Kiddushin 71
אחת היא
are identical.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both are either by hand or with an instrument.');"><sup>1</sup></span> Abaye said: This is Issi's reason, viz. , he learns 'baldness', 'baldness', from the sons of Aaron:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., baldness is mentioned in Deut. XIV. If., in connection with Israelites, and in Lev. XXI, 5, in reference to the priests. Here too it is assumed that 'the sons of Aaron' in v. 1. applies to the whole section,');"><sup>2</sup></span>
אביי אמר היינו טעמא דאיסי דגמר קרחה קרחה מבני אהרן מה להלן נשים פטורות אף כאן נשים פטורות
just as there, women are exempt, so here too, women are exempt. But if we hold that the phrase ['the sons of Aaron'] relates to the whole section, let Scripture refrain from it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This gezerah shawah.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ואי סבירא לן דכי כתיב קרא בכולי עניינא הוא דכתיב נשתוק קרא מיניה ותיתי בק"ו ואנא אמינא ומה כהנים שריבה בהם הכתוב מצות יתירות בני אהרן ולא בנות אהרן ישראל לא כ"ש
and it [woman's exemption] follows a fortiori. For I may argue, If [of] priests, upon whom the Writ imposes additional precepts, [we say] 'the sons of Aaron' but not the daughters of Aaron, how much more so of Israelites! - But for the gezerah shawah I would think the connection is broken.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 174, n. 4.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
אי לאו ג"ש הוה אמינא הפסיק הענין
Then now too, let us say that the connection is broken; and as for the gezerah shawah, that is required for what was taught: They shall not make a baldness:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 5. Heb. lo yikrehu.');"><sup>5</sup></span> I might think that even if one makes four or five bald patches he is liable for only one [transgression]; therefore it is stated, karhah [a baldness],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The verb is followed by its cognate object, though this is unnecessary.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
בראשם מה ת"ל לפי שנאמר (דברים יד, א) לא תתגודדו ולא תשימו קרחה בין עיניכם למת יכול לא יהא חייב אלא על בין העינים מנין לרבות כל הראש תלמוד לומר בראשם לחייב על הראש כבין העינים
Because it is said: 'Ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead': I might think that one is liable only for between the eyes. Whence do I know to include the whole head?
ואין לי אלא כהנים שריבה בהם הכתוב מצות יתירות ישראל מנלן נאמר כאן קרחה ונאמר להלן קרחה מה כאן חייב על כל קרחה וקרחה וחייב על הראש כבין העינים אף להלן חייב על כל קרחה וקרחה וחייב על הראש כבין העינים
Therefore it is stated: 'upon their head,' to teach liability for the [whole] head as for between the eyes. Now, I know this only of priests,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Upon their head' referring to them.');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ומה להלן על מת אף כאן על מת א"כ נכתוב קרא קרח מאי קרחה שמעת מינה תרתי
upon whom Scripture imposes additional precepts; whence do we know it of Israelites? - Karhah [baldness] is stated here, and karhah is also stated below; just as there, one is liable for every act of making baldness, and for the [whole] head as for between the eyes, so here too, one is liable for every act of baldness and in respect of the whole head as for between the eyes. And just as below, [baldness] for the dead [is meant], so here too it is for the dead!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., Lev, XXI, 5 refers to such a case.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
רבא אמר היינו טעמא דאיסי דיליף בין עיניכם מתפילין מה להלן נשים פטורות אף כאן נשים פטורות ורבא מאי טעמא לא אמר כאביי קרח קרחה לא משמע ליה
If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the gezerah shawah does not also exclude women.');"><sup>9</sup></span> let Scripture write kerah [baldness]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A shorter form.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ובין לאביי ובין לרבא האי בנים אתם מאי דרשי ביה האי מיבעי לכדתניא בנים אתם לה' אלהיכם בזמן שאתם נוהגים מנהג בנים אתם קרוים בנים אין אתם נוהגים מנהג בנים אין אתם קרוים בנים דברי ר' יהודה
Raba said: This is Issi's reason, viz. , he learns [the applicability of] 'between your eyes' from phylacteries:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XI, 18: and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes.');"><sup>11</sup></span> just as there, women are exempt, so here too, women are exempt.
רבי מאיר אומר בין כך ובין כך אתם קרוים בנים שנאמר (ירמיהו ד, כב) בנים סכלים המה ואומר (דברים לב, כ) בנים לא אמון בם ואומר (ישעיהו א, ד) זרע מרעים בנים משחיתים ואומר (הושע ב, א) והיה במקום אשר יאמר להם לא עמי אתם יאמר להם בני אל חי
Now, why does Raba not say as Abaye? - [The distinction between] kerah and karhah is not acceptable to him. And why does Abaye reject Raba's reason? - He can tell you.
מאי ואומר וכי תימא סכלי הוא דמקרי בני כי לית בהו הימנותייהו לא מיקרו בני ת"ש ואומר בנים לא אמון בם
Phylacteries themselves are learnt from this: just as there, ['between the eyes' means] the place where a baldness can be made [viz. ,] on the upper part of the head,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., where the hair grows.');"><sup>12</sup></span> so here too' the place for wearing [phylacteries] is the upper part of the head.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But not on the forehead above the nose, as 'between your eyes' would seem to imply.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
וכי תימא כי לית בהו הימנותא הוא דמיקרו בנים כי פלחו לעבודת כוכבים לא מיקרו בנים ת"ש ואומר זרע מרעים בנים משחיתים וכ"ת בנים משחיתים הוא דמיקרו בני מעלייא לא מיקרו ת"ש ואומר והיה במקום אשר יאמר להם לא עמי אתם יאמר להם בני אל חי
Now, according to both Abaye and Raba, how do they interpret this [verse], 'Ye are sons [etc.']?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they derive Issi's dictum from another source.');"><sup>14</sup></span> - That is wanted for what was taught: 'Ye are sons of the Lord your God'; when you behave as sons<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obediently and lovingly.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> הסמיכות והתנופות וההגשות והקמיצות והקטרות והמליקות והקבלות והזאות נוהגים באנשים ולא בנשים חוץ ממנחת סוטה ונזירה שהן מניפות
you are designated sons; if you do not behave as sons, you are not designated sons: this is R'Judah's view. R'Meir said: In both cases you are called sons, for it is said, they are sottish children;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jer. IV, 22.');"><sup>16</sup></span>
<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> סמיכות דכתיב (ויקרא א, ב) דבר אל בני ישראל וסמך בני ישראל סומכים ואין בנות ישראל סומכות
and it is also said: They are children in whom is no faith;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXXII, 20.');"><sup>17</sup></span> and it is also said, a seed of evil-doers, sons that deal corruptly;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Isa. I, 4.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
תנופות (ויקרא ז, כג) דבר אל בני ישראל והניף בני ישראל מניפין ואין בנות ישראל מניפות
and it is said, and it shall come to pass that, in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hos. II, 1.');"><sup>19</sup></span> Why give these additional quotations?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'why 'and it is said'?'');"><sup>20</sup></span>
הגשות דכתיב (ויקרא ו, ז) וזאת תורת המנחה הקרב אותה בני אהרן בני אהרן ולא בנות אהרן
For should you reply, only when foolish are they designated sons, but not when they lack faith - then come and hear: And it is said: 'They are sons in whom is no faith'. And should you say, when they have no faith they are called sons, but when they serve idols they are not called sons - then come and hear: And it is said: 'a seed of evil-doers, sons that deal corruptly.'
קמיצות דכתיב (ויקרא ב, ב) והביאה אל בני אהרן וקמץ בני אהרן ולא בנות אהרן
And should you say, they are indeed called sons that act corruptly, but not good sons - then come and hear: And it is said, and it shall come to pass that, in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This whole passage expresses the firm belief that Israel can never be entirely rejected by God for all time. That in turn is based on the conviction that the Jew will never sin so completely as to render a return to God impossible, and the final verse quoted refers to such a religious regeneration.');"><sup>21</sup></span> <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE [RITES OF] LAYING HANDS, WAVING, BRINGING NEAR [THE MEAL-OFFERING], TAKING THE HANDFUL, BURNING [THE FAT], WRINGING [THE NECK OF BIRD SACRIFICES], RECEIVING AND SPRINKLING [THE BLOOD], ARE PERFORMED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The meaning of these is made clear in the texts quoted in the GEMARA:');"><sup>22</sup></span>
הקטרות דכתיב (ויקרא ג, ה) והקטירו אותו בני אהרן בני אהרן ולא בנות אהרן
BY MEN BUT NOT BY WOMEN, EXCEPTING THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A SOTAH<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos.');"><sup>23</sup></span> AND A NEZIRAH,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos,');"><sup>24</sup></span>
הקבלות דכתיב (ויקרא א, ה) והקריבו בני אהרן ואמר מר
and he shall lay [his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. I, 2, 4.');"><sup>25</sup></span> thus the sons of Israel lay [hands], but not the daughters of Israel. WAVING: Speak unto the sons of Israel.' [the fat with the breast, it shall he bring, that the breast] ma waved [etc.]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. VII, 29f.');"><sup>26</sup></span> hence, the sons of Israel wave, but not the daughters of Israel. BRINGING NEAR [THE MEAL-OFFERING]: For it is written: And this is the law of the meal-offering: the sons of Aaron shall offer it:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. VI, 7. ['Offer it', i.e., 'bring it near' the altar, v. Sotah 14b.]');"><sup>27</sup></span> the sons of Aaron, but not the daughters of Aaron. TAKING THE HANDFUL. For it is written: And he shall bring it to Aaron's sons the priests: and he shall take thereout his handful [of the fine flour thereof].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. II, 2.');"><sup>28</sup></span> the sons of Aaron, but not the daughters of Aaron. BURNING [THE FAT]. Because it is written: And Aaron's sons shall burn it:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the fat, etc., mentioned in the preceding verses. - Ibid. III, 5.');"><sup>29</sup></span> the sons of Aaron, but not the daughters of Aaron. WRINGING [THE NECK OF BIRD SACRIFICES]. Because it is written, and he shall wring [off his head,] and burn it [on the altar]: thus wringing is assimilated to burning.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence it may not be done by women.');"><sup>30</sup></span> RECEIVING [THE BLOOD]. Because it is written, and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring [the blood]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. I, 5.');"><sup>31</sup></span> and a Master said,