to save her from] degradation.19 IF WHEN THEY GREW UP, THE INTERCHANGED CHILDREN etc. [It states] THEY EMANCIPATED. [Implying] only20 if they wished, but if they did not wish they need not [emancipate one another]! But why? Neither of them could marry either a bondwoman21 or a free woman!22 Raba replied: Read: Pressure is brought to bear upon them so that they emancipate one another. THE RESTRICTIONS … ARE IMPOSED UPON THEM. In what respect?23 — R. Papa replied: In respect of their meal-offering. A handful24 must be taken from it,25 as of a meal-offering of an Israelite, but it may not be eaten,26 as is the case with a meal-offering of the priests.27 But how [is one to proceed]? The handful is offered up separately and the remnants are also offered up separately. But [surely] there is to be applied here the Scriptural deduction that any offering a portion of which had been put on the fire of the altar28 is subject to the prohibition you shall not burn!29 — R. Judah son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi replied: They are burned as wood,30 in accordance with a ruling of R. Eleazar. For it was taught: R. Eleazar said, For it sweet savour31 you may not offer them;32 you may offer them, however, as mere30 wood.33 This is satisfactory according to R. Eleazar, what, however, can be said according to the Rabbis?34 — One proceeds in accordance with a ruling of R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon. For it was taught: R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon said: The handful is offered up separately and the remnants are scattered over the enclosure of the sacrificial ashes.35 And even the Rabbis differ from R. Eleazar only in respect of a priestly sinner's meal-offering which is suitable for offering up;36 but here,37 even the Rabbis agree.38 MISHNAH. IF A WOMAN DID NOT WAIT THREE MONTHS AFTER [SEPARATION39 FROM] HER HUSBAND, AND MARRIED AGAIN AND GAVE BIRTH [TO A SON], AND IT IS UNKNOWN WHETHER IT IS A NINE-MONTHS CHILD BY THE FIRST HUSBAND OR A SEVEN-MONTHS CHILD BY THE SECOND, IF SHE HAD OTHER SONS BY THE FIRST HUSBAND AND OTHER SONS BY THE SECOND, THESE MUST SUBMIT TO HALIZAH 40 BUT MAY NOT CONTRACT WITH HER LEVIRATE MARRIAGE.41 AND HE, IN RESPECT OF THEIR WIDOWS,42 LIKEWISE, SUBMITS TO HALIZAH 43 BUT MAY NOT CONTRACT LEVIRATE MARRIAGE.44 To Part b Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files Which he receives. As was explained supra. Who might, after her divorce when she is no more permitted to eat terumah. continue to collect it. Yihud, v. Glos. Cf. supra 86a. No preventive measure against (a) abuse by a divorced woman is here necessary, since the proximity of the threshing-floor to the town enables its owner to keep in touch with social events in the town. The precautions, however, against (b) privacy, owing to the loneliness of the floor, cannot be neglected. Cf. supra note 1 mutatis mutandis; (b) has to, but (a) need not be disregarded. Since he is not included in the exceptions. Cf. supra p. 683, n. 8. If the latter was not excluded why then was the former? The uncircumcised cannot help the infirmity of the constitution of the members of his family. It is not through any fault of his that he must remain uncircumcised (v. supra p. 683, n. 6). By the exercise of due care uncleanness might be avoided. In the first sentence it was stated that a woman receives no share; and in the following it is tacitly assumed that in certain places she does receive a share! Cf. BaH. Cur. edd. read, 'Where the poor man's tithe is distributed'. In town. Though privacy between the sexes need not be apprehended there. It is degrading for a woman to have to wait her turn in a crowd of men. With different law suits. While a woman is exempt from certain commandments. Hence it is the man that should receive precedence. The reason why a woman should be given her share of the poor man's tithe first. Cf. supra p. 684. n. 11. Lit., 'yes'. Owing to the priest. Since one of them is a slave. How, then, could they ever fulfil the religious duty of propagation which is incumbent upon all? Lit., for what law'. V. Lev. II, 2. Since he might be the Israelite. As he might also be the priest. V. Lev. VI, 16. As was the case here where the handful was offered up. Lev. II. Once the prescribed portion of an offering had been duly offered up on the altar the remnants of that offering may no longer be burned in the altar. Cf. Zeb 77a. How then could the remnants of the meal-offering be offered up when a portion of the offering (the handful) is also offered up. Not as an offering. Lev II, 12. V. supra note 13. Yoma 47b, Sot. 23a, Zeb. 76b, Men. 106b. Who do not permit the offering of the remnants on the altar even as wood. [H] Sot. 23a, Men. 74a. A place near the altar, where a certain portion of the ashes of the altar was deposited. In its entirety, as is the case with a priest's voluntary meal-offering. Where there is the possibility that it is not the offering of a priest at all. That the remnants are to be scattered in the enclosure of the ashes. V. Sot., Sonc ed., p. 116, notes. By her hushand's death or by divorce. From the widow of the son whose father is unknown, if he died childless. Since it is possible that they are only the maternal brothers of the deceased, whose widow is forbidden to them under the penalty of kareth. Lit., 'to them'. From their widows, if they died without issue. Cf. supra n. 8 mutatis mutandis. Tractate List / Glossary / / Bible Reference ### Yebamoth 100b IF HE1 HAD BROTHERS BY THE FIRST2 AND ALSO BROTHERS BY THE SECOND,2 BUT NOT BY THE SAME MOTHER, HE1 MAY EITHER SUBMIT TO HALIZAH OR CONTRACT THE LEVIRATE MARRIAGE,3 BUT AS FOR THEM, ONE4 SUBMITS TO HALIZAH 5 AND THE OTHER MAY [THEN] CONTRACT LEVIRATE MARRIAGE.6 IF ONE OF [THE TWO HUSBANDS] WAS AN ISRAELITE AND THE OTHER A PRIEST, HE7 MAY ONLY MARRY A WOMAN WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO MARRY A PRIEST.8 HE7 MAY NOT DEFILE HIMSELF FOR THE DEAD,8 BUT IF HE DID DEFILE HIMSELF HE DOES NOT SUFFER THE PENALTY OF FORTY STRIPES.9 HE MAY NOT EAT TERUMAH,9 BUT IF HE DID EAT HE NEED NOT PAY COMPENSATION EITHER FOR THE PRINCIPAL OR [FOR THE ADDITIONAL] FIFTH.10 HE DOES NOT RECEIVE A SHARE11 AT THE THRESHING-FLOOR, BUT HE MAY SELL [HIS OWN] TERUMAH 12 AND THE PROCEEDS ARE HIS.13 HE RECEIVES NO SHARE IN THE CONSECRATED THINGS OF THE TEMPLE,14 NO CONSECRATED THINGS ARE GIVEN TO HIM,15 BUT HE IS NOT DEPRIVED OF HIS OWN.13 HE IS EXEMPT FROM [GIVING TO ANY PRIEST] THE SHOULDER, THE CHEEKS AND THE MAW,16 WHILE HIS FIRSTLING MUST REMAIN IN THE PASTURE17 UNTIL IT CONTRACTS A BLEMISH.18 THE RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO PRIESTS AND THE RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO ISRAELITES ARE IMPOSED UPON HIM. IF THE TWO [HUSBANDS] WERE PRIESTS, HE7 MUST MOURN AS ONAN19 FOR THEM20 AND THEY MUST MOURN AS ONENIM21 FOR HIM,22 BUT HE MAY NOT DEFILE HIMSELF FOR THEM,23 NOR MAY THEY DEFILE THEMSELVES FOR HIM.23 HE MAY NOT INHERIT FROM THEM,24 BUT THEY MAY INHERIT FROM HIM.25 HE IS EXONERATED26 IF HE STRIKES OR CURSES27 THE ONE OR THE OTHER. HE GOES UP [TO SERVE] IN THE MISHMAR28 OF THE ONE AS WELL AS OF THE OTHER,29 BUT HE DOES NOT RECEIVE A SHARE [IN THE OFFERINGS].30 IF, HOWEVER BOTH SERVED IN THE SAME MISHMAR,28 HE RECEIVES A SINGLE PORTION.31 GEMARA. Only the halizah [must take place first]32 and the levirate marriage afterwards; the levirate marriage, however, must not take place first, since, thereby, one33 might infringe the prohibition against the marriage of a sister-in-law with a stranger.34 Samuel said: If ten priests stood together and one of them separated [from the company] and cohabited [with a feme sole]. the child [that may result from the union]35 is a shethuki.28 In what [respect is he] a shethuki? If it be suggested that he is silenced36 [when he claims a share] of his father's estate, [is not this, it may be retorted] self-evident? Do we know who is his father! — Rather,37 he is silenced [if he claims any] of the rights of priesthood.38 What is the reason? — Scripture stated, And it shall be unto him, and to his seed after him,39 it is, therefore, required that 'his seed' shall be traced to 'him',40 but this is not the case here.41 R. Papa demurred: If that is so in the case of Abraham where it is written, To be a God to thee and to thy seed after thee,42 what does the All Merciful exhort him thereby!43 — It is this that he said to him: Marry not an idolatress or a bondwoman so that your seed shall not be ascribed to her.44 An objection was raised: The first45 is fit to be a High Priest.46 But, surely, it is required that a priest's child shall be traced to his father,47 which is not the case here!48 — [The requirement that] a priest's child shall be traced to his father49 is a Rabbinical provision. while the Scriptural text is a mere prop;50 and it is only in respect of prostitution that the Rabbis have made their preventive measure; in respect of marriage, however, no such measure was enacted by them. But did the Rabbis introduce such a preventive measure in the case of prostitution? Surely we learned: IF A WOMAN DID NOT WAIT THREE MONTHS AFTER [SEPARATION FROM] HER HUSBAND, AND MARRIED AGAIN AND GAVE BIRTH [TO A SON]; now, what is meant by AFTER [SEPARATION FROM] HER HUSBAND? If it be suggested: AFTER the death OF HER HUSBAND, read the final clause: HE MUST MOURN AS ONAN FOR THEM AND THEY MUST MOURN AS ONENIM FOR HIM; one can well understand [the circumstances in which] HE MOURNS AS ONAN FOR THEM, such mourning being possible [even in the case] of marriage with the second [husband, on the occasion of the] collecting of the bones of the first.51 But how is it possible that they MOURN AS ONENIM FOR HIM, when the first husband is dead!52 If, however, [it be suggested that our Mishnah speaks] of a divorced woman, and that the meaning of AFTER [SEPARATION FROM] HER HUSBAND is AFTER the divorce OF HER HUSBAND, then read the final clause: HE MAY NOT DEFILE HIMSELF FOR THEM, NOR MAY THEY DEFILE THEMSELVES FOR HIM; now, one can understand that THEY MAY NOT DEFILE THEMSELVES FOR HIM as a restrictive measure, [since in respect of every one of them it may be assumed that] he is possibly not his son; but why MAY HE NOT DEFILE HIMSELF FOR THEM? Granted that he must not defile himself for the second;53 for the first, however, he should be allowed to defile himself in any case! For if he is his son, then he may justly defile himself for him; and if he is the son of the second54 he may legitimately defile himself for him since he is a halal!55 Consequently [our Mishnah must refer to a case] of prostitution,56 and the meaning of AFTER [SEPARATION FROM] HER HUSBAND must be, AFTER [SEPARATION FROM] THE MAN WHO IRREGULARLY COHABITED WITH HER;57 and yet it was stated in the final clause, HE MAY GO UP [TO SERVE] IN THE MISHMAR OF THE ONE AS WELL AS OF THE OTHER. This, then, presents an objection against the ruling of Samuel!58 — R. Shemaia replied: [Our Mishnah refers] to a minor who made a declaration of refusal.59 But is a minor60 capable of propagation? Surely R. Bebai recited before R. Nahman: Three categories of women may use an absorbent in their marital intercourse:61 A minor, an expectant mother, and a nursing wife. The minor,62 because she63 might become pregnant and, as a result, she might die. An expectant mother,62 because she63 might cause her foetus to degenerate into a sandal.64 A nursing wife,62 because she63 might have to wean her child [prematurely]65 and this would result in his death. And what is the age of such a minor?66 From the age of eleven years and one day until the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under,67 or over this age68 must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner. This is the opinion of R. Meir. The Sages, however, said: The one as well as the other carries on her marital intercourse in the usual manner, and mercy will be vouchsafed from heaven,69 for it is said in the Scriptures, The Lord preserveth the simple!70 — [The case of our Mishnah] is possible with a mistaken betrothal,71 and on the basis of a ruling of Rab Judah in the name of Samuel. For Rab Judah stated in the name of Samuel in the name of R. Ishmael: And she be not seized72 [only then73 is she] forbidden;74 if, however, she was seized75 she is permitted;74 there is, however, another kind of woman who is permitted74 even if she was not seized.76 And who is she? — A woman whose betrothal was a mistaken one,77 who may, even if her son sits riding on her shoulder, make a declaration of refusal [against her husband] and go away.78 - To Next Folio - Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files The son whose father is unknown. Husband of his mother. If there were no other surviving brothers. The widow is either his sister-in-law with whom levirate marriage is lawful, or a stranger with whom he may contract an ordinary marriage. Either a son of the first, or a son of the second husband. From the widow of the son whose father is unknown, if he died childless. Since the widow is either his sister-in-law and the levirate marriage with her is lawful, or she is a stranger and permitted to marry him because her brother-in-law had submitted to her halizah. The son whose father is unknown. It being possible that he is the son of the priest. Since it is possible that he is the son of the Israelite, Cf. also supra p. 681, n. 3. V. supra p. 681, n. 6 mutatis mutandis. In terumah. Separated from his own produce. V. supra p. 681, n. 9, mutatis mutandis. V. loc. cit. n. 10. This reading is that of MSS. and the separate editions of the Mishnah. Cur. edd., 'in the holy of holies'. V. supra p. 681, n. 11. Cf. Deut. XVIII, 3. V. supra p. 681, n. 9. V. loc. cit. n. 13. V. Glos. On the day of their death; since either of them might have been his father. Plur. of onan. Cf. supra n. 16 mutatis mutandis. Since, in the case of either of them, it is not certain that he is the son of the person concerned. V. Lev XXI, 2. The heirs of the one husband may refer him to those of the other while the heirs of the other may refer him back to the first, since in either case he has no proof that the deceased in question was his father. If he has no other heirs. As there is no one to dispute their claim, and since the claim of the one is of equal validity with that of the other, the inheritance is divided between the two groups of brothers. From the death penalty. V. Ex XXI. 15, 17 and cf. supra p. 687, n. 19. V. Glos. And the other priests of the mishmar have no right to prevent him. Each mishmar may send him to the others. Since one of the two is certainly his father. Where HE HAD BROTHERS IN THE FIRST AND … SECOND, BUT NOT BY THE SAME MOTHER … ONE SUBMITS TO HALIZAH AND THE OTHER MAY [THEN] CONTRACT LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. Should that brother not he the son of the father of the deceased. Lit., 'for he met a sister-in-law for the market'. Though, as his mother was feme sole, he is no bastard. Shethuki is derived from [H] which in Pi'el signifies 'to make silent'. Though he is undoubtedly a priest, since his father, whoever he may have been, was certainly one of the group of priests. He is not allowed to take part in the Temple service though eligible to marry a woman of pure stock. Num. XXV, 13, speaking of the priesthood. Only such a priest can transmit the rights of priesthood to his seed. Lit., 'and it is not'. Since the father of the shethuki is unknown he cannot transmit the rights of priesthood to him. Gen. XVII, 7. By the expression. Thy seed after thee, which is analogous to that of Num. XXV, 23. but, referring to Israelites and not to priests. could not bear the same exposition, The child of any such woman is ascribed to his mother and not to his father. Cf. Kid. 68b. Child born from a levirate marriage that took place within three months after the death of the deceased brother, when it is doubtful whether the child is the offspring of the deceased or of the levir. Supra 37a. Lit., 'that "his seed" shall be traced "to him"'. Cf. supra n. 7 end. To be eligible for the rights of priesthood. Not actual proof. For the purpose of re-burial. Whenever such collecting takes place, even many years after death, the son must on that day observe the laws relating to an onan (cf. Pes. 91b). Such mourning, therefore, is possible even after the marriage of his mother with her second husband. Having died, according to the present assumption, before the birth of the son. Owing to the possibility that he is the son of the first and, consequently, a legitimate priest who is forbidden to defile himself for the corpses of strangers. Who married his mother while she was a divorced woman. V. Glos. The child of a union between a priest and a divorced woman is disqualified for the priesthood and may defile himself for the dead. Where neither of the men had contracted legal marriage with her. Her son, since she has the status of feme sole, has also the status of a legitimate priest who must observe the laws of priestly sanctity, and must not, therefore, defile himself for either of the men. Death and divorce being excluded as factors in the separation of the woman from the first man, it is also possible that the son should he in the position of onan for them and that they should he onenim for him. [H]. The consonants [H] are the same as those of 'her husband', [H]. Who disqualified such a child for the priesthood. Cf. supra p. 688, n. 15. V. Glos. s.v. mi'un. Such a minor requires no letter of divorce. It is, therefore, possible for her to be separated from her first husband and yet remain permitted to marry a priest. Her son would consequently be subject to the restrictions spoken of in our Mishnah. Cf. supra p. 690. n. 6. Lit., 'a female who refused'. To prevent conception. Is permitted the use of an absorbent. Were she not to use one. A flat, fish-shaped abortion. V. n. on [H] supra 12b. Owing to her second conception. Who, though capable of conception, is exposed to the danger of death. When no conception is possible. When no fatal consequences are involved in conception or birth. Divine mercy will safeguard her from danger. Ps. CXVI, 6, those who are incapable of preserving themselves. Tosef. Nid. II. supra 12b q. v. notes. Now, since a minor may not make a declaration of refusal unless she is under the age of twelve years and one day, and since a minor under that age either dies if she conceives, or does not conceive at all if she is younger, how could our Mishnah speak of a minor who made a declaration of refusal and who also had a child? When a condition which remained unfulfilled was attached to it. In such a case, the woman may leave her husband without a letter of divorce and is, consequently, permitted to marry a priest. Her son who is, therefore, a legitimate priest may well be subject to the restrictions enumerated in our Mishnah. Cf. supra p. 690. n. 6. Num. V. 13. (E.V., Neither she be taken in the act), referring to a woman who was defiled secretly and there were no witnesses against her. Only if she was not seized, i.e., she did not act under compulsion but willingly. Cf. supra 56b. To her husband. Violated. Cf. supra n. 2. Cf. supra p. 691, n. 14. In any subsequent intercourse, whether lawful or illicit, her status is that of feme sole who had never before been married; v. Keth. Sonc. ed. p. 298, notes. Tractate List / Glossary / / Bible Reference |  |  |