Keritot 21

Chapter 21

א שעשה בה את המזיד כשוגג
1 IN THAT WILFUL TRANSGRESSION<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., of the man. If her trespass, however, was inadvertent there is no offering for the man either.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
ב איזו שפחה כל שחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין שנאמר (ויקרא יט, כ) והפדה לא נפדתה דברי ר' יהודה ר' ישמעאל אומר זו היא שפחה ודאית ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר כל עריות מפורשות ושיור אין לנו אלא חציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין:
2 IS OF THE SAME STATUS AS TRANSGRESSION IN ERROR'TO WHICH HANDMAID DOES THIS REFER? TO ONE WHO IS HALF A SLAVE AND HALF A FREE PERSON,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., a slave belonging to two partners one of whom has set her free. The maid is betrothed to a Hebrew slave; her betrothal is only partly valid by reason of her slavery.');"><sup>2</sup></span> AS IT IS WRITTEN: AND NOT AT ALL REDEEMED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 20. Lit., 'redeemed, she is not redeemed', i.e., she is not altogether redeemed.');"><sup>3</sup></span> THUS THE VIEW OF R'AKIBA. R'ISHMAEL SAYS: TO A SLAVE PROPER'R'ELIEZER B. JACOB<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gemara infra, 'son of Azariah'.');"><sup>4</sup></span> SAYS: OF ALL OTHER FORBIDDEN CONNECTIONS IT IS EXPLICITLY STATED [THAT THEY ARE WHOLLY FREE PEOPLE], THERE IS THUS LEFT THE INSTANCE OF ONE WHO IS HALF A SLAVE AND HALF A FREE PERSON.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Therefore interpret the law in Lev. XIX, 20f, as referring to this category.');"><sup>5</sup></span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Whence do we know that she is liable to lashes but not he? - Our Rabbis taught: There shall be inquisition [bikkoreth],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ג <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מנלן דהיא לקי והוא לא לקי דתנו רבנן (ויקרא יט, כ) בקורת תהיה מלמד שהיא לוקה יכול שניהן לוקין תלמוד לומר תהיה היא לוקה והוא אינו לוקה
3 conveys that she is liable to lashes. I might still think that both are liable to lashes, therefore it is written 'shall be';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Shall be, being in the feminine, is referred to the maid. ,rec tre');"><sup>7</sup></span> she is liable but not he. And whence do we know that the term bikkoreth implies lashes? - Said R'Isaac: It denotes, it shall be read for her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' During the administration of lashes, the text of Deut. XXVIII, 58f; cf. Mak. 22b. , is thus derived from , to read.');"><sup>8</sup></span> as it has been taught: The head of the judges reads, the second counts and the third says, beat him. R'Ashi says: It denotes, she shall be examined,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the administration of lashes the delinquent is examined as to how many lashes he can stand.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ד ומנין דהדין בקורת לישנא דמלקות הוא א"ר יצחק תהא בקראי כדתניא גדול הדיינין מקרא שני מונה שלישי אומר הכהו רב אשי אומר בביקור תהיה כדתנן אין אומדין אותו אלא מכות הראוין להשתלש
4 as we have learnt: They do not estimate the number of lashes he can bear except in a multiple of three.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mak. 22b.');"><sup>10</sup></span> Our Rabbis taught: Whenever the woman is subject to lashes the man is liable to a sacrifice, and when she is free from lashes,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., on account of her minority.');"><sup>11</sup></span> he is exempted from a sacrifice. Whence do we know this? - Said Raba: It is written, And if a man lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, designated for a man, and not at all redeemed, nor was freedom given her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 20.');"><sup>12</sup></span> Now consider: the text deals hitherto with the man, it should therefore have proceeded immediately with the words, And he shall bring his guilt-offering unto the Lord, and then continue, There shall be inquisition.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which has just been interpreted as conveying her penalty of lashes.');"><sup>13</sup></span> Why has the text stated first, 'There shall be inquisition' an only afterwards 'And he shall bring his guilt-offering unto the Lord'? This then is meant: If there is an inquisition regarding the woman, he shall bring a guilt-offering unto the Lord, and if there is no inquisition he shall not bring his guilt-offering. But perhaps he has been exempted [from lashes], she however is liable to lashes as well as to a sacrifice?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whence does the Mishnah know that only the man is liable to a guilt-offering but not the woman?');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ה ת"ר בזמן שהאשה לוקה האיש מביא קרבן אין האשה לוקה אין האיש מביא קרבן מנלן אמר רבא דכתיב (ויקרא יט, כ) ואיש כי ישכב את אשה שכבת זרע והיא שפחה נחרפת לאיש והפדה לא נפדתה או חופשה לא נתן לה
5 - It reads: And he shall bring his guilt-offering unto the Lord.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'He' is restrictive. He brings a guilt-offering, but not she.');"><sup>15</sup></span> R'Isaac said: One is liable only in the case of a possessed handmaid, as it is written, 'That is a bondmaid designated for a man'. And where do we find that the term 'designated' [neherefeth] implies that a change has taken place?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that a bodily change has taken place with her in that she is no longer a virgin.');"><sup>16</sup></span> - It is written, And strewed groats [harifoth] thereon.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Sam. XVII, 19. Groats, i.e., grain which has experienced a change through grinding.');"><sup>17</sup></span> Or as it is written, Though thou shouldest bray a fool in a mortar with a pestle among groats [harifoth].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXVII, 22.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
ו מכדי עד הכא באיש קא משתעי קרא נכתוב והביא את אשמו לה' ולבסוף לכתוב בקורת תהיה אמאי כתב רחמנא ברישא בקורת תהיה ולבסוף כתב והביא את אשמו לה' ה"ק אם בקורת תהיה היא והביא את אשמו לה' ואם לא תהיה בקורת לא יביא הוא את אשמו
6 And they gave their hand that they would put away their wives; and being guilty, they offered a ram of the flock for their guilt;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezra X, 19.');"><sup>19</sup></span> said R'Hisda: This teaches that they had all had intercourse with designated handmaids.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For which a guilt-offering is brought, as mentioned in the text.');"><sup>20</sup></span> TO WHICH HANDMAID DOES THIS REFER etc. Our Rabbis taught: 'Redeemed' might convey altogether free, therefore it continues, 'she is not [redeemed]'. This on the other hand might convey not at all redeemed, therefore it reads 'redeemed'. How is this possible? She is redeemed yet not wholly redeemed, viz. , one who is half a slave and half a free person and is betrothed to a Hebrew slave. Thus the view of R'Akiba.
ז אימא הוא מעטיה קרא אבל היא תילקי ותיתי קרבן והביא את אשמו לה' כתיב
7 R'Ishmael says: The text refers to a heathen bondmaid who is betrothed unto a Hebrew slave; while the phrase 'redeemed, she is not [redeemed]' is used in accordance with the language of men.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., as a common parlance. The repetition of the verb 'redeem' is only an emphasis, and is not to imply any law.');"><sup>21</sup></span> R'Eleazar B'Azariah says: Of all for bidden connections it is explicitly stated [that they are free people], there is thus l the instance of one who is half a slave and half a free person and is betrothed unto a Hebrew slave. Others<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Meir is quoted under this name; cf. Hor. 13b.');"><sup>22</sup></span>
ח א"ר יצחק לעולם אינו חייב אלא על שפחה בעולה בלבד שנאמר והיא שפחה נחרפת לאיש ומאי משמע דהאי נחרפת לישנא דשנויי הוא דכתיב (שמואל ב יז, יט) ותשטח עליו הריפות ואב"א (משלי כז, כב) אם תכתוש האויל במכתש בתוך הריפות בעלי
8 say, 'They shall not be put to death, because she was not free', indicates that the text refers to a heathen bondmaid who is betrothed unto a heathen slave. As to R'Ishmael, it is plausible that 'redeemed, she is not [redeemed]' may be interpreted as a common parlance, but whence do we learn that she was betrothed to a Hebrew slave? - It is written, For she was not free; he, however, was free.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Hebrew was not the perpetual possession of his master; he is to be freed after six years.');"><sup>23</sup></span> Is not the view of R'Eleazar B'Azariah identical with that of R'Akiba? - He [R'Eleazar] retorts to R'Ishmael: I agree with you in general that the Torah uses the language of men, but this case is different, for the text states, 'for she was not free' why add 'redeemed, she is not [redeemed]'? To learn therefrom that it refers to one who is half a slave and half a free person. As to others, it is plausible that 'redeemed, she is not [redeemed]' may be interpreted as a common parlance, but whence do we learn that she was betrothed to a heathen slave? - The text reads, 'for she was not free'; since this is superfluous with reference to her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it is already stated that she was not redeemed.');"><sup>24</sup></span> it is taken to refer to him. <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IN THE CASE OF ALL FORBIDDEN CONNECTIONS, IF ONE PARTNER WAS A MAJOR AND THE OTHER A MINOR, THE LATTER IS EXEMPTED; IF ONE IS AWAKE AND THE OTHER ASLEEP, THE LATTER IS EXEMPTED; FINALLY, IF ONE IS AN INADVERTENT AND THE OTHER A WILFUL TRANSGRESSOR, THE FORMER IS LIABLE TO A SIN-OFFERING, THE LATTER TO KARETH.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Gemara enlarges upon it and states what the law would be in the case of a bondmaid.');"><sup>25</sup></span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Is indeed in our instance<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in the case of the bondmaid.');"><sup>26</sup></span>
ט (עזרא י, יט) ויתנו ידם להוציא נשיהם ואשמים איל צאן על אשמתם אמר רב חסדא מלמד שכולן שפחות חרופות בעלו:
9 a minor guilty? - Said Rab Judah: This is meant: In the case of all forbidden connections, if one was a major and the other a minor, the latter is exempted and the former guilty; In our instance also the major is exempted, because both partners depend upon one another.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As stated supra; whenever she is exempted from lashes he is also free from a guilt-offering.');"><sup>27</sup></span> IF ONE IS AWAKE AND THE OTHER ASLEEP, THE LATTER IS EXEMPTED.
י איזוהי שפחה כו': ת"ר והפדה יכול כולה ת"ל לא נפדתה יכול לא נפדתה ת"ל והפדה
10 Is indeed In our instance a sleeping person guilty? Said Rab Judah in the name of Rab: This is meant: In the case of all forbidden connections, if one is awake and the other asleep, the latter is exempted and the former guilty, in our instance even the one awake is exempted, because they depend upon one another. A Tanna recited before R'Shesheth: They have placed on an equal footing a consummated connection with a mere sexual contact, an intentional connection with an unintentional, a natural connection with a perverse one, and one performed while awake with one performed in sleep. He retorted: How is this meant? If it refers to a designated bondmaid, how does a consummated connection equal a mere sexual contact? In fact, a consummated connection is in the case of a designated bondmaid subject to the law, but a mere sexual contact is not. Similarly the statement that intentional connection equals unintentional [is wrong], for one is guilty only in the case of intentional connection but not otherwise. Similarly the statement that natural connection equals perverse [is wrong], for with the designated bondmaid one is guilty only in the case of natural connection but not in the case of perverse connection, because it is written 'carnally'.
יא הא כיצד פדויה ואינה פדויה חציה שפחה וחצייה בת חורין ומאורסת לעבד עברי דברי ר"ע רבי ישמעאל אומר בשפחה כנענית הכתוב מדבר ומאורסת לעבד עברי א"כ מה ת"ל והפדה לא נפדתה דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם
11 And then what is the meaning of the statement that a wakeful person equals a sleeping person? If on the other hand this dictum refers to other forbidden connections, how does it state consummated connection equals a mere sexual contact
יב ר' אלעזר בן עזריה אומר כל עריות מפורשות לנו משוייר לנו חציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין ומאורסת לעבד עברי אחרים אומרים (ויקרא יט, כ) לא יומתו כי לא חופשה בשפחה כנענית הכתוב מדבר ומאורסת לעבד כנעני
12 
יג לר' ישמעאל בשלמא והפדה לא נפדתה כדקתני דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם אלא דקתני מאורסת לעבד עברי מנלן דכתיב כי לא חופשה מכלל דהוא חופש
13 
יד ר' אלעזר בן עזריה היינו ר"ע לר' ישמעאל קאמר לדידי בעלמא כוותיך סבירא ליה דדברה תורה כלשון בני אדם והכא שאני מכדי כתיב ליה קרא כי לא חופשה והפדה לא נפדתה ל"ל ש"מ להכי אתא לחציה שפחה וחציה בת חורין
14 
טו לאחרים בשלמא והפדה לא נפדתה קסבר דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם אלא הא דעבד כנעני מנלן אמר קרא כי לא חופשה אם אינו ענין לדידה תנהו ענין לדידיה:
15 
טז <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> כל עריות אחד גדול ואחד קטן קטן פטור אחד ער ואחד ישן ישן פטור אחד שוגג ואחד מזיד שוגג בחטאת ומזיד בהכרת:
16 
יז <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> והכא חייב קטן א"ר יהודה הכי קתני כל עריות אחד גדול ואחד קטן קטן פטור וגדול חייב והכא גדול נמי פטור מ"ט דהא מקשיין אהדדי
17 
יח כל עריות אחד ניעור ואחד ישן ישן פטור וכאן ישן נמי חייב א"ר יהודה אמר רב הכי קתני כל עריות אחד ניעור ואחד ישן ישן פטור וניעור חייב וכאן אפילו ניעור פטור מ"ט דמקשיין אהדדי
18 
יט תני תנא קמיה דרב ששת עשו גומר כמערה מתכוין כשאין מתכוין כדרכה כשלא כדרכה ניעור כישן
19 
כ א"ל מאי קאמרת אי בשפחה חרופה קתני אמאי עשו גומר כמערה גומר בשפחה חרופה מיחייב מערה לא מיחייב ותו מתכוין כשאינו מתכוין אי מכוונה מיחייבא אי לא לא מיחייבא
20 
כא וכדרכה כשלא כדרכה נמי כדרכה בשפחה חרופה מיחייב ושלא כדרכה לא מיחייב מאי טעמא (ויקרא יט, כ) שכבת זרע כתיב ומאי ניעור כישן
21 
כב ואי בשאר עריות קא תני עשו גומר כמערה
22 
Previous ChapterNext Chapter