Kiddushin 135
אפילו נדה נמי אלמה אמר אביי הכל מודים בבא על הנדה ועל הסוטה שאין הולד ממזר אמר חזקיה אמר קרא (ויקרא טו, כד) ותהי נדתה עליו אפילו בשעת נדתה תהא בה הויה
even a niddah too?Why then did Abaye say: All agree that if one has inter - course with a niddah or a sotah,the issue is not mamzer? - Said Hezekiah, Scripture saith, [and if any man lie with her,] and her menstruationbe upon him:even during her 'menstruation' betrothal with her is valid. <br> <br> Consider: one can assimilate [all other consanguineous relations] to niddah, and one can assimilate her to a wife's sister:what [reason] do you see to assimilate them to a wife's sister:assimilate them to niddah? - [In a choice between] leniency and stringency, we assimilate to the case of stringency. <br> <br> R. Aha b. Jacob said: It is inferred a minori from yebamah: if kiddushin with a yebamah is invalid,though she is [interdicted only] by a negative precept, how much the more so with those who are forbidden on pain of death or kareth! If so, should not others, interdicted [only] by negative precepts, be the same? - Said R. Papa, of those interdicted by negative precepts it is explicitly stated: If there be to a man two wives, the one beloved, and the other hated. Now is there before the Omnipresent a hated [woman] or a beloved one! But 'beloved' means beloved in her marriage, and 'hated' means hated in her marriage; yet the Divine Law states: 'and if there be.' <br> <br> Now R, Akiba, who maintained, kiddushin with those who are interdicted by a negative precept is invalid, - to what does he apply, 'if there be'? - To [the betrothal of] a widow to a High Priest, and in accordance with R. Simai. For it was taught: R. Simai said: [The issue] of all [marriages forbidden by a negative injunction] R. Akiba declared mamzer, excepting that of a widow [married] to a High Priest, since the Torah said, [a widow ... he shall not take,] and he shall not profane [his seed]: he renders [his seed] profane, but not mamzer. But on the view of R. Yeshebab, who said: Come, and let us cry out against Akiba son of Joseph, who declared: He who has no entry in Israel, the issue is mamzer - it is well if R. Yeshebab comes to combat R. Simai; then it is right. But if he states an independent opinion, this including even those who are interdicted by a positive precept, to what can he apply it? - To a non-virgin [married] to a High Priest. And wherein does it differ? - Because it is a positive precept unapplicable to all. And the Rabbis: instead of explaining [the verse] as referring to those forbidden by negative precepts, let them refer it to those forbidden by positive precepts? - Those who are forbidden by positive precepts, - how are they conceivable? If both are Egyptian women, both are 'hated'? If one is an Egyptian woman and the other a Jewess - we require that the 'two wives' shall be of one people: if [one is] a non-virgin [married] to a High Priest, - is it then written, [If] there be [two wives] to a priest? And R. Akiba? - You are forced to leave it to the verse to explain itself. <br> <br> AND WHATEVER [WOMAN] WHO CANNOT CONTRACT KIDDUSHIN etc. How do we know [it of] a Canaanitish bondmaid? - Said R. Huna, Scripture saith, Abide ye here with ['im] the ass - it is a people ['am] like unto an ass. We have thus found that kiddushin with her is invalid:<br>