Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

May 26, 2016 | 讬状讞 讘讗讬讬专 转砖注状讜

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Kiddushin 76

Study Guide Kiddushin 76. The gemara gives a number explanations for Rabbi Elazar’s opinion about why a Cuti can’t marry a Cutit. 聽How far back does one need to check the lineage of the woman’s family he is planning to marry? 聽It depends on if she is from the family of Kohanim or not. 聽Why does one need to check her family but she doesn’t need to check the man’s family? 聽There are all sorts of people whose family lineage doesn’t need checking. 聽The gemara explains each one.


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讜驻讜讟专讬诐 讗转 讛谞砖讜讗讜转 诪讗讬 讚专砖讬 诇讗 转讛讬讛 讗砖转 讛诪转 讛讞讜爪讛 诇讗讬砖 讝专 讛讱 讚讬转讘讛 讞讜爪讛 讛讬讗 诇讗 转讛讬讛 诇讗讬砖 讝专 讗讘诇 讛讱 讚诇讗 讬转讘讛 讞讜爪讛 转讛讬讛 诇讗讬砖 讝专

and they would exempt married women from 岣litza and levirate marriage. The Gemara elaborates: In what way would they expound the verse to lead them to this conclusion? The verse states: 鈥淭he wife of the dead man shall not be married outside of the family to one not of his kin; her brother-in-law will have intercourse with her and take her to him to be his wife, and consummate the levirate marriage鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:5). They understood the word 鈥渙utside鈥 to be a description of the woman: She who sits outside, i.e., one who is only betrothed; she shall not be married to one not of his kin, and it is with her that the obligation of levirate marriage applies. But she who is not sitting outside, but who has already married, shall marry one not of his kin. Consequently, the concern with regard to the Samaritans is that their descendants include the children of a widow who unlawfully wed one who was not her brother-in-law.

讜专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚讗诪专 讬砖 诪诪讝专 诪讞讬讬讘讬 诇讗讜讬谉

After having explained which prohibition the Samaritans violated, the Gemara explains how this accounts for the prohibition with regard to marriage with Samaritans. And Rabbi Akiva conforms to his standard line of reasoning, as he says: The offspring of intercourse for which one is liable for violating a prohibition is a mamzer. Therefore, the descendants of a yevama who had transgressed the prohibition of: 鈥淭he wife of the deceased shall not be married outside of the family to one not of his kin,鈥 have the status of mamzerim.

讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬谉 讘讚拽讚讜拽讬 诪爪讜转 诪讗谉 讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讗讬讚讬 讘专 讗讘讬谉 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诪爪转 讻讜转讬 诪讜转专转 讜讗讚诐 讬讜爪讗 讘讛 讬讚讬 讞讜讘转讜 讘驻住讞 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜住专 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬诐 讘讚拽讚讜拽讬 诪爪讜转 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 砖讛讞讝讬拽讜 讘讛 讻讜转讬诐 讛专讘讛 诪讚拽讚拽讬诐 讘讛 讬讜转专 诪讬砖专讗诇

And some say a third opinion as to why the Sages disqualified Samaritans for marriage: It is because they are not well versed in the details of mitzvot. The Gemara asks: Who is the one indicated by the phrase: Some say? Rav Idi bar Avin said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. As it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Pesa岣m 2:2): The matza of a Samaritan is permitted to be eaten on Passover and is not considered to be leavened bread, and a person can fulfill his obligation to eat matza on the first night of Passover with it; but Rabbi Eliezer prohibits it, since Samaritans are not well versed in the details of mitzvot, and there is concern that their matza might be leavened. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says that this is not a concern, as with regard to any mitzva that Samaritans embraced and accepted, they are more exacting in its observance than are Jews.

讜讗诇讗 讛讻讬 诪讗讬 讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬谉 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬谉 讘转讜专转 拽讬讚讜砖讬谉 讜讙讬专讜砖讬谉

The Gemara asks: But here, with regard to marriage, in what details are they not well versed? The Gemara answers: It is because they are not well versed with regard to the laws of betrothal and divorce. Consequently, it is possible that their bills of divorce were invalid, or that a betrothed woman was allowed to remarry without having received a bill of divorce, which would mean that her future children would be mamzerim.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 诪诪讝专 诪讗讞讜转讜 讜诪诪讝专 诪讗砖转 讗讞 谞转注专讘讜 讘讛谉 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讬砖 诪诪讝专 诪讞讬讬讘讬 讻专讬转讜转 谞讬转谞讬 讞讚讗 诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛 讻讱 讛讬讛

Rav Na岣an says that Rabba bar Avuh says: Samaritans are of flawed lineage because a mamzer resulting from intercourse between a man and his sister and a mamzer resulting from intercourse between a man and his brother鈥檚 wife were assimilated among them, and they therefore all have the status of mamzerim due to the uncertainty as to the identity of those assimilated mamzerim. The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us by providing the details of how they are mamzerim due to uncertainty? If he intended to incidentally teach us the halakha that the offspring from intercourse for which one is liable to receive karet is a mamzer, let him teach one example, by mentioning the example of a mamzer from a sister. The Gemara answers: He did not mention these details to teach us a halakha, but rather the incident that took place, took place in this way, and that is why the Samaritans were considered to be of flawed lineage.

讜专讘讗 讗诪专 注讘讚 讜砖驻讞讛 谞转注专讘讜 讘讛谉 讗讬住讜专讗 诪砖讜诐 诪讗讬 诪砖讜诐 砖驻讞讛 谞讬转谞讬 讞讚讗 诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛 讻讱 讛讬讛

And Rava says: A Canaanite slave and a Canaanite maidservant were assimilated among them. The Gemara asks: In these cases, the prohibition is due to what? It is due to a Canaanite maidservant, whose children are slaves. But if so, let him teach one example; why also mention a Canaanite slave, whose child resulting from intercourse with a Jewish woman is of unflawed lineage? The Gemara again answers: The incident that took place, took place in this way.

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜砖讗 讗砖讛 讻讛谞转 爪专讬讱 诇讘讚讜拽 讗讞专讬讛 讗专讘注 讗诪讛讜转 砖讛谉 砖诪谞讛 讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗讘讬 讗诪讛 讜讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗讘讬讛 讜讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗讘讬 讗讘讬讛 讜讗诪讛 诇讜讬讛 讜讬砖专讗诇讬转 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉 注讜讚 讗讞转

MISHNA: A priest who marries a woman who is the daughter of a priest must investigate with regard to her background, i.e., he must check previous generations of her family tree from both the maternal and paternal sides, for four mothers, which are eight. How so? He investigates the lineage of her mother, and the mother of her mother, and the mother of her mother鈥檚 father, and her mother, i.e., the mother of her mother鈥檚 fathers鈥 mother. And he also investigates the lineage of the mother of her father, and her mother, i.e., the mother of her father鈥檚 mother, and the mother of her father鈥檚 father, and her mother i.e., the mother of her father鈥檚 father鈥檚 mother. If he seeks to marry a Levite woman or an Israelite woman, he adds to these an investigation of mothers of one additional generation.

讗讬谉 讘讜讚拽讬谉 诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讝讘讞 讜诇诪注诇讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛讚讜讻谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛住谞讛讚专讬谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 讜讻诇 砖讛讜讞讝拽讜 讗讘讜转讬讜 诪砖讜讟专讬 讛专讘讬诐 讜讙讘讗讬 爪讚拽讛 诪砖讬讗讬谉 诇讻讛讜谞讛 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘讚讜拽 讗讞专讬讛谉

With regard to these investigations, one need not investigate from the altar and above. If his ancestors included a priest who served at the altar, one checks no further, as the court would have investigated his lineage before allowing him to participate in the Temple service. Nor do they check from the platform, used by Levites for singing in the Temple, and above, nor from the Sanhedrin and above, since only one whose lineage has been examined and who was found to be fit can be appointed to the Sanhedrin. And similarly, anyone whose ancestors held public posts, and anyone whose ancestors were charity collectors, may marry into the priesthood, and there is no need to investigate their lineage, since no one of flawed lineage would be appointed to those positions.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗祝 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 讞转讜诐 注讚 讘注专讻讬 讛讬砖谞讛 砖诇 爪讬驻讜专讬 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘谉 讗谞讟讬讙谞讜住 讗讜诪专 讗祝 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 诪讜讻转讘 讘讗住讟专讟讬讗 砖诇 诪诇讱

Rabbi Yosei says: Even the descendants of one who had signed as a witness in the old court [ba鈥檃rki] of Tzippori do not need to have their lineage investigated. Rabbi 岣nina ben Antigonus says: Even the descendants of one who was written in the army list [be鈥檌steratya] of the Jewish king do not need to have their lineage investigated.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讘谞砖讬 讘讚拽讬谞谉 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讘讙讘专讬 诇讗 讘讚拽讜 谞砖讬 讚讻讬 诪讬谞爪讜 讘讛讚讬 讛讚讚讬 讘注专讬讜转 讛讜讗 讚诪讬谞爪讜 讜讗诐 讗讬转讗 讚讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇转讗 诇讗 讗讬转 诇讬讛 拽诇讗 讙讘专讬 讚讻讬 诪讬谞爪讜 讘讛讚讬 讛讚讚讬 讘讬讜讞住讬谉 讛讜讗 讚诪讬谞爪讬 讗诐 讗讬转讗 讚讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇转讗 讗讬转 诇讬讛 拽诇讗

GEMARA: What is different about women that we investigate their lineage, and what is different about men that we do not investigate their lineage? Why shouldn鈥檛 we also examine the lineage of a bride鈥檚 male ancestors for any possible flaw, as we do her female ancestors? The Gemara answers: When women quarrel with each other, it is through accusations of engaging in forbidden sexual intercourse, i.e., licentiousness, that they quarrel. And if it is so that there is a matter of a flaw with regard to the lineage of the woman in question, it would not generate publicity. By contrast, when men quarrel with each other, it is through accusations of flawed lineage that they quarrel. Therefore, if it is so that there is a matter of a flaw with regard to her father鈥檚 lineage, it would generate publicity, even if no investigation is conducted.

讜讗讬讛讬 谞诪讬 转讘讚讜拽 讘讬讛 讘讚讬讚讬讛 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诇讗 讛讜讝讛专讜 讻砖专讜转 诇讬谞砖讗 诇驻住讜诇讬诐

The Gemara inquires: But she should also investigate his lineage; why is only the lineage of the woman investigated? The Gemara comments: This supports Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It was not prohibited for women of unflawed lineage, i.e., daughters of priests, to marry men of flawed lineage, such as 岣lalim, converts, or emancipated slaves. Therefore, women are not required to investigate the lineage of potential husbands.

专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 转谞讬 讗专讘注 讗诪讛讜转 砖讛诐 砖转讬诐 注砖专讛 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 讗专讘注 讗诪讛讜转 砖讛诐 砖砖 注砖专讛 讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛

Rav Adda bar Ahava taught that one needs to investigate four mothers who are twelve, adding an additional two generations of mothers of each of the woman鈥檚 parents. It was taught in a baraita: Four mothers who are sixteen. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to Rav Adda bar Ahava,

诪讜拽讬诐 诇讛 讘诇讜讬讛 讜讘转 讬砖专讗诇 讗诇讗 诪转谞讬转讗 谞讬诪讗 驻诇讬讙讗 诇讗 诪讗讬 注讜讚 讗讞转 讝讜讙 讗讞转

he interprets his statement as referring to a Levite woman or an Israelite woman, about whom the mishna states that one must investigate one additional generation. Therefore, Rav Adda bar Ahava鈥檚 ruling accords with that of the mishna. But shall we say the baraita disputes the mishna? The Gemara rejects this: No, what is the meaning of the mishna鈥檚 phrase: One additional? It means one pair, i.e., two more mothers on each side.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讝讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讘诇 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻诇 诪砖驻讞讜转 讘讞讝拽转 讻砖专讜转 讛谉 注讜诪讚讜转 讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讘专 讙讜专讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪砖谞转讬谞讜 讻砖拽讜专讗 注诇讬讜 注专注专 诪讗谉 讚诪转谞讬 讛讗 诇讗 诪转谞讬 讛讗

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This mishna presents the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: All families retain a presumptive status of fitness, and do not require investigation. The Gemara asks: Is that so, did Rav really say this? But doesn鈥檛 Rav 岣ma bar Gurya say that Rav says: Our mishna is referring only to a case when an objection was registered about the family concerning its lineage, but if no objection was registered, everyone agrees that the family retains its presumptive status of fitness. The Gemara answers: The one who taught this statement in the name of Rav did not teach that other statement.

讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讝讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讘诇 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻诇 诪砖驻讞讜转 讘讞讝拽转 讻砖专讜转 讛谉 注讜诪讚讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讘专 讙讜专讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗诐 拽讜专讗 注诇讬讜 注专注专 爪专讬讱 诇讘讚讜拽 讗讞专讬讛

There are those who say that this discussion occurred as follows: Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This mishna presents the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: All families retain presumptive status of fitness. Rav 岣ma bar Gurya says that Rav says: When an objection is registered about a family concerning its lineage, everyone agrees that he must investigate it. According to this version, there is no contradiction between these two complementary statements.

讗讬谉 讘讜讚拽讬谉 诪谉 讛诪讝讘讞 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讘讚拽讜讛 诇讗 讛讜讜 诪住拽讬 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛讚讜讻谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讗诪专 诪专 砖砖诐 讛讬讜 讬讜砖讘讬诐 诪讬讬讞住讬 讻讛讜谞讛 讜诪讬讬讞住讬 诇讜讬讛

搂 The mishna teaches that one need not investigate from the altar and above. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: If the Sanhedrin had not examined his lineage they would not have allowed him to ascend to the altar and perform the sacrificial rites. The mishna further teaches: Nor must one investigate from the platform and above. The Gemara asks: What is the reason? The Gemara answers: It is as the Master said in his description of the Temple chambers (Tosefta, 岣giga 2:4): For there in the Hewn Chamber those of the priesthood with unflawed lineage and the Levites of unflawed lineage sat and examined the lineage of everyone who came to serve in the Temple.

讜诇讗 诪住谞讛讚专讬谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚转谞讬 专讘 讬讜住祝 讻砖诐 砖讘讬转 讚讬谉 诪谞讜拽讬谉 讘爪讚拽 讻讱 诪谞讜拽讬谉 诪讻诇 诪讜诐 讗诪专 诪专讬诪专 诪讗讬 拽专讗讛 讻诇讱 讬驻讛 专注讬转讬 讜诪讜诐 讗讬谉 讘讱

The mishna also taught: Nor must one investigate from the Sanhedrin and above. What is the reason there is no need to investigate further? The Gemara answers: It is as Rav Yosef taught that just as the court is clean in justice, so too, it is clean of any blemish, i.e., it does not include anyone of flawed lineage. Mareimar said: What is the verse from which it is derived? It states: 鈥淵ou are all fair, my love; and there is no blemish in you鈥 (Song of Songs 4:7).

讗讬诪讗 诪讜诪讗 诪诪砖 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讛转讬爪讘讜 砖诐 注诪讱 注诪讱 讘讚讜诪讬诐 诇讱

The Gemara asks: But perhaps you should say that this is referring to an actual blemish, that one who has a physical blemish may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin. Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov said: It is not necessary to derive the halakha that one who has a physical blemish may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin from this verse, as the verse states with regard to the transfer of the Divine Spirit from Moses to the Elders: 鈥淭hat they may stand there with you鈥 (Numbers 11:16), and the phrase 鈥渨ith you鈥 is explained to mean: With similarity to you, teaching that the members of the Sanhedrin must be whole in body like Moses.

讜讚诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讻讬谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讛拽诇 诪注诇讬讱 讜谞砖讗讜 讗转讱 讘讚讜诪讬诐 诇讱

The Gemara rejects this proof: But perhaps those who were with Moses had to be free of any blemish due to the Divine Presence, which rested upon them, but this is not a requirement for judges on the Sanhedrin. Rav Na岣an said that the verse states: 鈥淪o shall they make it easier for you and bear the burden with you鈥 (Exodus 18:22). The phrase 鈥渨ith you鈥 is explained to mean: With similarity to you, i.e., without blemish. This verse is referring to the appointment of regular judges, upon whom the Divine Presence does not rest, and teaches that all members of the Sanhedrin must be whole in body. The verse from Song of Songs teaches that they must be of unflawed lineage as well.

讻诇 诪讬 砖讛讜讞讝拽讜 讗讘讜转讬讜 诪砖讜讟专讬 讛专讘讬诐 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚诇讗 诪讜拽诪讬谞谉 诪驻住讜诇讬诐 讜专诪讬谞讛讜 讛讻诇 讻砖专讬诐 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬 诪诪讜谞讜转 讜讗讬谉 讛讻诇 讻砖专讬诐 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬 谞驻砖讜转 讜讛讜讬谞谉 讘讛 讛讻诇 诇讗讬转讜讬讬 诪讗讬 讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诇讗讬转讜讬讬 诪诪讝专 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜讻谉 转谞讬 专讘 砖诪注讜谉 讘专 讝讬专讗 讘拽讬讚讜砖讬 讚讘讬 诇讜讬 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches: Anyone whose ancestors held public posts may marry into the priesthood without investigation. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that we do not establish officers and other public appointees from people with flawed lineage? And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following statement: All are fit to judge cases of monetary law, but not all are fit to judge cases of capital law. And we discussed it: What does the word: All, serve to include? And Rav Yehuda says: It serves to include a mamzer, that he may judge cases of monetary law. This indicates that even a mamzer may occupy a public position. Abaye said: The mishna is referring to public officials in Jerusalem, where they were particular that all their judges should be of unflawed lineage. And Rav Shimon bar Zeira similarly taught in the baraita of Kiddushin from the school of Levi: It is referring to public officials in Jerusalem.

讜讙讘讗讬 爪讚拽讛 诪砖讬讗讬诐 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬讜谉 讚诪谞爪讜 讘讛讚讬 讗讬谞砖讬 讚讗诪专 诪专 诪诪砖讻谞讬诐 注诇 讛爪讚拽讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘注专讘 砖讘转 讜讗诐 讗讬转讗 讚讗讬讻讗 讗讬转 诇讬讛 拽诇讗

The mishna teaches: And anyone whose ancestors were charity collectors may marry into the priesthood without investigation. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: It is due to the fact that they quarrel with people, as the Master said: Those appointed to collect charity may forcibly take collateral for charity from those who have not fulfilled their obligations even on the eve of Shabbat, when people are preoccupied and rushed, leading to quarrels. And if it is so that there is a flaw in the lineage of the collector鈥檚 family, it would generate publicity through the quarrels that are an unavoidable aspect of his job.

讗讜砖驻讝讬讻谞讬讛 讚专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讙讬讜专讗 讛讜讛 讜讛讜讛 拽讗 诪谞爪讬 讗讬讛讜 讜专讘 讘讬讘讬 诪专 讗诪专 讗谞讗 注讘讬讚谞讗 住专专讜转讗 讚诪转讗 讜诪专 讗诪专 讗谞讗 注讘讬讚谞讗 住专专讜转讗 讚诪转讗 讗转讜 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 诇讛讜 转谞讬谞讗 砖讜诐 转砖讬诐 注诇讬讱 诪诇讱 诪拽专讘 讗讞讬讱 讻诇 诪砖讬诪讜转 砖讗转讛 诪砖讬诐 诇讗 讬讛讬讛 讗诇讗 诪拽专讘 讗讞讬讱

The Gemara relates: Rav Adda bar Ahava鈥檚 host was the son of a convert, and he and Rav Beivai were quarreling. One said: I will perform the service of the city, i.e., I will be appointed to a position of authority, and one said: I will perform the service of the city. They came before Rav Yosef to decide between them. Rav Yosef said to them: We learned: 鈥淵ou shall set him king over you, whom the Lord your God shall choose; one from among your brothers鈥 (Deuteronomy 17:15). The repetition of the verb 鈥渟et鈥 in the verse [som tasim] indicates: All appointments that you appoint may be only from among your brothers. Therefore, a convert may not serve in any official position.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讗诪讜 诪讬砖专讗诇 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诪讜 诪讬砖专讗诇 诪拽专讘 讗讞讬讱 拽专讬谞讗 讘讬讛 讛诇讻讱 专讘 讘讬讘讬 讚讙讘专讗 专讘讗 讛讜讗 诇讬注讬讬谉 讘诪讬诇讬 讚砖诪讬讗 讜诪专 诇讬注讬讬谉 讘诪讬诇讬 讚诪转讗 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛诇讻讱 诪讗谉 讚诪砖专讬 爪讜专讘讗 诪讚专讘谞谉 讘讗讜砖驻讬讝讬讻谞讬讛 诇讗砖专讬 讻专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讚讬讚注 诇诪讛驻讬讱 诇讬讛 讘讝讻讜转讬讛

Rav Adda bar Ahava said to Rav Yosef: And does this halakha apply even if the mother of the person in question is born Jewish? In other words, does this apply to one whose father is a convert? Rav Yosef said to him: If his mother is born Jewish, the words: 鈥淔rom among your brothers鈥 are said about him. Therefore, now that it has been determined that this person鈥檚 mother was born Jewish and that he is fit to serve a public role, Rav Beivai, who is a great man in Torah learning, should oversee the matters of Heaven, i.e., the public issues that involve the performance of mitzvot; and the Master, Rav Adda bar Ahava鈥檚 host, should oversee the other matters of the city. Abaye said, as a moral of the story: Therefore, if one has a Torah scholar as a guest, let him host a person such as Rav Adda bar Ahava, who knows how to plead in his favor, as it was the argument of Rav Adda bar Ahava that led to his host鈥檚 appointment.

专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诪讟驻诇 讘讛讜 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 诪讟驻诇 讘讛讜 讘诪注专讘讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讬砖 讻讜专讬 诇讗 诪讜拽诪讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讘谞讛专讚注讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讬砖 讙专讙讜转讗 诇讗 诪讜拽诪讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜

The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira would deal with converts and assign them to positions of authority. Similarly, Rabba bar Avuh would deal with them. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they would not establish even an appointee over measurements from them, as they extended the prohibition against appointing a convert as a king to include all positions of power. In Neharde鈥檃, they would not establish even an appointee over irrigation of the city fields from them.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗祝 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讬讬拽讬 讜诪讞转诪讬

The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: Even the descendants of one who had signed as a witness in the Old Court of Tzippori does not need to have their lineage investigated. The Gemara explains: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: In that city, they would first examine witnesses and only afterward have them sign. Consequently, anyone who signed as a witness in Tzippori must certainly have been of unflawed lineage.

专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘谉 讗谞讟讬讙谞讜住 讜讻讜壮 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讘讞讬讬诇讜转 砖诇 讘讬转 讚讜讚 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 诪讗讬 拽专讗 讜讛转讬讞砖诐 讘爪讘讗 讘诪诇讞诪讛 讜讟注诪讗 诪讗讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讻讚讬 砖转讛讗 讝讻讜转谉 讜讝讻讜转 讗讘讜转诐 诪住讬讬注转谉

The mishna teaches that Rabbi 岣nina ben Antigonus says: Even the descendants of one who was written in the army list of the Jewish king does not have their lineage investigated. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The reference is to one who was written in the list of the military troops of the House of David, who were all of pure lineage. Rav Yosef said: What is the verse from which it is derived? The phrase is: 鈥淩eckoned by lineage for service in war鈥 (I聽Chronicles 7:40). The Gemara asks: And what is the reason for this requirement that they be of unflawed lineage? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is in order that their merit and the merit of their ancestors will help them in battle.

讜讛讗讬讻讗 爪诇拽 讛注诪讜谞讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讗转讬 诪注诪讜谉 诇讗 讚讬转讬讘 讘注诪讜谉 讜讛讗讬讻讗 讗讜专讬讛 讛讞转讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讗转讬 诪讞转 诇讗 讚讬转讬讘 讘讞转

The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 there Zelek the Ammonite, one of David鈥檚 warriors (II聽Samuel 23:37); what, is it not indicated that he was a convert who came from Ammon? The Gemara rejects this: No, his name indicates only that he dwelled in Ammon, but he was born a Jew. The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 there Uriah the Hittite (II聽Samuel 23:39); what, is it not indicated that he came from Heth? The Gemara rejects this: No, his name indicates only that he dwelled in Heth.

讜讛讗讬讻讗 讗转讬 讛讙转讬 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚讬转讬讘 讘讙转 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗转讬 讛讙讬转讬 讘讗 讜讘讟诇讛

The Gemara further asks: But isn鈥檛 there Ittai the Gittite (II聽Samuel 15:19)? And if you would say that so too his name indicates that he dwelled in Gath but was born a Jew, but doesn鈥檛 Rav Na岣an say, to explain how David could make use of the crown of the idol of Ammon in apparent violation of the prohibition against deriving benefit from idolatry: Ittai the Gittite came and nullified its status of an idol. The halakha is that only a gentile can nullify an idol, by doing something degrading to it. This indicates that Ittai the Gittite must have been a gentile.

讜注讜讚 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 讬诇讚讬诐 讛讬讜 诇讜 诇讚讜讚 讜讻讜诇诐 讘谞讬 讬驻转 转讜讗专 讛讬讜 讜讻讜诇诐 诪住转驻专讬诐 拽讜诪讬 讜诪讙讚诇讬诐 讘诇讜专讬转 讛讬讜 讜讻讜诇诐 讬讜砖讘讬诐 讘拽专讜谞讬讜转 砖诇 讝讛讘 讜讛讬讜 诪讛诇讻讬诐 讘专讗砖讬 讙讬讬住讜转 讜讛谉 讛谉 讘注诇讬 讗讙专讜驻讬诐 砖诇 讘讬转 讚讜讚 讚讗讝诇讬 诇讘注讜转讬 注诇诪讗

The Gemara again questions the statement that all of the soldiers in David鈥檚 army were of unflawed lineage. And further, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David had four hundred youths in his camp, all sons of beautiful women, i.e., born to women captured in war, who were therefore gentiles, all of whom had their hair cut in the komei style or who grew their hair in a gentile hairstyle [belorit] on the back of their heads, and all of them sat in gold carts [bikroniyyot] and would march at the head of troops in David鈥檚 army; and these very ones were the strong men of the House of David, i.e., David would rely on their strength. This states that David鈥檚 army included men of flawed lineage. The Gemara answers: These four hundred youths did not fight in the battles, but rather they would go forth in front of the troops in order to frighten everyone.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Kiddushin 76

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Kiddushin 76

讜驻讜讟专讬诐 讗转 讛谞砖讜讗讜转 诪讗讬 讚专砖讬 诇讗 转讛讬讛 讗砖转 讛诪转 讛讞讜爪讛 诇讗讬砖 讝专 讛讱 讚讬转讘讛 讞讜爪讛 讛讬讗 诇讗 转讛讬讛 诇讗讬砖 讝专 讗讘诇 讛讱 讚诇讗 讬转讘讛 讞讜爪讛 转讛讬讛 诇讗讬砖 讝专

and they would exempt married women from 岣litza and levirate marriage. The Gemara elaborates: In what way would they expound the verse to lead them to this conclusion? The verse states: 鈥淭he wife of the dead man shall not be married outside of the family to one not of his kin; her brother-in-law will have intercourse with her and take her to him to be his wife, and consummate the levirate marriage鈥 (Deuteronomy 25:5). They understood the word 鈥渙utside鈥 to be a description of the woman: She who sits outside, i.e., one who is only betrothed; she shall not be married to one not of his kin, and it is with her that the obligation of levirate marriage applies. But she who is not sitting outside, but who has already married, shall marry one not of his kin. Consequently, the concern with regard to the Samaritans is that their descendants include the children of a widow who unlawfully wed one who was not her brother-in-law.

讜专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚讗诪专 讬砖 诪诪讝专 诪讞讬讬讘讬 诇讗讜讬谉

After having explained which prohibition the Samaritans violated, the Gemara explains how this accounts for the prohibition with regard to marriage with Samaritans. And Rabbi Akiva conforms to his standard line of reasoning, as he says: The offspring of intercourse for which one is liable for violating a prohibition is a mamzer. Therefore, the descendants of a yevama who had transgressed the prohibition of: 鈥淭he wife of the deceased shall not be married outside of the family to one not of his kin,鈥 have the status of mamzerim.

讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬谉 讘讚拽讚讜拽讬 诪爪讜转 诪讗谉 讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗诪专 专讘 讗讬讚讬 讘专 讗讘讬谉 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 诪爪转 讻讜转讬 诪讜转专转 讜讗讚诐 讬讜爪讗 讘讛 讬讚讬 讞讜讘转讜 讘驻住讞 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜住专 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬诐 讘讚拽讚讜拽讬 诪爪讜转 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讻诇 诪爪讜讛 砖讛讞讝讬拽讜 讘讛 讻讜转讬诐 讛专讘讛 诪讚拽讚拽讬诐 讘讛 讬讜转专 诪讬砖专讗诇

And some say a third opinion as to why the Sages disqualified Samaritans for marriage: It is because they are not well versed in the details of mitzvot. The Gemara asks: Who is the one indicated by the phrase: Some say? Rav Idi bar Avin said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. As it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Pesa岣m 2:2): The matza of a Samaritan is permitted to be eaten on Passover and is not considered to be leavened bread, and a person can fulfill his obligation to eat matza on the first night of Passover with it; but Rabbi Eliezer prohibits it, since Samaritans are not well versed in the details of mitzvot, and there is concern that their matza might be leavened. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says that this is not a concern, as with regard to any mitzva that Samaritans embraced and accepted, they are more exacting in its observance than are Jews.

讜讗诇讗 讛讻讬 诪讗讬 讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬谉 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 讘拽讬讗讬谉 讘转讜专转 拽讬讚讜砖讬谉 讜讙讬专讜砖讬谉

The Gemara asks: But here, with regard to marriage, in what details are they not well versed? The Gemara answers: It is because they are not well versed with regard to the laws of betrothal and divorce. Consequently, it is possible that their bills of divorce were invalid, or that a betrothed woman was allowed to remarry without having received a bill of divorce, which would mean that her future children would be mamzerim.

讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 诪诪讝专 诪讗讞讜转讜 讜诪诪讝专 诪讗砖转 讗讞 谞转注专讘讜 讘讛谉 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讬砖 诪诪讝专 诪讞讬讬讘讬 讻专讬转讜转 谞讬转谞讬 讞讚讗 诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛 讻讱 讛讬讛

Rav Na岣an says that Rabba bar Avuh says: Samaritans are of flawed lineage because a mamzer resulting from intercourse between a man and his sister and a mamzer resulting from intercourse between a man and his brother鈥檚 wife were assimilated among them, and they therefore all have the status of mamzerim due to the uncertainty as to the identity of those assimilated mamzerim. The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us by providing the details of how they are mamzerim due to uncertainty? If he intended to incidentally teach us the halakha that the offspring from intercourse for which one is liable to receive karet is a mamzer, let him teach one example, by mentioning the example of a mamzer from a sister. The Gemara answers: He did not mention these details to teach us a halakha, but rather the incident that took place, took place in this way, and that is why the Samaritans were considered to be of flawed lineage.

讜专讘讗 讗诪专 注讘讚 讜砖驻讞讛 谞转注专讘讜 讘讛谉 讗讬住讜专讗 诪砖讜诐 诪讗讬 诪砖讜诐 砖驻讞讛 谞讬转谞讬 讞讚讗 诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛 讻讱 讛讬讛

And Rava says: A Canaanite slave and a Canaanite maidservant were assimilated among them. The Gemara asks: In these cases, the prohibition is due to what? It is due to a Canaanite maidservant, whose children are slaves. But if so, let him teach one example; why also mention a Canaanite slave, whose child resulting from intercourse with a Jewish woman is of unflawed lineage? The Gemara again answers: The incident that took place, took place in this way.

诪转谞讬壮 讛谞讜砖讗 讗砖讛 讻讛谞转 爪专讬讱 诇讘讚讜拽 讗讞专讬讛 讗专讘注 讗诪讛讜转 砖讛谉 砖诪谞讛 讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗讘讬 讗诪讛 讜讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗讘讬讛 讜讗诪讛 讜讗诐 讗讘讬 讗讘讬讛 讜讗诪讛 诇讜讬讛 讜讬砖专讗诇讬转 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 注诇讬讛谉 注讜讚 讗讞转

MISHNA: A priest who marries a woman who is the daughter of a priest must investigate with regard to her background, i.e., he must check previous generations of her family tree from both the maternal and paternal sides, for four mothers, which are eight. How so? He investigates the lineage of her mother, and the mother of her mother, and the mother of her mother鈥檚 father, and her mother, i.e., the mother of her mother鈥檚 fathers鈥 mother. And he also investigates the lineage of the mother of her father, and her mother, i.e., the mother of her father鈥檚 mother, and the mother of her father鈥檚 father, and her mother i.e., the mother of her father鈥檚 father鈥檚 mother. If he seeks to marry a Levite woman or an Israelite woman, he adds to these an investigation of mothers of one additional generation.

讗讬谉 讘讜讚拽讬谉 诇讗 诪谉 讛诪讝讘讞 讜诇诪注诇讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛讚讜讻谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛住谞讛讚专讬谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 讜讻诇 砖讛讜讞讝拽讜 讗讘讜转讬讜 诪砖讜讟专讬 讛专讘讬诐 讜讙讘讗讬 爪讚拽讛 诪砖讬讗讬谉 诇讻讛讜谞讛 讜讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讘讚讜拽 讗讞专讬讛谉

With regard to these investigations, one need not investigate from the altar and above. If his ancestors included a priest who served at the altar, one checks no further, as the court would have investigated his lineage before allowing him to participate in the Temple service. Nor do they check from the platform, used by Levites for singing in the Temple, and above, nor from the Sanhedrin and above, since only one whose lineage has been examined and who was found to be fit can be appointed to the Sanhedrin. And similarly, anyone whose ancestors held public posts, and anyone whose ancestors were charity collectors, may marry into the priesthood, and there is no need to investigate their lineage, since no one of flawed lineage would be appointed to those positions.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗祝 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 讞转讜诐 注讚 讘注专讻讬 讛讬砖谞讛 砖诇 爪讬驻讜专讬 专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘谉 讗谞讟讬讙谞讜住 讗讜诪专 讗祝 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 诪讜讻转讘 讘讗住讟专讟讬讗 砖诇 诪诇讱

Rabbi Yosei says: Even the descendants of one who had signed as a witness in the old court [ba鈥檃rki] of Tzippori do not need to have their lineage investigated. Rabbi 岣nina ben Antigonus says: Even the descendants of one who was written in the army list [be鈥檌steratya] of the Jewish king do not need to have their lineage investigated.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讘谞砖讬 讘讚拽讬谞谉 讜诪讗讬 砖谞讗 讘讙讘专讬 诇讗 讘讚拽讜 谞砖讬 讚讻讬 诪讬谞爪讜 讘讛讚讬 讛讚讚讬 讘注专讬讜转 讛讜讗 讚诪讬谞爪讜 讜讗诐 讗讬转讗 讚讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇转讗 诇讗 讗讬转 诇讬讛 拽诇讗 讙讘专讬 讚讻讬 诪讬谞爪讜 讘讛讚讬 讛讚讚讬 讘讬讜讞住讬谉 讛讜讗 讚诪讬谞爪讬 讗诐 讗讬转讗 讚讗讬讻讗 诪讬诇转讗 讗讬转 诇讬讛 拽诇讗

GEMARA: What is different about women that we investigate their lineage, and what is different about men that we do not investigate their lineage? Why shouldn鈥檛 we also examine the lineage of a bride鈥檚 male ancestors for any possible flaw, as we do her female ancestors? The Gemara answers: When women quarrel with each other, it is through accusations of engaging in forbidden sexual intercourse, i.e., licentiousness, that they quarrel. And if it is so that there is a matter of a flaw with regard to the lineage of the woman in question, it would not generate publicity. By contrast, when men quarrel with each other, it is through accusations of flawed lineage that they quarrel. Therefore, if it is so that there is a matter of a flaw with regard to her father鈥檚 lineage, it would generate publicity, even if no investigation is conducted.

讜讗讬讛讬 谞诪讬 转讘讚讜拽 讘讬讛 讘讚讬讚讬讛 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诇讗 讛讜讝讛专讜 讻砖专讜转 诇讬谞砖讗 诇驻住讜诇讬诐

The Gemara inquires: But she should also investigate his lineage; why is only the lineage of the woman investigated? The Gemara comments: This supports Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It was not prohibited for women of unflawed lineage, i.e., daughters of priests, to marry men of flawed lineage, such as 岣lalim, converts, or emancipated slaves. Therefore, women are not required to investigate the lineage of potential husbands.

专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 转谞讬 讗专讘注 讗诪讛讜转 砖讛诐 砖转讬诐 注砖专讛 讘诪转谞讬转讗 转谞讗 讗专讘注 讗诪讛讜转 砖讛诐 砖砖 注砖专讛 讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛

Rav Adda bar Ahava taught that one needs to investigate four mothers who are twelve, adding an additional two generations of mothers of each of the woman鈥檚 parents. It was taught in a baraita: Four mothers who are sixteen. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to Rav Adda bar Ahava,

诪讜拽讬诐 诇讛 讘诇讜讬讛 讜讘转 讬砖专讗诇 讗诇讗 诪转谞讬转讗 谞讬诪讗 驻诇讬讙讗 诇讗 诪讗讬 注讜讚 讗讞转 讝讜讙 讗讞转

he interprets his statement as referring to a Levite woman or an Israelite woman, about whom the mishna states that one must investigate one additional generation. Therefore, Rav Adda bar Ahava鈥檚 ruling accords with that of the mishna. But shall we say the baraita disputes the mishna? The Gemara rejects this: No, what is the meaning of the mishna鈥檚 phrase: One additional? It means one pair, i.e., two more mothers on each side.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讝讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讘诇 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻诇 诪砖驻讞讜转 讘讞讝拽转 讻砖专讜转 讛谉 注讜诪讚讜转 讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讘专 讙讜专讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪砖谞转讬谞讜 讻砖拽讜专讗 注诇讬讜 注专注专 诪讗谉 讚诪转谞讬 讛讗 诇讗 诪转谞讬 讛讗

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This mishna presents the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: All families retain a presumptive status of fitness, and do not require investigation. The Gemara asks: Is that so, did Rav really say this? But doesn鈥檛 Rav 岣ma bar Gurya say that Rav says: Our mishna is referring only to a case when an objection was registered about the family concerning its lineage, but if no objection was registered, everyone agrees that the family retains its presumptive status of fitness. The Gemara answers: The one who taught this statement in the name of Rav did not teach that other statement.

讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讝讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讘诇 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讻诇 诪砖驻讞讜转 讘讞讝拽转 讻砖专讜转 讛谉 注讜诪讚讜转 讗诪专 专讘 讞诪讗 讘专 讙讜专讬讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗诐 拽讜专讗 注诇讬讜 注专注专 爪专讬讱 诇讘讚讜拽 讗讞专讬讛

There are those who say that this discussion occurred as follows: Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This mishna presents the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: All families retain presumptive status of fitness. Rav 岣ma bar Gurya says that Rav says: When an objection is registered about a family concerning its lineage, everyone agrees that he must investigate it. According to this version, there is no contradiction between these two complementary statements.

讗讬谉 讘讜讚拽讬谉 诪谉 讛诪讝讘讞 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讘讚拽讜讛 诇讗 讛讜讜 诪住拽讬 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诪谉 讛讚讜讻谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讗诪专 诪专 砖砖诐 讛讬讜 讬讜砖讘讬诐 诪讬讬讞住讬 讻讛讜谞讛 讜诪讬讬讞住讬 诇讜讬讛

搂 The mishna teaches that one need not investigate from the altar and above. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: If the Sanhedrin had not examined his lineage they would not have allowed him to ascend to the altar and perform the sacrificial rites. The mishna further teaches: Nor must one investigate from the platform and above. The Gemara asks: What is the reason? The Gemara answers: It is as the Master said in his description of the Temple chambers (Tosefta, 岣giga 2:4): For there in the Hewn Chamber those of the priesthood with unflawed lineage and the Levites of unflawed lineage sat and examined the lineage of everyone who came to serve in the Temple.

讜诇讗 诪住谞讛讚专讬谉 讜诇诪注诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚转谞讬 专讘 讬讜住祝 讻砖诐 砖讘讬转 讚讬谉 诪谞讜拽讬谉 讘爪讚拽 讻讱 诪谞讜拽讬谉 诪讻诇 诪讜诐 讗诪专 诪专讬诪专 诪讗讬 拽专讗讛 讻诇讱 讬驻讛 专注讬转讬 讜诪讜诐 讗讬谉 讘讱

The mishna also taught: Nor must one investigate from the Sanhedrin and above. What is the reason there is no need to investigate further? The Gemara answers: It is as Rav Yosef taught that just as the court is clean in justice, so too, it is clean of any blemish, i.e., it does not include anyone of flawed lineage. Mareimar said: What is the verse from which it is derived? It states: 鈥淵ou are all fair, my love; and there is no blemish in you鈥 (Song of Songs 4:7).

讗讬诪讗 诪讜诪讗 诪诪砖 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讛转讬爪讘讜 砖诐 注诪讱 注诪讱 讘讚讜诪讬诐 诇讱

The Gemara asks: But perhaps you should say that this is referring to an actual blemish, that one who has a physical blemish may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin. Rav A岣 bar Ya鈥檃kov said: It is not necessary to derive the halakha that one who has a physical blemish may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin from this verse, as the verse states with regard to the transfer of the Divine Spirit from Moses to the Elders: 鈥淭hat they may stand there with you鈥 (Numbers 11:16), and the phrase 鈥渨ith you鈥 is explained to mean: With similarity to you, teaching that the members of the Sanhedrin must be whole in body like Moses.

讜讚诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讻讬谞讛 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 拽专讗 讜讛拽诇 诪注诇讬讱 讜谞砖讗讜 讗转讱 讘讚讜诪讬诐 诇讱

The Gemara rejects this proof: But perhaps those who were with Moses had to be free of any blemish due to the Divine Presence, which rested upon them, but this is not a requirement for judges on the Sanhedrin. Rav Na岣an said that the verse states: 鈥淪o shall they make it easier for you and bear the burden with you鈥 (Exodus 18:22). The phrase 鈥渨ith you鈥 is explained to mean: With similarity to you, i.e., without blemish. This verse is referring to the appointment of regular judges, upon whom the Divine Presence does not rest, and teaches that all members of the Sanhedrin must be whole in body. The verse from Song of Songs teaches that they must be of unflawed lineage as well.

讻诇 诪讬 砖讛讜讞讝拽讜 讗讘讜转讬讜 诪砖讜讟专讬 讛专讘讬诐 诇诪讬诪专讗 讚诇讗 诪讜拽诪讬谞谉 诪驻住讜诇讬诐 讜专诪讬谞讛讜 讛讻诇 讻砖专讬诐 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬 诪诪讜谞讜转 讜讗讬谉 讛讻诇 讻砖专讬诐 诇讚讜谉 讚讬谞讬 谞驻砖讜转 讜讛讜讬谞谉 讘讛 讛讻诇 诇讗讬转讜讬讬 诪讗讬 讜讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 诇讗讬转讜讬讬 诪诪讝专 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜讻谉 转谞讬 专讘 砖诪注讜谉 讘专 讝讬专讗 讘拽讬讚讜砖讬 讚讘讬 诇讜讬 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches: Anyone whose ancestors held public posts may marry into the priesthood without investigation. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that we do not establish officers and other public appointees from people with flawed lineage? And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following statement: All are fit to judge cases of monetary law, but not all are fit to judge cases of capital law. And we discussed it: What does the word: All, serve to include? And Rav Yehuda says: It serves to include a mamzer, that he may judge cases of monetary law. This indicates that even a mamzer may occupy a public position. Abaye said: The mishna is referring to public officials in Jerusalem, where they were particular that all their judges should be of unflawed lineage. And Rav Shimon bar Zeira similarly taught in the baraita of Kiddushin from the school of Levi: It is referring to public officials in Jerusalem.

讜讙讘讗讬 爪讚拽讛 诪砖讬讗讬诐 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬讜谉 讚诪谞爪讜 讘讛讚讬 讗讬谞砖讬 讚讗诪专 诪专 诪诪砖讻谞讬诐 注诇 讛爪讚拽讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘注专讘 砖讘转 讜讗诐 讗讬转讗 讚讗讬讻讗 讗讬转 诇讬讛 拽诇讗

The mishna teaches: And anyone whose ancestors were charity collectors may marry into the priesthood without investigation. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: It is due to the fact that they quarrel with people, as the Master said: Those appointed to collect charity may forcibly take collateral for charity from those who have not fulfilled their obligations even on the eve of Shabbat, when people are preoccupied and rushed, leading to quarrels. And if it is so that there is a flaw in the lineage of the collector鈥檚 family, it would generate publicity through the quarrels that are an unavoidable aspect of his job.

讗讜砖驻讝讬讻谞讬讛 讚专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讙讬讜专讗 讛讜讛 讜讛讜讛 拽讗 诪谞爪讬 讗讬讛讜 讜专讘 讘讬讘讬 诪专 讗诪专 讗谞讗 注讘讬讚谞讗 住专专讜转讗 讚诪转讗 讜诪专 讗诪专 讗谞讗 注讘讬讚谞讗 住专专讜转讗 讚诪转讗 讗转讜 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 诇讛讜 转谞讬谞讗 砖讜诐 转砖讬诐 注诇讬讱 诪诇讱 诪拽专讘 讗讞讬讱 讻诇 诪砖讬诪讜转 砖讗转讛 诪砖讬诐 诇讗 讬讛讬讛 讗诇讗 诪拽专讘 讗讞讬讱

The Gemara relates: Rav Adda bar Ahava鈥檚 host was the son of a convert, and he and Rav Beivai were quarreling. One said: I will perform the service of the city, i.e., I will be appointed to a position of authority, and one said: I will perform the service of the city. They came before Rav Yosef to decide between them. Rav Yosef said to them: We learned: 鈥淵ou shall set him king over you, whom the Lord your God shall choose; one from among your brothers鈥 (Deuteronomy 17:15). The repetition of the verb 鈥渟et鈥 in the verse [som tasim] indicates: All appointments that you appoint may be only from among your brothers. Therefore, a convert may not serve in any official position.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讗诪讜 诪讬砖专讗诇 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗诪讜 诪讬砖专讗诇 诪拽专讘 讗讞讬讱 拽专讬谞讗 讘讬讛 讛诇讻讱 专讘 讘讬讘讬 讚讙讘专讗 专讘讗 讛讜讗 诇讬注讬讬谉 讘诪讬诇讬 讚砖诪讬讗 讜诪专 诇讬注讬讬谉 讘诪讬诇讬 讚诪转讗 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛诇讻讱 诪讗谉 讚诪砖专讬 爪讜专讘讗 诪讚专讘谞谉 讘讗讜砖驻讬讝讬讻谞讬讛 诇讗砖专讬 讻专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讚讬讚注 诇诪讛驻讬讱 诇讬讛 讘讝讻讜转讬讛

Rav Adda bar Ahava said to Rav Yosef: And does this halakha apply even if the mother of the person in question is born Jewish? In other words, does this apply to one whose father is a convert? Rav Yosef said to him: If his mother is born Jewish, the words: 鈥淔rom among your brothers鈥 are said about him. Therefore, now that it has been determined that this person鈥檚 mother was born Jewish and that he is fit to serve a public role, Rav Beivai, who is a great man in Torah learning, should oversee the matters of Heaven, i.e., the public issues that involve the performance of mitzvot; and the Master, Rav Adda bar Ahava鈥檚 host, should oversee the other matters of the city. Abaye said, as a moral of the story: Therefore, if one has a Torah scholar as a guest, let him host a person such as Rav Adda bar Ahava, who knows how to plead in his favor, as it was the argument of Rav Adda bar Ahava that led to his host鈥檚 appointment.

专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诪讟驻诇 讘讛讜 专讘讛 讘专 讗讘讜讛 诪讟驻诇 讘讛讜 讘诪注专讘讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讬砖 讻讜专讬 诇讗 诪讜拽诪讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜 讘谞讛专讚注讗 讗驻讬诇讜 专讬砖 讙专讙讜转讗 诇讗 诪讜拽诪讬 诪讬谞讬讬讛讜

The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira would deal with converts and assign them to positions of authority. Similarly, Rabba bar Avuh would deal with them. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they would not establish even an appointee over measurements from them, as they extended the prohibition against appointing a convert as a king to include all positions of power. In Neharde鈥檃, they would not establish even an appointee over irrigation of the city fields from them.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讗祝 诪讬 砖讛讬讛 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚讬讬拽讬 讜诪讞转诪讬

The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: Even the descendants of one who had signed as a witness in the Old Court of Tzippori does not need to have their lineage investigated. The Gemara explains: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: In that city, they would first examine witnesses and only afterward have them sign. Consequently, anyone who signed as a witness in Tzippori must certainly have been of unflawed lineage.

专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讘谉 讗谞讟讬讙谞讜住 讜讻讜壮 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讘讞讬讬诇讜转 砖诇 讘讬转 讚讜讚 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 诪讗讬 拽专讗 讜讛转讬讞砖诐 讘爪讘讗 讘诪诇讞诪讛 讜讟注诪讗 诪讗讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讻讚讬 砖转讛讗 讝讻讜转谉 讜讝讻讜转 讗讘讜转诐 诪住讬讬注转谉

The mishna teaches that Rabbi 岣nina ben Antigonus says: Even the descendants of one who was written in the army list of the Jewish king does not have their lineage investigated. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The reference is to one who was written in the list of the military troops of the House of David, who were all of pure lineage. Rav Yosef said: What is the verse from which it is derived? The phrase is: 鈥淩eckoned by lineage for service in war鈥 (I聽Chronicles 7:40). The Gemara asks: And what is the reason for this requirement that they be of unflawed lineage? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is in order that their merit and the merit of their ancestors will help them in battle.

讜讛讗讬讻讗 爪诇拽 讛注诪讜谞讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讗转讬 诪注诪讜谉 诇讗 讚讬转讬讘 讘注诪讜谉 讜讛讗讬讻讗 讗讜专讬讛 讛讞转讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讗转讬 诪讞转 诇讗 讚讬转讬讘 讘讞转

The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 there Zelek the Ammonite, one of David鈥檚 warriors (II聽Samuel 23:37); what, is it not indicated that he was a convert who came from Ammon? The Gemara rejects this: No, his name indicates only that he dwelled in Ammon, but he was born a Jew. The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 there Uriah the Hittite (II聽Samuel 23:39); what, is it not indicated that he came from Heth? The Gemara rejects this: No, his name indicates only that he dwelled in Heth.

讜讛讗讬讻讗 讗转讬 讛讙转讬 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚讬转讬讘 讘讙转 讜讛讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗转讬 讛讙讬转讬 讘讗 讜讘讟诇讛

The Gemara further asks: But isn鈥檛 there Ittai the Gittite (II聽Samuel 15:19)? And if you would say that so too his name indicates that he dwelled in Gath but was born a Jew, but doesn鈥檛 Rav Na岣an say, to explain how David could make use of the crown of the idol of Ammon in apparent violation of the prohibition against deriving benefit from idolatry: Ittai the Gittite came and nullified its status of an idol. The halakha is that only a gentile can nullify an idol, by doing something degrading to it. This indicates that Ittai the Gittite must have been a gentile.

讜注讜讚 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗专讘注 诪讗讜转 讬诇讚讬诐 讛讬讜 诇讜 诇讚讜讚 讜讻讜诇诐 讘谞讬 讬驻转 转讜讗专 讛讬讜 讜讻讜诇诐 诪住转驻专讬诐 拽讜诪讬 讜诪讙讚诇讬诐 讘诇讜专讬转 讛讬讜 讜讻讜诇诐 讬讜砖讘讬诐 讘拽专讜谞讬讜转 砖诇 讝讛讘 讜讛讬讜 诪讛诇讻讬诐 讘专讗砖讬 讙讬讬住讜转 讜讛谉 讛谉 讘注诇讬 讗讙专讜驻讬诐 砖诇 讘讬转 讚讜讚 讚讗讝诇讬 诇讘注讜转讬 注诇诪讗

The Gemara again questions the statement that all of the soldiers in David鈥檚 army were of unflawed lineage. And further, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David had four hundred youths in his camp, all sons of beautiful women, i.e., born to women captured in war, who were therefore gentiles, all of whom had their hair cut in the komei style or who grew their hair in a gentile hairstyle [belorit] on the back of their heads, and all of them sat in gold carts [bikroniyyot] and would march at the head of troops in David鈥檚 army; and these very ones were the strong men of the House of David, i.e., David would rely on their strength. This states that David鈥檚 army included men of flawed lineage. The Gemara answers: These four hundred youths did not fight in the battles, but rather they would go forth in front of the troops in order to frighten everyone.

Scroll To Top