since either of them is a peculiar creature; the slave, too, because owing to the terumah1 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 HALIZAH40 BUT MAY NOT CONTRACT WITH HER LEVIRATE MARRIAGE.41 AND HE, IN RESPECT OF THEIR WIDOWS,42 LIKEWISE, SUBMITS TO HALIZAH43 BUT MAY NOT CONTRACT LEVIRATE MARRIAGE.44
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 HALIZAH5 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] TERUMAH12 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 -