Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Kethuboth

Folio 28a

and if he¹  was a priest she must not live with him in the [same] alley.²  If it was a small village³  — such a case happened, and they said: A small village is considered⁴  a neighbourhood.⁵

Who must give way before whom? — Come and hear' It has been taught: She must give way before him, and not he before her, but if the court-yard⁶  belonged to her, he must give way before her.

The question was asked: If the court-yard belonged to both, what is [the law]? Come and hear: 'She must give way before him.' In what case?⁷  If the court-yard belongs to him it is obvious; and if the court-yard belongs to her, has it not been taught: 'If the court-yard belongs to her, he gives way before her'? Hence [it must be] in a such case!⁸  — [No.] Perhaps [it deals with a case] when they rented [the court-yard]. How is it then?⁹  — Come and hear: [It is written:] The Lord will hurl thee away violently as a man,¹⁰  and Rab said:¹¹  moving about¹²  is harder for a man than for a woman.¹³

Our Rabbis taught: If he¹⁴  borrowed¹⁵  from the property of her father,¹⁶  she collects the payment only through another person.¹⁷  R. Shesheth said: And if they [both] come before us to Court, we do not deal with¹⁸  them.¹⁹  R. Papa said: We excommunicate them. R. Huna, the son of R. Joshua. said: We even order them to be lashed. R. Nahman said: It is taught in Ebel Rabbathi:²⁰  This is said only²¹  when she was divorced after²²  marriage, but if she was divorced after betrothal, she may collect the payments herself, because he is not [so] familiar with her.

Once a betrothed and his [former] fiancee came before Raba, and R. Adda b. Mattena, sat before him. Raba placed a messenger²³  between them.²⁴  R. Adda b. Mattena said to him: Did not R. Nahman say: 'It is taught in Ebel Rabbathi etc.'?²⁵  — He answered him: We see²⁶  that they are familiar with one another.²⁷  Some say: Raba did not place a messenger between them. R. Adda b. Mattena said to him: Let the Master place a messenger between them. He answered him:²⁸  Did not R. Nahman say: 'It is taught in Ebel Rabbathi, etc.'? He²⁹  said to him:²⁸  This only when they are not familiar with one another, but [as to] these — I see that they are familiar with one another.²⁷

MISHNAH. THE FOLLOWING³⁰  ARE BELIEVED ON TESTIFYING WHEN THEY ARE GROWN-UP³¹  TO WHAT THEY HAVE SEEN WHEN THEY WERE SMALL:³²  — A PERSON IS BELIEVED ON SAYING 'THIS IS THE HANDWRITING OF MY FATHER.'³³  'THIS IS THE HANDWRITING OF MY TEACHER. 'THIS IS THE HANDWRITING OF MY BROTHER:³⁴  REMEMBER THAT THAT WOMAN WENT OUT WITH A HINUMA AND UNCOVERED HEAD,³⁵  'THAT THAT MAN USED TO GO OUT FROM SCHOOL³⁶  TO IMMERSE³⁷  IN ORDER TO EAT TERUMAH'.³⁸  'THAT HE USED TO TAKE A SHARE WITH US AT THE THRESHING FLOOR, THAT THIS PLACE WAS A BETH HA-PERAS.'³⁹  THAT UP TO HERE WE USED TO GO ON SABBATH.⁴⁰  BUT A MAN IS NOT BELIEVED WHEN HE SAYS: SO-AND — SO HAD A WAY⁴¹  IN THIS PLACE, THAT MAN HAD A PLACE OF STANDING UP AND LAMENTATION⁴²  IN THIS PLACE.

GEMARA. R. Huna b. Joshua said: [This is] only⁴³  when a grown up person is with him.⁴⁴  And it is necessary,⁴⁵  for if he had taught us⁴⁶  [with regard to] his father, [I might say]⁴⁷  that is because he⁴⁸  was always⁴⁹  with him,⁵⁰  but [with regard to] his teacher. [he would] not [be believed]. And if he had taught us [with regard to] his teacher, [I might say]⁵¹  that is because he had reverence⁵²  for his teacher.⁵³  And if he had taught us these two [cases],⁵⁴  [I might say⁵⁵  with regard to] his father, that is because he was always with him, and [with regard to] his teacher, because he had reverence for him, but [with regard to] his brother, in regard to whom there is neither this nor that ground.⁵⁶  I might say [that he is] not [believed]; so he teaches us⁵⁷  [that] since the confirmation of documents⁵⁸  is [only] ordained by the Rabbis,⁵⁹  so the Rabbis have believed him regarding what the Rabbis [themselves] have ordained.

I REMEMBER THAT THAT WOMAN WENT OUT WITH A HINUMA AND UNCOVERED HEAD. What is the reason?⁶⁰  — Because most women get married as virgins, so this⁶¹  is only a declaration.⁶²

THAT THAT MAN USED TO GO OUT FROM SCHOOL TO IMMERSE IN ORDER TO EAT TERUMAH. But perhaps he was the slave of a priest?⁶³  — This supports R. Joshua b. Levi; for R. Joshua b. Levi said: A man is forbidden to teach his slave⁶⁴  the Torah. But is it indeed not [permitted]? Has it not been taught: If his master has borrowed from him⁶⁵  or his master made him

1. The husband.
2. Even if she has not remarried, since a priest's divorced wife is forbidden to a priest.
3. I.e., the place In which they lived.
4. Lit.,'judged'.
5. And she must not marry and live there.
6. With the buildings in it.
7. Lit., 'of what case do we treat'?
8. Lit., 'manner'. When the court belonged to both.
9. What is the answer to the question? Lit., 'what is with regard to it'.
10. Isa. XXII. 17.
11. Referring to this verse.
12. Lit., 'hurlings about'.
13. Hence. if the court-yard belonged to both, she must give way before him. By moving from place to place. a man loses the sphere of his livelihood, while a woman can assure hers by marriage.
14. The husband who was a priest.
15. While they were married.
16. I.e., property that she brought from her father's house or that she inherited from her father after her marriage. (V. Glos. s.v. mulug).
17. So as to avoid personal contact between them, which may lead to familiarity.
18. Lit., 'we do not attach ourselves to them'.
19. She must send someone to represent her.
20. Name of a small Treatise joined to the Babylonian Talmud which deals with laws of mourning. It is also called euphemistically Semahoth ('Joys').
21. Lit., 'in what (case) are these words said', i.e., when must they not meet together after divorce. R. Nahman applied the rule stated there to collecting payments or appearing in court together. For variants v. loc. cit.
22. Lit., 'from'.
23. Apparently a messenger of the court, an usher.
24. Between the betrothed and his former fiancee.
25. That the law does not apply to a betrothed couple that had been divorced.
26. From our own observations now.
27. Therefore the rule stated in Ebel Rabbathi cannot hold good in this case.
28. Raba.
29. R. Adda.
30. Lit., 'and those'.
31. Lit., 'in their greatness', in their majority.
32. Lit., 'in their smallness', in their minority.
33. And the signature which was appended when he was still a minor is confirmed in court on the strength of this testimony made in his majority.
34. To the marriage-ceremony.
35. Signs that she was a virgin-bride: V. supra 15b and 17b.
36. When we were pupils together.
37. I.e., to bathe for purification so as to be ritually fit to eat terumah.
38. Which shews that he is a priest. cf. supra 24a-26a.
39. A field in which a grave has been ploughed becomes a beth ha-peras, and renders unclean through contact for a distance of half a furrow of one hundred cubits In each direction. Peras = half (v. Jast.). Rashi connects it with meaning 'to break' (an area of bone splinters); Maim. with 'to extend' (an area of extension); Tosaf. Nid. 57b with 'to tread' (an area from which people tread aside).
40. On Sabbath it is not permitted to walk 2000 cubits beyond the outer boundary of the town,
41. I.e., a right of way.
42. Var. lec., SITTING DOWN. At funerals. The funeral escort, On returning from a burial, halted on the way seven times at certain places. where they stood up and sat down on the ground to offer comfort to the mourners or to lament for the departed. v. B.B. (Sonc. ed.) p. 420. n. 4.
43. Lit., 'and that is' — Only then he is believed on testifying to what he saw as a child.
44. And we arc informed that he is permitted to join the other witness in the evidence which requires the minimum of two witnesses.
45. To teach the three cases regarding the handwriting.
46. Lit., 'let us hear'.
47. That he is believed.
48. The son.
49. Lit., 'frequent'.
50. With his father; he therefore knew' his handwriting well.
51. That he is believed.
52. Lit., 'fear, awe'.
53. He therefore knew his handwriting well.
54. Of his father and his teacher.
55. That he is believed.
56. He is neither always with him nor does he revere him.
57. Lit., 'he lets us hear' — by stating all the three cases.
58. I.e., the attestation of signatures on documents in court.
59. V. supra 21b.
60. That he is believed.
61. His testimony.
62. No formal testimony of witnesses is required; a general declaration is sufficient.
63. Who is also entitled to eat terumah.
64. And this person was in a school, (lit., 'the house of the book') where he learned the Torah (The Book _ the Bible _ the Torah). Therefore he could not be a slave.
65. From his slave.

a guardian or he put on Tefillin¹  in the presence of his master or he read three verses²  in the Synagogue, he does not become free!³  — There⁴  it happened that he did it with his consent;⁵  [for what case] do we state [our rule]?⁶  When he treats him as a child.⁷

TO IMMERSE IN ORDER TO EAT TERUMAH. [Only] with regard to Rabbinical terumah.⁸  THAT HE WAS TAKING A SHARE WITH US AT THE THRESHING FLOOR. But perhaps he was the slave of a priest? — We have learned [this] according to him who says: One does not distribute terumah to a slave unless his master is with him,⁹  for it has been taught: One does not distribute terumah to a slave unless his master is with him. This is the view of R. Judah. R. Jose says: He can say: 'If I am a priest, give me for my sake, and if I am the slave of a priest, give me for the sake of my master'. In the place of R. Judah they used to raise from terumah to the status of a priest; in the place of R. Jose they would not raise from terumah to the status of a priest.¹⁰

It is taught:¹¹  R. Eleazar, the son of R. Jose,¹²  said: I have never given testimony. Once I gave testimony and they raised a slave to the priesthood through my evidence.¹³  [You say] they raised! Do you indeed mean to say this? Now. if the Holy One, blessed be He, does not bring a stumbling¹⁴  through the animals of the pious men,¹⁵  how much less through the pious men themselves?¹⁶  — But,¹⁷  they wanted to raise a slave to the priesthood through my evidence. He saw it¹⁸  in the place of R. Jose,¹⁹  and he went and testified in the place of R. Judah.²⁰

THAT THIS PLACE WAS A BETH HA-PERAS Why?²¹  — Because [the law of] beth ha-peras is Rabbinical, for Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: One blows away [the dust from]²²  the beth ha.peras. and goes [there]. Rab Judah b. Ammi said in the name of Rab Judah: A beth ha-peras which has been trodden out is clean. What is the reason?²³  It is impossible that a bone [of the size] of a barleycorn was not trodden down by the foot.²⁴

UP TO HERE HE USED TO GO ON SABBATH. He holds that the [Sabbath] limits²⁵  are Rabbinical.

A MAN IS NOT BELIEVED WHEN HE SAYS: THAT MAN HAD A WAY IN THIS PLACE, SO-AND-SO HAD A PLACE OF STANDING UP AND LAMENTATION IN THIS PLACE. What is the reason? Money we do not extract.²⁶

Our Rabbis taught:²⁷  A boy is believed when he says, 'Thus my father told me: this family is clean. this family is unclean. — [You say,] 'clean and unclean'! Do you indeed mean to say this?²⁸  But [say]: 'this family is fit²⁹  and this family is unfit', 'That we have eaten at the Kezazah³⁰  [on the occasion of the marriage] of the daughter of So-and-so to So-and-so', 'that we used to bring hallah and [priestly] gifts³¹  to the priest So-and-so'. But only through himself,³²  and not through someone else. In all these cases, if he was an heathen and he became a proselyte, a slave and he was set free, he is not believed.³³  [But] he is not believed when he says 'that man had a way in this place, that man had a place of standing up and lamentation in this place'. R'. Johanan b. Beroka, said. He is believed. To which [clause] does R. Johanan b. Beroka, refer? Shall I say, to the last clause? This is extracting money?³⁴  — But [it refers] to the first clause. In all these cases, if he was a heathen and he became a proselyte, a slave and he was set free, he is not believed. R. Johanan b. Beroka says: He is believed. In what [principle] do they differ? — The first Tanna holds: Since he was a heathen he would not pay special attention to it,³⁵  and R. Johanan b. Beroka, holds: Since he had it in his mind to become a proselyte he would pay special attention to it.

What is KEZAZAH? — The Rabbis taught: In what manner does kezazah take place? If one of the brothers has married a woman who is unworthy of him, the members³⁶  of the family come together, bring a cask full of fruit, break it in the middle of the open place³⁷  and say. Brethren of the house of Israel, hear. Our brother So-and-so has married a woman who is not worthy of him, and we are afraid lest his descendants³⁸  will be united with our descendants. Come and take for yourselves a sign³⁹  for future generations, that his descendants shall not be united with our descendants'. This is kezazah with regard to which a child is believed when he testifies.

1. The Phylacteries.
2. From the Bible.
3. Lit., 'he does not go out to freedom', v. Git. 70a. This shews that a slave does learn the Torah.
4. In the case just quoted.
5. It may sometimes happen that a slave is taught the Torah.
6. That it is forbidden to teach a slave the Torah.
7. And teaches him as he would teach his own children. This is forbidden. Therefore the person in the Mishnah could not be a slave.
8. Cf. supra 25a. Only with regard to Rabbinical terumah is such testimony sufficient.
9. As he was alone and took a share at the threshing floor, it shews that he was a priest.
10. V. supra 26a-27b. And therefore they would not give a slave terumah in the absence of his master, lest this should be used as evidence in regard to marriage.
11. In a Baraitha.
12. V. Yeb. 99b.
13. Lit., 'through my mouth'.
14. A sin, an offence.
15. V. Git. 7a.
16. And how could such an offence have been caused through R. Eleazar.
17. The case was as follows.
18. That they gave terumah to a person who in fact was a slave in the absence of his master.
19. Where they did not raise from terumah to the state of a priest. There was therefore no harm in distributing terumah to a slave at the threshing floor.
20. Where they raised from terumah to the state of a priest. They therefore thought that this man was a priest. The mistake was apparently found out in time and he was not raised. No offence was brought about through a pious man.
21. Why was this testimony sufficient?
22. To see whether there are any bones there.
23. Why is it regarded as clean?
24. And by being reduced to a smaller size is no longer liable to communicate defilement.
25. I.e., the ordinance regarding the Sabbath limits for walking is Rabbinical; therefore this testimony is sufficient.
26. On the strength of that statement. In civil matters such testimony is not sufficient.
27. Cf. Tosef. Keth. III for variants.
28. 'Clean' and 'unclean' are not applicable to families.
29. Unblemished and fit to marry into priestly families.
30. 'Cutting off', 'severing family connections'; a ceremony attending the sale of an heirloom to an outsider, and the marriage of a man beneath his social rank. It is the marriage-Kezazah that is spoken of here, v. infra.
31. V. Deut. XVIII, 3.
32. The boy himself must have been the messenger.
33. As to what he saw when he was a heathen or a slave.
34. V. note 5.
35. To the various matters about which he testified.
36. Lit., 'the sons'.
37. [H]. supra p. 41, n. 5. Here. too, it can mean the open space before the house.
38. Lit., 'seed'.
39. As a token. They should remember what happened and tell their children, so that everyone will know to distinguish between the descendants of this brother and those of the rest of the family.