Commentary for Yevamot 27:20

והכי נמי מסתברא דקתני סיפא כל הטהרות וכל הטמאות שהיו אלו מטהרין ואלו מטמאין לא נמנעו עושים טהרות אלו על גבי אלו

And if it be suggested that Beth Hillel are of the opinion that the descendant of those who are guilty of an offence involving <i>kareth</i> is not a bastard,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A bastard being the descendant only of such marriages as are subject to one of the capital punishments that are carried out under the jurisdiction of a court. ');">³³</span> surely, [it may be retorted], R. Eleazar said: Although Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel are in disagreement on the questions of rivals, they concede that a bastard is only he who is descended from a marriage which is forbidden as incest and punishable with <i>kareth</i>! Does not this then conclusively prove that they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Beth Shammai. ');">²⁷</span> did not act [in accordance with their own view]? — No; they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Beth Shammai. ');">²⁷</span> acted, indeed, [in accordance with their own view], but they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Beth Shammai. ');">²⁷</span> informed them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Beth Hillel. ');">³⁴</span> [of the existence of any such cases] and they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Beth Hillel. ');">³⁴</span> kept away. This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That Beth Shammai duly informed Beth Hillel of any families contracting marriages which according to the ruling of the latter were forbidden. ');">³⁵</span> may also be proved by logical inference; for in the final clause it was stated. [SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF] ALL [THE QUESTIONS OF RITUAL] CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, WHICH THESE DECLARED CLEAN WHERE THE OTHERS DECLARED UNCLEAN, NEITHER OF THEM ABSTAINED FROM USING THE UTENSILS OF THE OTHERS FOR THE PREPARATION OF FOOD THAT WAS RITUALLY CLEAN.

Explore commentary for Yevamot 27:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.