Halakhah for Yevamot 168:6
תנא ושייר מאי שייר דהאי שייר שייר פצוע דכא
which R. Dimi, when he came,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From Palestine to Babylon. ');"><sup>11</sup></span> reported in the name of R. Johanan, viz., that if an Egyptian of the second generation married an Egyptian woman of the first generation her son is regarded as belonging to the second generation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 78a. ');"><sup>12</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Kiddushin 78a) that there is no liability for lashes until he has intercourse. But [if] he married her and did not have intercourse, he is not lashed - as there is no liability for lashes without intercourse. And [both] he and her are lashed; and that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Yevamot 84b), "Fitting women are not [prohibited] from marrying disqualified men," is not from this matter at all - and we will explain the thing below on this page. As this one who has had intercourse with someone to whom she is forbidden, is also included in the obligation - and like the matter that they, may their memory be blessed, said that there is no difference between a woman and a man regarding all of the punishments of the Torah, except for the designated maidservant, [about] which I have written above in the Order of Vayikra in the commandment of a definite guilt-offering (Sefer HaChinukh 129).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy