Yevamot

No man can impose a prohibition upon that which is not his. The question was raised: What would Samuel  have said with regard to the hermaphrodite?  — Come and hear what Samuel said to R. Anan: The Baraitha cannot be maintained in the face of our Mishnah. What would Samuel have said in respect of grafting?  — Come and hear what Samuel said to R. Anan: Teach in accordance with the view of him who stated 'three and thirty'. What is the opinion of Rab  in respect of protracted labour?  — This is undecided. What is Rab's Opinion in respect of forfeiture?  R. Joseph replied. Come and hear what R. Huna stated in the name of Rab: The halachah is not in agreement with R. Jose. Said Abaye to him:  What reason do you see for relying upon this statement?  Rely rather on that which R. Adda made in the name of Rab: The halachah is in agreement with R. Jose! — Who is it [that is referred to by the phrase] 'At the school of Rab it was stated'?  R. Huna [of course];  and R. Huna it was who stated that the halachah is not in agreement [with R. Jose]. R. JUDAH STATED: A TUMTUM etc. R. Ammi remarked: What would R. Judah  have done with a case like that of the tumtum of Bairi,  who, after having been placed upon the operating table  and operated upon, begat seven children!  And R Judah?  — He could tell you:  An enquiry should be made as to the origin of his children. It was taught: R. Jose son of. R. Judah stated that a tumtum must not participate in halizah, since it is possible that on being operated upon he may be found to be a congenital saris.  Is everyone then,  who is operated upon a male! — It is this that he meant: It is possible that on being operated upon he may be found to be a female; and were he found to be a male, it is even then possible that he might be found to be a congenital saris. What is the practical difference between them?  — Raba replied: The practical difference between them is the question of disqualification  where other brothers are in existence,  and that of halizah where no other brothers exist. R. Samuel son of R. Judah said in the name of R. Abba, the brother of R. Judah b. Zabdi, in the name of Rab Judah in the name of Rab: In respect of the hermaphrodite the penalty of stoning is incurred through either of his organs. An objection was raised: R. Eliezer stated, 'In respect of the hermaphrodite the penalty of stoning is incurred as in the case of a male. This, however, applies only to his male organ; but in respect of his female organ no penalty is incurred'!  — He  holds the same opinion as the following Tanna. For it was taught: R. Simai stated that in respect of the hermaphrodite the penalty of stoning is incurred through either of his organs. What is R. Simai's reason? — Raba replied: Bar Hamduri has explained it to me as follows: And thou shalt not lie with a male, as well as with womankind;  what male is it that is capable of two manners of lying?  Obviously  the hermaphrodite. And the Rabbis? — Though he is capable of two manners of lying it is nevertheless written in Scripture. With a male.  Whence, however, do the Rabbis  derive the law concerning an ordinary male? — From And.  Whence  the prohibition in respect of unnatural intercourse with a woman? — From Woman. R. Shezbi stated in the name of R. Hisda: It is not in all respects that R. Eliezer maintains that the hermaphrodite is a proper male. Since, were you to say so, [such an animal]  would be fit for consecration.  And whence is it derived that it  may not be consecrated? — From what the Rabbis taught: [A bird] that was covered,  set aside [for idolatrous purposes], or worshipped, that was the hire of a harlot  or the price of a dog,  a tumtum or hermaphrodite, causes the defilement of one's clothes  by [contact with one's] oesophagus.  R. Eliezer said: [A bird that was] a tumtum or hermaphrodite does not impart the defilement of clothes through contact with one's oesophagus; for R. Eliezer maintained that wherever male and female were mentioned,  the tumtum and hermaphrodite are to be excluded; but [in the case of the sacrifice of a] bird, since in respect of it no mention was made of male or female, the tumtum and hermaphrodite are not to be excluded. R. Nahman b. Isaac said: We also learned [a similar Baraitha]: R. Eliezer stated: