Kiddushin

But according to R. Johanan b. Beroka, who maintained, Concerning both [Adam and Eve] it is said: And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful and multiply,1 what can be said? — Because the study of the Torah and redemption of the firstborn are two verses with one purpose, and such do not illumine [others]. But according to R. Johanan b. Beroka too, let procreation and fear be regarded as two verses with one purpose,2 which do not illumine [other cases]?3 — Both are necessary. For if the Divine Law wrote fear and not procreation, I would argue, The Divine Law stated, [Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,] and conquer it: only a man, whose nature It is to conquer, but not a woman, as it is not her nature to conquer.4 And if Scripture wrote procreation and not fear, I would reason: A man, who has the means to do this [sc. to shew fear to his parents] is referred to, but not a woman, seeing that she lacks the means to fulfil this;5 and that being so, she has no obligation at all.6 Thus both are necessary. Now, that is well on the view that two verses with the same teaching do not illumine [others]: but on the view that they do, what can be said?7 — Said Raba, The Papunians8 know the reason of this thing, and who is it? R. Aha b. Jacob. Scripture saith, And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the Torah of the Lord may be in thy mouth:9 hence the whole Torah is compared to phylacteries: just as phylacteries are an affirmative command limited to time, and women are exempt, so are they exempt from all positive commands limited to time.10 And since women are exempt from affirmative precepts limited to time, it follows that they are subject to those not limited to time.11 Now, that is well on the view that phylacteries are a positive command limited to time; but what can be said on the view that they are not?12 — Whom do you know to maintain that phylacteries are an affirmative precept not limited to time? R. Meir. But he holds that there are two verses with the same teaching, and such do not illumine [others].13 But according to R. Judah, who maintains that two verses with the same teaching illumine [others], and [also] that phylacteries are a positive command limited to time, what can be said? — Because unleavened bread, rejoicing [on Festivals], and ‘assembling’ are three verses with the same teaching,14 and such do not illumine [others].15 AND ALL NEGATIVE PRECEPTS etc. Whence do we know it? — Said Rab Judah in Rab's name, and the School of R. Ishmael taught likewise, Scripture saith, When a man or a woman shall commit any sin that men commit [. . . then that soul shall be guilty]:16 thus the Writ equalised woman and man in respect of all penalties [decreed] in the Torah.17 The School of R. Eliezer taught: Scripture saith, [Now these are the judgments] which thou shalt set before them:18 The Writ equalised woman and man in respect of all civil laws in Scripture.19 The School of Hezekiah taught: Scripture saith, [but if the ox were wont to gore . . .] and he kill a man or woman [the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death];20 the Writ placed woman on a par with man in respect of all death sentences [decreed] in Scripture. Now, it is necessary [that all three should be intimated]. For if the first [only] were stated, [l would say] that the All-Merciful had compassion upon her [woman], for the sake of atonement;21 but as for civil law, I might argue that it applies only to man, who engages in commerce, but not to woman, who does not. While if the second [alone] were intimated, that is because oneðs livelihood depends thereon;22 but as for ransom ,23 I might argue, Obermeyer, p. 242. the ‘memorial,’ is stronger than a mere analogy of the type hitherto discussed, and so outweighs any opposite conclusions arrived at by analogy. would deduce that woman are exempt from all such precepts (and from precepts limited to time too, a fortiori). ‘assembling’ do not furnish any opposite conclusion, for they are two verses with the same teaching. husband or her host (supra 34b) is rejected. statement.