Commentary for Shevuot 36:3
כי איתמר דאביי בעלמא איתמר
R'Huna son of R'Nathan raised an objection: Did Abaye then say that he had no alternative;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If he withdraws when it is passive, he is exempt, because he has no alternative.');"><sup>4</sup></span> from which we deduce that we are discussing the time not near her period;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For if he cohabited near the time of her period he should have realised that there is a possibility that she might become unclean; and he is liable for withdrawing even when passive, for Abaye holds that he who cohabits with membrum mortuum is also liable. (V. supra 18a.) Only if he cohabits not near the time of her period is he exempt if he withdraws when passive, with membrum mortuum, for he has no other alternative, and is not to be blamed for cohabiting then.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
Explore commentary for Shevuot 36:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.