Yevamot 122

ויש לו בנים לא ישא אילונית שהיא זונה האמורה בתורה דאזונה כהנים הוא דמפקדי וישראל לא מפקדי משום הכי קתני כהן

AND CHILDREN HE SHALL NOT MARRY A WOMAN INCAPABLE OF PROCREATION, SINCE SUCH [IS INCLUDED IN THE TERM OF] HARLOT MENTIONED IN THE TORAH. Since priests only were commanded concerning the harlot while Israelites were not so commanded, therefore PRIEST only was mentioned. Said R. Huna: What is R. Judah's reason? — Since it is written, And they shall eat, and not have enough, they shall commit harlotry and shall not increase,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hos. IV, 10. ');">¹</span> any cohabitation which results in no increase is nothing but meretricious intercourse.

אמר רב הונא מאי טעמא דר' יהודה דכתיב (הושע ד, י) אכלו ולא ישבעו הזנו ולא יפרוצו כל ביאה שאין בה פירצה אינה אלא בעילת זנות

It was taught: R. Eliezer stated, A priest shall not marry a minor. Said R. Hisda to Rabbah: Go and consider this matter,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why R. Eliezer ruled a priest shall not marry a minor. ');">²</span> for in the evening R. Huna will question you on the subject. When he went out he considered the point [and came to the conclusion that] R. Eliezer was of the same opinion as R. Meir and also of the same Opinion as R. Judah. 'He is of the same opinion as R. Meir' who takes exceptional cases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'minority'. ');">³</span> into consideration;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is possible, though not usual, that the minor would be found to be sterile. ');">⁴</span>

תניא רבי אליעזר אומר כהן לא ישא את הקטנה אמר ליה רב חסדא לרבה פוק עיין בה דלאורתא בעי לה רב הונא מינך נפק עיין בה רבי אליעזר סבר לה כרבי מאיר וסבר לה כרבי יהודה

and 'also of the same opinion as R. Judah', who holds that a woman incapable of procreation is regarded as a harlot.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If she marries. Cf. supra p. 407, n. 13, and text. ');">⁵</span> But does he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Eliezer. ');">⁶</span> hold the same opinion as R. Meir? Surely it was taught: A minor, whether male or female, may neither perform, nor submit to <i>halizah</i>, nor contract levirate marriage; so R; Meir. They said to R. Meir: You spoke well [when you ruled], may neither perform, nor submit to halizah', since in the Pentateuchal section<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Dealing with halizah. ');">⁷</span>

סבר לה כרבי מאיר דחייש למיעוטא וסבר לה כרבי יהודה דאמר אילונית זונה הויא

man was written,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Deut. XXV, 7. ');">⁸</span> and we also draw a comparison between woman and man.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the male must be a grown-up man and not a minor so must the female be a grown-up woman. ');">⁹</span> What, however, is the reason why they may not contract levirate marriage? He replied: Because a minor male might be found to be a saris;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wanting in generative powers. V. Glos. ');">¹⁰</span>

וכרבי מאיר מי סבר לה והתניא קטן וקטנה לא חולצין ולא מיבמין דברי רבי מאיר אמרו לו לרבי מאיר יפה אמרת שאין חולצין (דברים כה, ז) איש כתיב בפרשה ומקשינן אשה לאיש אלא מאי טעמא אין מיבמין

a minor female might be found to be incapable of procreation; and thus the law of incest would be violated.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Bek. 19b, infra 119a; they not being capable of procre- ation, there would be no offspring to succeed to the name of the deceased brother. The woman, therefore, is forbidden to the man as 'his brother's wife'. ');">¹¹</span> And it was also taught: A minor female may contract the levirate marriage<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the act of a minor has no validity, she may contract the marriage, since the commandment of the levirate marriage will be fulfilled as soon as she becomes of age. ');">¹²</span> but may not perform <i>halizah</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since her action has no validity and cannot, therefore, set her free to marry a stranger. ');">¹³</span>

[א"ל] קטן שמא ימצא סריס קטנה שמא תמצא אילונית ונמצאו פוגעין בערוה ותניא קטנה מתייבמת ואינה חולצת דברי רבי אליעזר

so R. Eliezer!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then, could R. Eliezer be said to hold the same view as R. Meir? ');">¹⁴</span> And does he hold the same opinion as R. Judah? Surely it was taught: Zonah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.V. harlot (Lev. XXI, 7) who is forbidden to marry a priest (ibid.). ');">¹⁵</span> implies, as her name [indicates, a faithless wife];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Rashi. [H] from rt. [H] 'to go astray', 'to run away' sc. from her husband. ');">¹⁶</span>

וכרבי יהודה מי סבר לה והתניא זונה זונה כשמה דברי רבי אליעזר רבי עקיבא אומר זונה זו מופקרת רבי מתיא בן חרש אומר אפי' הלך בעלה להשקותה ובא עליה בדרך עשאה זונה

so R. Eliezer. R. Akiba said: Zonah implies one who is a prostitute.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though unmarried. ');">¹⁷</span> R. Mathia b. Heresh said: Even a woman whose husband, while going<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To the supreme court in Jerusalem. ');">¹⁸</span> to arrange for her drinking,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the water of bitterness; v. Num. V, 8. ');">¹⁹</span>

רבי יהודה אומר זונה זו אילונית וחכמים אומרים אין זונה אלא גיורת ומשוחררת ושנבעלה בעילת זנות ר' אליעזר אומר פנוי הבא על הפנויה שלא לשם אישות עשאה זונה

cohabited with her on the way,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When she is forbidden to him. From the moment of her seclusion with a stranger, after her husband had warned her to hold no secret meetings with that man, until after the test of the water, cohabitation between husband and wife is forbidden. ');">²⁰</span> is rendered a zonah. R. Judah said: Zonah implies one who is incapable of procreation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If she marries. Cf. supra p. 407, n. 13 and text. ');">²¹</span> And the Sages said: Zonah is none other than a female proselyte, a freed bondwoman, and one who has been subjected to any meretricious intercourse. R. Eleazar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cur. edd. 'Eliezer'. ');">²²</span>

אלא אמר רב אדא בר אהבה הכא בכ"ג עסקינן לאימת קני לה לכי גדלה בעולה היא

said: An unmarried man who had intercourse with an unmarried woman, with no matrimonial intent, renders her thereby a zonah!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How, then, could it be said that R. Eliezer is of the same opi- nion as R. Judah? ');">²³</span> No, said R. Adda b. Ahabah, the reference here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of R. Eliezer supra. ');">²⁴</span> is to<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here we are engaged in'. ');">²⁵</span>

אמר רבא מכלי לב אי דקדשה אבוה מההיא שעתא הוא דקני לה ואי דקדשה נפשה הא רבי אליעזר היא ולא רבנן

a High Priest. For when does he acquire her [as his lawful wife]? Only when she grows up;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While she is a minor, her betrothal has no validity. ');">²⁶</span> but, then, she is already a be'ulah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. Owing to his own cohabitation which had no lawful sanction and was in the nature of an outrage or seduction. ');">²⁷</span> Said Raba:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With reference to R. Adda b. Ahabah's reply. ');">²⁸</span>

אלא אמר רבא לעולם בכהן הדיוט וחיישינן שמא תתפתה עליו א"ה ישראל נמי פתויי קטנה אונס הוא ואונס בישראל מישרא שרי

What thoughtlessness!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] (v. Rashi) without heart. [H] may perhaps mean 'consumption of the heart', i.e., 'what annoyance' to hear such an illogical explanation! ');">²⁹</span> If her father had arranged her betrothal, then [the High Priest] would have acquired her from that very moment;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A father is fully entitled to arrange the betrothal of his minor daughter (v. Kid. 3b). ');">³⁰</span> and if she herself had accepted the betrothal, is this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The ruling that a High Priest may not marry her. ');">³¹</span>

רב פפא אמר בכ"ג והאי תנא הוא דתניא (ויקרא כא, ג) בתולה יכול קטנה ת"ל אשה אי אשה יכול בוגרת ת"ל בתולה הא כיצד יצתה מכלל קטנות ולכלל בגרות לא באתה

then the view of R. Eliezer only<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As seems to be implied by the statement supra where only R. Eliezer is mentioned as if the Rabbis differed from him. ');">³²</span> and not that of the Rabbis!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In such a case, surely, even the Rabbis agree. ');">³³</span> No, explained Raba, it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of R. Eliezer supra. ');">³⁴</span>

רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר האי תנא הוא דתניא בתולה אין בתולה אלא נערה וכן הוא אומר (בראשית כד, טז) והנערה טובת מראה מאד בתולה

refers indeed to a common priest, but [the prohibition to marry the minor] is a precaution against the possibility of her seduction<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Owing to her youth and inexperience. ');">³⁵</span> while living with him. If so, [the same should apply to] an Israelite also! — The seduction of a minor is regarded as an outrage, and an outraged woman is permitted in the case of an Israelite.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To a priest, however, she is forbidden. Hence R. Eliezer's restriction of his ruling to the priest only: ');">³⁶</span> R. Papa replied: [It<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The statement of R. Eliezer supra. ');">³⁴</span>

ר' אלעזר אומר פנוי הבא על הפנויה שלא לשם אישות עשאה זונה אמר רב עמרם אין הלכה כרבי אלעזר:

speaks] of a High Priest, and it represents the opinion of the following Tanna. For it was taught: A virgin;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 4. ');">³⁷</span> as one might assume it to mean a minor, it was explicitly stated wife. If only 'wife' [had been written], it might have been assumed to mean one who is adolescent,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A bogereth (v. Glos.). ');">³⁸</span> hence it was explicitly stated, 'a virgin'. How, then [is the text to be understood]? One who has emerged from her minority but has not yet attained adolescence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A minor is thus forbidden, and R. Eliezer's ruling is based on a Pentateuchal deduction. ');">³⁹</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> לא יבטל אדם מפריה ורביה אלא א"כ יש לו בנים ב"ש אומרים שני זכרים וב"ה אומרים זכר ונקבה שנאמר (בראשית ה, ב) זכר ונקבה בראם:

R. Nahman b. Isaac explained:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Following the line of R. Papa. ');">⁴⁰</span> It is the opinion of the following Tanna. For it was taught: A virgin;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 4. ');">³⁷</span> the only meaning of 'virgin' is damsel;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], one between twelve and twelve and a half years of age. ');">⁴¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> הא יש לו בנים מפריה ורביה בטיל מאשה לא בטיל מסייעא ליה לרב נחמן אמר שמואל דאמר אע"פ שיש לו לאדם כמה בנים אסור לעמוד בלא אשה שנאמר (בראשית ב, יח) לא טוב היות האדם לבדו

and so it is said in Scripture, And the damsel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H]. ');">⁴²</span> was very fair to look upon, a virgin.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], Gen. XXIV, 16. ');">⁴³</span> R. Eleazar said: An unmarried man who had intercourse with an unmarried woman, with no matrimonial intent, renders her thereby a zonah.' R. Amram said: The <i>halachah</i> is not in agreement with the opinion of R. Eleazar.

ואיכא דאמרי הא יש לו בנים בטיל מפריה ורביה ובטיל נמי מאשה נימא תיהוי תיובתא דרב נחמן אמר שמואל לא אין לו בנים נושא אשה בת בנים יש לו בנים נושא אשה דלאו בת בנים נפקא מינה למכור ספר תורה בשביל בנים:

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. A MAN SHALL NOT ABSTAIN FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THE DUTY OF THE PROPAGATION OF THE RACE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H]. V, Gen. I, 28: [H], be fruitful and multiply. ');">⁴⁴</span> UNLESS HE ALREADY HAS CHILDREN. [AS TO THE NUMBER]. BETH SHAMMAI RULED: TWO MALES, AND BETH HILLEL RULED: MALE AND A FEMALE, FOR IT IS STATED IN SCRIPTURE, MALE AND FEMALE CREATED HE THEM.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. V, 2. ');">⁴⁵</span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. [This implies] if he has children, he may abstain from performing the duty of propagation but not from that of living with a wife.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since our Mishnah mentions only the exemption from the former and not from that of the latter. ');">⁴⁶</span>

בית שמאי אומרים שני זכרים: מאי טעמייהו דבית שמאי ילפינן ממשה דכתיב (דברי הימים א כג, טו) בני משה גרשום ואליעזר ובית הלל ילפינן מברייתו של עולם ובית שמאי לילפי מברייתו של עולם אין דנין אפשר

This provides support for a statement R. Nahman made in the name of Samuel who ruled that although a man may have many children he must not remain without a wife, for it is said in the Scriptures, It is not good that the man should be alone.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. II, 18. ');">⁴⁷</span> Others read: [This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Since the Mishnah does not state, A man shall not marry a woman who is incapable of bearing children unless he already has children (Tosaf.)]. ');">⁴⁸</span> implies] if he has children he may abstain from performing the duty of propagation and also from that of living with a wife. May it, then, be said that this presents an objection against the statement R. Nahman made in the name of Samuel?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra, that a man must never remain unmarried. ');">⁴⁹</span> — No; if he has no children he must marry a woman capable of procreation; and if he has children he may marry a woman who is incapable of procreation. What is the practical difference?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As regards the duty of marriage. In either case one must not remain single. ');">⁵⁰</span> — In respect of selling a Scroll of the Law for the sake of children.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Only a man who has no children must sell even such a precious object if thereby he is enabled to marry a woman capable of procreation. If he has children such a sale is forbidden, and he must contract a less expensive marriage with an old or sterile woman. ');">⁵¹</span> BETH SHAMMAI RULED: TWO MALES. What is Beth Shammai's reason? We make an inference from Moses, in connection with whom it is written, The sons of Moses: Gershom and Eliezer.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Chron. XXIII, 15. ');">⁵²</span> And Beth Hillel? — We infer from the creation of the world. Let Beth Shammai also infer from the creation of the world! — The possible cannot be inferred