Yevamot 118

הא מני ר' מאיר היא ורב דאמר כר' אלעזר

— This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Baraitha cited by Raba. ');">¹</span> represents the view of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'this, according to whom'? ');">²</span> R. Meir,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 395, n. 7. ');">³</span>

אי כרבי אלעזר מאי איריא משום בעולה תיפוק ליה דהויא לה זונה דהא א"ר אלעזר פנוי הבא על הפנויה שלא לשם אישות עשאה זונה

while Rab holds the same view as R. Eleazar.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 395, n. 10. ');">⁴</span> If [Rab holds the same view] as R. Eleazar, what was the object of pointing to her previous carnal intercourse<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a reason for prohibition. ');">⁵</span> when [her prohibition] could have been inferred from the fact that she was a harlot,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who is forbidden not only to a High Priest but also to a common priest (v. Lev. XXI, 7). Why, then, did Rab refer to a High Priest only? ');">⁶</span>

אמר רב יוסף כגון שנבעלה לבהמה דהתם משום בעולה איכא משום זונה ליכא

R. Eleazar having stated that an unmarried man who cohabited with an unmarried woman with no matrimonial intention renders her thereby a harlot!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 61b, 76a, Sanh. 51a, Tem. 30a. ');">⁷</span> — R. Joseph replied:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rab's reason of 'previous carnal intercourse' was necessary. ');">⁸</span> <font>When, for instance, the woman was subjected to intercourse with a beast</font>, where the reason of <font>'previous carnal intercourse' may be applied but not that of harlot</font>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A term which is not applicable to bestial intercourse. V. infra. ');">⁹</span>

אמר ליה אביי ממה נפשך אי בעולה הויא זונה נמי הויא ואי זונה לא הויא בעולה נמי לא הויא וכי תימא מידי דהויא אמוכת עץ שלא כדרכה אם כן אין לך אשה שכשרה לכהונה שלא נעשית מוכת עץ על ידי צרור

Said Abaye to him: Whatever you prefer [your reply cannot be upheld], If she is a <i>be'ulah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] one who had experienced carnal intercourse. ');">¹⁰</span> she must also be a harlot; and if she is not a harlot<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Presumably because her act cannot be regarded as 'sexual intercourse'. ');">¹¹</span> she cannot be a <i>be'ulah</i> either! And were you to reply: This case is similar to that of a wounded woman,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 394, n. 8. As in her case marriage with a High Priest is forbidden (v. our Mishnah), though she is no harlot, so also in the case of bestial intercourse. ');">¹²</span>

אלא אמר רבי זירא בממאנת

[it may be pointed out] that <font>if [the disqualification should be extended to] unnatural intercourse also,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if injury to the anus is to be subject to the same restrictions as injury to the hymen. ');">¹³</span></font> you will find no woman eligible to marry a [High Priest [since there is not one] who has not been in some way &nbsp; &nbsp; wounded<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 394, n. 8. ');">¹⁴</span> by a splinter! No, said R. Zera,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rab's reason of 'previous carnal intercourse' was necessary. ');">¹⁵</span>

אמר רב שימי בר חייא נבעלה לבהמה כשרה לכהונה תניא נמי הכי נבעלה למי שאינו איש אע"פ שבסקילה כשרה לכהונה

in respect of a minor who made a declaration of refusal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mema'eneth, v. Glos. Unnatural intercourse with her by her husband places the minor in the status of be'ulah (v. Glos.) but not in that of harlot, while her refusal to live with him does not give her the status of divorcee or widow but that of mema'eneth. Hence the necessity for Rab's statement that such a minor also is forbidden to marry a High Priest. ');">¹⁶</span> R. Shimi b. Hiyya stated: <font>A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even a High Priest. The result of such intercourse being regarded as a mere wound, and the opinion that does not regard an accidentally injured hymen as a disqualification does not so regard such an intercourse either. ');">¹⁷</span></font> Likewise it was taught: A woman who had intercourse with that which is no human being,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A beast. ');">¹⁸</span>

כי אתא רב דימי אמר מעשה בריבה אחת בהיתלו שהיתה מכבדת את הבית ורבעה כלב כופרי מאחריה והכשירה רבי לכהונה אמר שמואל ולכהן גדול בימי רבי כהן גדול מי הוה אלא ראויה לכהן גדול

though she is in consequence <font>subject to the penalty of stoning,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the offence was committed in the presence of witnesses after due warning. ');">¹⁹</span></font> is nevertheless permitted to marry a priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the absence of witnesses and warning. ');">²⁰</span> </font>

א"ל רבא מפרקין לרב אשי מנא הא מילתא דאמור רבנן אין זנות לבהמה דכתיב (דברים כג, יט) לא תביא אתנן זונה ומחיר כלב

When R. Dimi came<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From Palestine to Babylon. ');">²¹</span> he related: <font>It once happened at Haitalu<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Babylonian form for Aitalu, modern Aiterun N.W. of Kadesh, v, S. Klein, Beitrage p. 47]. ');">²²</span></font> that while a young woman was sweeping the floor<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'house'. ');">²³</span>

ותנן אתנן כלב ומחיר זונה מותרין (משום) שנאמר (דברים כג, יט) גם שניהם שנים ולא ארבעה

a village dog<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'big hunting dog' (Rashi), 'ferocious dog' (Jast.), 'small wild dog' (Aruk). ');">²⁴</span> covered her from the rear,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A case of unnatural intercourse. ');">²⁵</span> and Rabbi permitted her to marry a priest. Samuel said: Even a High Priest. But was there a High Priest in the days of Rabbi?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Judah ha-nasi (the Prince or Patriarch) I, who flourished 170-217 C.E., above a hundred years after the destruction of the second Temple. ');">²⁶</span>

ת"ר אנוסת עצמו ומפותת עצמו לא ישא ואם נשא נשוי אנוסת חבירו ומפותת חבירו לא ישא ואם נשא ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר הולד חלל וחכמים אומרים הולד כשר:

— Rather, [Samuel meant]: Fit for a High Priest. Raba of Parzakaia<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Bomberg ed.; MS.M., 'Parazika' (cf. Golds.); Cur. edd., 'Parkin'. ');">²⁷</span> said to R. Ashi: Whence is derived the following statement which the Rabbis made: <font>Harlotry is not applicable to bestial intercourse?</font> — It is written, <i>Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot, or the price of a dog</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 19. ');">²⁸</span>

אם נשא נשוי: אמר רב הונא אמר רב ומוציא בגט ואלא הא דקתני אם נשא נשוי אמר רב אחא בר יעקב לומר

and yet we learned that the hire of a dog<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The beast which a harlot receives for her intercourse with a dog. ');">²⁹</span> and the price of a harlot<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A beast received as the price of a harlot who has been sold. ');">³⁰</span> are permitted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To be consecrated to the altar. ');">³¹</span> because it is said, <i>Even both these</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIII, 19. ');">²⁸</span> two only but not four. Our Rabbis taught: [A High Priest] shall not marry the woman he himself has outraged or seduced.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Lev. XXI, 14: But a virgin&nbsp;… shall he take, i.e., she must be a virgin at the time he marries her. ');">³²</span> If, however, he married her, the marriage is valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he is married'. ');">³³</span> He shall not marry a woman whom another man has outraged or seduced. If he did marry her, the child, said R. Eliezer b. Jacob, is profaned:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Halal, v. Glos. ');">³⁴</span> but the Sages said: The child is legitimate.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is not subject to any disabilities, religious or civil, ');">³⁵</span> 'If, however, he married her, the marriage is valid'. Said R. Huna in the name of Rab: But he must put her aside by a letter of divorce. What, then, [is the explanation] of the statement 'If, however, he married her, the marriage is valid'? — R. Aha b. Jacob replied: It was meant to imply