Parallel
יבמות 99
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
Our Rabbis taught: A man must sometimes submit to halizah from his mother owing to an uncertainty; from his sister, owing to an uncertainty: and from his daughter, owing to an uncertainty'. For instance? If his mother and another woman had two male children, and then gave birth to two male children in a hiding place; and a son of the one mother married the mother of the other son while the son of the other mother married the mother of the first, and both died without issue, the one must submit to halizah from both women and the other must submit to halizah from both women. Thus it follows that each submits to halizah from his mother owing to an uncertainty. 'From his sister. owing to an uncertainty'; for instance? When his mother and another woman gave birth to two female children In a hiding place, and their brothers who were not from the same mother married them and died without issue, he must submit to halizah from both widows. Thus it follows that a man submits to halizah from his sister owing to an uncertainty. 'From his daughter, owing to an uncertainty'; for instance? When his wife and another woman gave birth to two female children in a hiding place, and their [husbands'] brothers married them and died without issue, the one [father] submits to halizah from his daughter owing to the uncertainty and the other [father] submits to halizah from his daughter owing to the uncertainty. It was taught: R. Meir said, A husband and wife may sometimes produce five different castes. How? If an Israelite bought a bondman and a bondwoman in the market, and these had two sons one of whom became a proselyte, the result is that one is a proselyte and the other is an idolater. If [subsequently] he made them perform the prescribed immersion for the purpose of slavery and then they cohabited with one another [and bore a son], behold here we have a proselyte, an idolater and a slave. If he subsequently emancipated the bondwoman and the slave cohabited with her [and had another son], behold here we have a proselyte, an idolater, a slave and a bastard. If he then emancipated both of them and made them marry one another, behold here we have a proselyte, an idolater, a slave, a bastard and an Israelite. What does this teach us? — That when an idolater or a slave cohabits with an Israelitish woman their child is a bastard. Our Rabbis taught: Sometimes a man sells his father to enable his mother to collect her kethubah. How? If an Israelite bought in the market a bondman and a bondwoman who had a son, and having emancipated the bondwoman he married her and bequeathed, in writing, all his estate to her son, the result is that this son sells his father in order to enable his mother to collect her kethubah. What does this teach us? — That all this [Baraitha represents the views of] R. Meir. and that a slave [is regarded as] movable property, such property being mortgaged for a kethubah! And if you prefer I might say. It is this that we were taught: A slave [is on the same footing as] real estate. MISHNAH. IF THE CHILD OF A WOMAN WAS INTERCHANGED WITH THE CHILD OF HER DAUGHTER-IN-LAW. AND WHEN THE INTERCHANGED CHILDREN GREW UP THEY TOOK WIVES AND THEN DIED, THE [OTHER] SONS OF THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW SUBMIT TO HALIZAH BUT MAY NOT CONTRACT LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. FOR [IN THE CASE OF EACH WIDOW AND BROTHER] IT IS UNCERTAIN WHETHER SHE IS THE WIFE OF HIS BROTHER OF THE WIFE OF HIS FATHER'S BROTHER. THE [OTHER] SONS OF THE GRANDMOTHER EITHER SUBMIT TO HALIZAH OR CONTRACT LEVIRATE MARRIAGE, SINCE [IN THE CASE OF EACH WIDOW AND BROTHER] THE ONLY DOUBT IS WHETHER SHE IS THE WIFE OF HIS BROTHER OR THE WIFE OF HIS BROTHER'S SON. IF THE UNTAINTED SONS DIED, THEN THE INTERCHANGED SONS SUBMIT [IN RESPECT OF THE WIDOWS] OF THE SONS OF THE GRANDMOTHER TO HALIZAH BUT MUST NOT CONTRACT THE LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. SINCE [IN THE CASE OF EACH WIDOW AND BROTHER] IT IS UNCERTAIN WHETHER SHE IS THE WIFE OF HIS BROTHER OR THE WIFE OF HIS FATHER'S BROTHER; [WHILE IN RESPECT OF THE WIDOWS] OF THE SONS OF THE DAUGHTER-IN- LAW ONE SUBMITS TO HALIZAH AND THE OTHER [MAY ALSO] CONTRACT THE LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. IF THE CHILD OF A PRIEST'S WIFE WAS INTERCHANGED WITH THE CHILD OF HER BONDWOMAN, BEHOLD BOTH MAY EAT TERUMAH AND RECEIVE ONE SHARE AT THE THRESHINGFLOOR
—
THEY MAY NOT DEFILE THEMSELVES FOR THE DEAD NOR MAY THEY MARRY ANY WOMEN WHETHER THESE ARE ELIGIBLE [FOR MARRIAGE WITH A PRIEST] OR INELIGIBLE. IF WHEN THEY GREW UP, THE INTERCHANGED CHILDREN EMANCIPATED ONE ANOTHER THEY MAY MARRY WOMEN WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR MARRIAGE WITH A PRIEST AND THEY MAY NOT DEFILE THEMSELVES FOR THE DEAD. IF, HOWEVER, THEY DEFILED THEMSELVES, THE PENALTY OF FORTY STRIPES IS NOT INFLICTED UPON THEM. THEY MAY NOT EAT TERUMAH, BUT IF THEY DID EAT THEY NEED NOT PAY COMPENSATION EITHER FOR THE PRINCIPAL OR [THE ADDITIONAL] FIFTH. THEY ARE NOT TO RECEIVE A SHARE AT THE THRESHING-FLOOR, BUT THEY MAY SELL [THEIR OWN] TERUMAH AND THE PROCEEDS ARE THEIRS. THEY RECEIVE NO SHARE IN THE CONSECRATED THINGS OF THE TEMPLE, AND NO CONSECRATED THINGS ARE GIVEN TO THEM. BUT THEY ARE NOT DEPRIVED OF THEIR OWN. THEY ARE EXEMPT FROM [GIVING TO ANY PRIEST] THE SHOULDER, THE CHEEKS AND THE MAW, WHILE THE FIRSTLING OF EITHER OF THEM MUST REMAIN IN THE PASTURE UNTIL IT CONTRACTS A BLEMISH. THE RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO PRIESTS AND THE RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO ISRAELITES ARE BOTH IMPOSED UPON THEM. GEMARA. IF THE UNTAINTED SONS DIED etc.; are, then, the others, because they were mixed up, tainted! — R. Papa replied: Read, 'If those [whose parentage was] certain died'. [IN RESPECT, HOWEVER, OF THE WIDOWS] OF THE SONS OF THE DAUGHTER-IN-LAW ONE SUBMITS TO HALIZAH etc. Only halizah [must take place first] and the levirate marriage afterwards. The levirate marriage, however, must not take place first; since thereby one might infringe the prohibition against a sister-in-law's marriage with a stranger. [IF THE CHILD OF] A PRIEST'S WIFE WAS INTERCHANGED etc. Obviously only ONE SHARE! — Read 'ONE SHARE together'. Here we learn [a thing] which is in agreement with him who ruled that no share of terumah is given to a slave unless his master is with him. For it was taught: No share in terumah is given to a slave unless his master is with him; so R. Judah. R. Jose, however, ruled: The slave may claim, 'If I am a priest, give me for my own sake; and if I am a priest's slave, give me for the sake of my master'. In the place of R. Judah, [men of doubtful status] were raised to the status of priesthood [on the evidence that they received a share] of terumah. In the place of R. Jose, however, no one was raised to the status of priesthood [on the evidence of having received a share] of terumah. It was taught: R. Eleazar b. Zadok said, 'During the whole of my lifetime I have given evidence but once, and through my statement they raised a slave to the priesthood'. 'They raised'? Is [such an error] conceivable! If through the beasts of the righteous the Holy One, blessed be He, does not cause an offence to be committed, how much less through the righteous themselves! — Rather, read. 'They desired to raise a slave to the priesthood, through my statement'. He witnessed [the occurrence] in the place of R. Jose. but went and tendered his evidence in the place of R. Judah. Our Rabbis taught: Ten [classes of people] must not be given a share of terumah at the threshing-floors. They are the following: The deaf, the imbecile, the minor, the tumtum, the hermaphrodite the slave, the woman, the uncircumcised, the levitically unclean, and he who married a woman who is unsuitable for him. In the case of all these, however, [terumah] may be sent to their houses, with the exception of the one who is levitically unclean and one who married a woman who is unsuitable for him. Now, one can well understand [the prohibition in respect of] the deaf, the imbecile and the minor, since they lack intelligence; [in respect of] the tumtum and the hermaphrodite also,
—