1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 22.22-22.24 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Mary (mother of Jesus), betrothed to Joseph โข betrothal โข betrothal, adoption of husbands name โข betrothal, as contract โข betrothal, as matrimony โข betrothal, biblical law โข betrothal, celibacy โข betrothal, rabbinic halakha โข betrothal, vs. marriage โข betrothed, Lots daughters โข divorce, from betrothal โข fornication, during betrothal โข onomastics, betrothal โข rape, during betrothal โข sexual relations, during betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 313; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 54, 76, 87, 97, 98, 185
sup>
22.22 ืึผึดืึพืึดืึผึธืฆึตื ืึดืืฉื ืฉืึนืึตื ืขึดืึพืึดืฉืึผึธื ืึฐืขึปืึทืชึพืึผึทืขึทื ืึผืึตืชืึผ ืึผึทืึพืฉืึฐื ึตืืึถื ืึธืึดืืฉื ืึทืฉืึผึนืึตื ืขึดืึพืึธืึดืฉืึผึธื ืึฐืึธืึดืฉืึผึธื ืึผืึดืขึทืจึฐืชึผึธ ืึธืจึธืข ืึดืึผึดืฉืึฐืจึธืึตืื 22.23 ืึผึดื ืึดืึฐืึถื ื ืขืจ ื ึทืขึฒืจึธื ืึฐืชืึผืึธื ืึฐืึนืจึธืฉืึธื ืึฐืึดืืฉื ืึผืึฐืฆึธืึธืึผ ืึดืืฉื ืึผึธืขึดืืจ ืึฐืฉืึธืึทื ืขึดืึผึธืึผื 22.24 ืึฐืืึนืฆึตืืชึถื ืึถืชึพืฉืึฐื ึตืืึถื ืึถืึพืฉืึทืขึทืจ ืึธืขึดืืจ ืึทืึดืื ืึผืกึฐืงึทืึฐืชึผึถื ืึนืชึธื ืึผึธืึฒืึธื ึดืื ืึธืึตืชืึผ ืึถืชึพืื ืขืจ ืึทื ึผึทืขึฒืจึธื ืขึทืึพืึผึฐืึทืจ ืึฒืฉืึถืจ ืึนืึพืฆึธืขึฒืงึธื ืึธืขึดืืจ ืึฐืึถืชึพืึธืึดืืฉื ืขึทืึพืึผึฐืึทืจ ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืขึดื ึผึธื ืึถืชึพืึตืฉืึถืช ืจึตืขึตืืึผ ืึผืึดืขึทืจึฐืชึผึธ ืึธืจึธืข ืึดืงึผึดืจึฐืึผึถืึธื'' None | sup>
22.22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so shalt thou put away the evil from Israel. 22.23 If there be a damsel that is a virgin betrothed unto a man, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 22.24 then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die: the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbourโs wife; so thou shalt put away the evil from the midst of thee.'' None |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 21.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal โข Ezekiel, betrothal โข Marriage, betrothal โข Sanctification, betrothal โข Women, betrothal
Found in books: Neusner (2001), The Theology of Halakha, 92; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 223
sup>
21.6 ืึฐืึดืึผึดืืฉืืึน ืึฒืึนื ึธืื ืึถืึพืึธืึฑืึนืึดืื ืึฐืึดืึผึดืืฉืืึน ืึถืึพืึทืึผึถืึถืช ืืึน ืึถืึพืึทืึผึฐืืึผืึธื ืึฐืจึธืฆึทืข ืึฒืึนื ึธืื ืึถืชึพืึธืึฐื ืึน ืึผึทืึผึทืจึฐืฆึตืขึท ืึทืขึฒืึธืืึน ืึฐืขึนืึธืื'' None | sup>
21.6 then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.'' None |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.1 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: โข cultural self-assertion, and engagement with Homer โข heresy, engagement with, in Christian writings
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 57; Goldhill (2020), Preposterous Poetics: The Politics and Aesthetics of Form in Late Antiquity, 81
sup>
1.1 ืึผึฐืจึตืืฉืึดืืช ืึผึธืจึธื ืึฑืึนืึดืื ืึตืช ืึทืฉืึผึธืึทืึดื ืึฐืึตืช ืึธืึธืจึถืฅื1.1 ืึทืึผึดืงึฐืจึธื ืึฑืึนืึดืื ืึทืึผึทืึผึธืฉืึธื ืึถืจึถืฅ ืึผืึฐืึดืงึฐืึตื ืึทืึผึทืึดื ืงึธืจึธื ืึทืึผึดืื ืึทืึผึทืจึฐื ืึฑืึนืึดืื ืึผึดืึพืืึนืื ' None | sup>
1.1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.'' None |
|
4. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 1.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, a writ โข Betrothal, money โข Betrothal, sexual relations โข betrothal โข betrothal, Judea โข betrothal, death of spouse โข betrothal, divorce
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 310; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 99; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 25
sup>
1.5 ืึธืืึนืึตื ืึตืฆึถื ืึธืึดืื ืึผึดืืืึผืึธื ืฉืึถืึผึนื ืึฐืขึตืึดืื, ืึตืื ืึน ืึธืืึนื ืึดืึฐืขึนื ืึทืขึฒื ึทืช ืึผึฐืชืึผืึดืื, ืึดืคึผึฐื ึตื ืฉืึถืึผึดืชึฐืึทืึตื ืขึดืึผึธืึผ. ืึทืึทืช ืึทืึฐืึฐื ึทืช ืึดืฉืึฐืจึธืึตื ืึฐืึทืึทืช ืึทืึฐืึฐื ึทืช ืึผึนืึตื, ืึผึฐืชึปืึผึธืชึธื ืึธื ึถื. ืึผึตืืช ืึผึดืื ืฉืึถื ืึผึนืึฒื ึดืื ืึธืืึผ ืืึนืึดืื ืึทืึผึฐืชืึผืึธื ืึทืจึฐืึผึทืข ืึตืืึนืช ืืึผื, ืึฐืึนื ืึดืืึผ ืึฐืึธืึธื ืึฒืึธืึดืื:'' None | sup>
1.5 He who eats with his father-in-law in Judea without the presence of witnesses cannot raise a claim of non-virginity against his wife because he has been alone with her. It is the same whether the woman is an Israelite widow or a priestly widow her kethubah is a maneh. The court of the priests collected for a virgin four hundred zuz, and the sages did not protest.'' None |
|
5. Mishnah, Sotah, 3.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal โข Ezekiel, betrothal โข Marriage, betrothal โข Sanctification, betrothal โข Women, betrothal โข betrothal, in lists of male-female, difference
Found in books: Alexander (2013), Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism. 56; Neusner (2001), The Theology of Halakha, 92
sup>
3.8 ืึทื ืึผึตืื ืึดืืฉื ืึฐืึดืฉึผืึธื. ืึธืึดืืฉื ืคึผืึนืจึตืขึท ืึผืคืึนืจึตื, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ืคืึนืจึทืขึทืช ืึผืคืึนืจึถืึถืช. ืึธืึดืืฉื ืึทืึผึดืืจ ืึถืช ืึผึฐื ืึน ืึผึฐื ึธืึดืืจ, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ืึทืึผึถืจึถืช ืึถืช ืึผึฐื ึธืึผ ืึผึฐื ึธืึดืืจ. ืึธืึดืืฉื ืึฐืึทืึผึตืึท ืขึทื ื ึฐืึดืืจืึผืช ืึธืึดืื, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ืึฐืึทืึผึทืึทืช ืขึทื ื ึฐืึดืืจืึผืช ืึธืึดืืึธ. ืึธืึดืืฉื ืืึนืึตืจ ืึถืช ืึผึดืชึผืึน, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ืืึนืึถืจึถืช ืึถืช ืึผึดืชึผึธืึผ. ืึธืึดืืฉื ืึฐืงึทืึผึตืฉื ืึถืช ืึผึดืชึผืึน, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ืึฐืงึทืึผึถืฉืึถืช ืึถืช ืึผึดืชึผึธืึผ. ืึธืึดืืฉื ื ึดืกึฐืงึธื ืขึธืจึนื, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ื ึดืกึฐืงึถืึถืช ืขึฒืจึปืึผึธื. ืึธืึดืืฉื ื ึดืชึฐืึถื, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ื ึดืชึฐืึตืืช. ืึธืึดืืฉื ื ึดืึฐืึผึธืจ ืึผึดืึฐื ึตืึธืชืึน, ืึฐืึตืื ืึธืึดืฉึผืึธื ื ึดืึฐืึผึถืจึถืช ืึผึดืึฐื ึตืึธืชึธืึผ:'' None | sup>
3.8 What differences are there in law between a man and a woman?A man who has leprosy rends his clothes and loosens his hair, but a woman does not rend her clothes and loosen her hair. A man may vow that his son will become a nazirite, but a woman may not vow that her son will become a nazirite. A man can shave with offerings set aside for his fatherโs naziriteship but a woman cannot shave with offerings set aside for her fatherโs naziriteship. A man may sell his daughter, but a woman may not sell her daughter. A man may give his daughter in betrothal, but a woman may not give her daughter in betrothal. A man is stoned naked, but a woman is not stoned naked. A man is hanged after being put to death, but a woman is not hanged. A man is sold for to make restitution for his theft, but a woman is not sold to make restitution for her theft.'' None |
|
6. Mishnah, Yevamot, 13.1-13.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, katan (male minor) โข Betrothal, ketana (female minor) โข Betrothal, naโara โข Rebekah, as an agent in betrothal narrative โข betrothal, celibacy โข betrothal, refusal โข fornication,from betrothal
Found in books: Kanarek (2014), Biblical narrative and formation rabbinic law, 81; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 172; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 17
sup>
13.1 ืึผึตืืช ืฉืึทืึผึทืื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึตืื ืึฐืึธืึฒื ึดืื ืึถืึผึธื ืึฒืจืึผืกืึนืช. ืึผืึตืืช ืึดืึผึตื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึฒืจืึผืกืึนืช ืึผื ึฐืฉืืึผืืึนืช. ืึผึตืืช ืฉืึทืึผึทืื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึผึทืึผึทืขึทื ืึฐืึนื ืึทืึผึธืึธื. ืึผืึตืืช ืึดืึผึตื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึผึทืึผึทืขึทื ืึผืึทืึผึธืึธื. ืึผึตืืช ืฉืึทืึผึทืื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึผึฐืคึธื ึธืื. ืึผืึตืืช ืึดืึผึตื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึผึฐืคึธื ึธืื ืึฐืฉืึถืึผึนื ืึฐืคึธื ึธืื. ืึผึตืืช ืฉืึทืึผึทืื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึผึฐืึตืืช ืึผึดืื. ืึผืึตืืช ืึดืึผึตื ืืึนืึฐืจึดืื, ืึผึฐืึตืืช ืึผึดืื ืึฐืฉืึถืึผึนื ืึฐืึตืืช ืึผึดืื. ืึธืึฐืจืึผ ืึธืึถื ืึผึตืืช ืึดืึผึตื ืึฐืึตืืช ืฉืึทืึผึทืื, ืึฐืึธืึถื ึถืช ืึฐืึดืื ืงึฐืึทื ึผึธื, ืึฒืคึดืึผืึผ ืึทืจึฐืึผึธืขึธื ืึทืึฒืึดืฉึผืึธื ืคึฐืขึธืึดืื. ืึธืึฐืจืึผ ืึธืึถื ืึผึตืืช ืฉืึทืึผึทืื, ืึตืื ืึผึฐื ืึนืช ืึดืฉืึฐืจึธืึตื ืึถืคึฐืงึตืจ, ืึถืึผึธื ืึฐืึธืึถื ึถืช ืึผืึทืึฐืชึผึถื ึถืช ืขึทื ืฉืึถืชึผึทืึฐืึผึดืื, ืึผืชึฐืึธืึตื ืึฐืชึดื ึผึธืฉืึตื:'
13.1 ืคึผึดืงึผึทืึทืช ืึฐืึตืจึถืฉืึถืช, ืึผึธื ืึธืึธื ืขึทื ืึทืคึผึดืงึผึทืึทืช, ืึฐืึธืึทืจ ืึผืึธื ืขึทื ืึทืึตืจึถืฉืึถืช, ืืึน ืฉืึถืึผึธื ืึธืึดืื ืขึทื ืึทืึตืจึถืฉืึถืช, ืึนื ืคึธืกึทื ืึถืช ืึทืคึผึดืงึผึทืึทืช. ืึผึธื ืึธืึธื ืขึทื ืึทืึตืจึถืฉืึถืช ืึฐืึธืึทืจ ืึผืึธื ืขึทื ืึทืคึผึดืงึผึทืึทืช, ืืึน ืฉืึถืึผึธื ืึธืึดืื ืขึทื ืึทืคึผึดืงึผึทืึทืช, ืคึผึธืกึทื ืึถืช ืึทืึตืจึถืฉืึถืช: ' None | sup>
13.1 Beth Shammai says: Only those who are betrothed may exercise the right of refusal; But Beth hillel says: Both those who are betrothed and those who are married. Beth Shammai says: A declaration of refusal may be made against a husband but not against a yavam; But Beth Hillel says: Either against a husband or against a yavam. Beth Shammai says: The declaration must be made in his presence, But Beth Hillel says: Either in his presence or not in his presence. Beth Shammai says: The declaration must be made before the court, But Beth Hillel says: Either before the court or not before the court. Beth Hillel said to Beth Shammai: A girl may exercise the right of refusal while she is a minor even four or five times. Beth Shammai said to them: โThe daughters of Israel are not ownerless property! Rather, either she makes a declaration of refusal and then waits until she is of age, or she makes a declaration of refusal and marries again immediately. Section one: According to Beth Shammai only those who are betrothed are allowed to make a declaration of refusal and thereby leave their husbands without a get. Beth Hillel says even if she was married she may do so. According to the Talmud, Beth Shammai allows only the betrothed woman to refuse because if the married woman also was able to refuse, men would not want to spend the money involved in marrying a minor, lest she later refuse the marriage. Section two: If the minor girl was married off by her mother or brother and then her husband died, according to Beth Shammai she cannot make a declaration against her yavam. Rather she must wait until she reaches majority age and then request halitzah. However, according to Beth Hillel she may make such a declaration against the yavam as well. However, even though she has annulled her marriage to the yavamโs brother, she cannot at a later point marry the yavam, since she was at one point his brotherโs wife. Section three: According to Beth Shammai, she must make the declaration of refusal in front of him. According to Beth Hillel, this is not necessary. Section four: According to Beth Shammai, she must make the declaration of refusal in front of a court. According to Beth Hillel, this is not necessary. Section five: According to Beth Hillel, as long as she is still a minor, she may be married off as many times as her brothers and mother wish and she may later refuse as many marriages as they offer. Beth Shammai offers a moral objection to this possibility, for through it a girl could be betrothed (but according to Beth Shammai not married) to several men without ever having received a get. Rather she either waits until she is an adult or makes a declaration of refusal and then marries immediately, at which point she could no longer refuse, according to Beth Shammai. Note that this last section is phrased differently than the previous sections. According to some mishnaic commentators, since Beth Shammai explains their position the halakhah is according to them in this section. In all of the other sections, the halakhah follows Beth Hillel, as it usually does.' ' None |
|
7. Tosefta, Ketuvot, 1.4, 5.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal โข betrothal โข betrothal, as matrimony โข betrothal, duration โข betrothal, vs. marriage โข divorce, from betrothal โข fornication, during betrothal โข fornication,from betrothal โข sexual relations, during betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 78; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 100, 171; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 117
sup>
1.4 ืืืืจืช ืืืืืืื ืืช ืืชืืืชื ืืืชืื ื ืฉืืช ืืืืงืช ืฉืืื ืืฉืืจื ืื ืืฆืืช ืืืืืื ืืช ืืื ืื ืืชืืื ืจืฆื ืืงืืื ื ืืชื ืืชืืื ืื ื.
5.1 ืืืืืจืช ืืชืืืขื ื ืืชื ืื ืื ืฉื ืื ืขืฉืจ ืืืืฉ ืื ืืืชื ืงืื ื ืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืืืื ืืขืื ืจ\\"ื ืืืืจ ื ืืชื ืื ืื ืืื ืชืจืืื ืื\\"ื ืื ืืืืจืืกืื ืืื ืื ืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ืจ\\"ื ืฉื ืืชื ืื ืื ืืืฆื ืืืืื ืืืืฆื ืชืจืืื ืืื ื\\"ื ืืืช ืืื ืืืื ืืื ืืช ืืฉืจืื ืืืื ืืื ืืืืื ืฉืืขืืื ืื ืื ืืืื ืืชืื ืื ืืืืืื ืจ\' ืืืืื ืื ืืชืืจื ืืืืจ ืฉืชื ืืืืช ืชืจืืื ืืืื ืืืืื ืจ\' ืืืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืจืช ืืช ืืชืจืืื ืืืืงืืช ืืืืื ืืืืื ืจืื ืฉืืขืื ืื ืืืืืื ืืืืจ ืื ืืงืื ืฉืืืืืจื ืฉื ืชืจืืื ื ืืชื ืื ืืคืื ืืืืื. ืื ืืฉื ื ืจืืฉืื ื ืจืืืชืื ื ืืืจื ืืื ืืืฉื ืืืืืช ืืชืจืืื ืขื ืฉืชืื ืก ืืืืคื ืืืืืื ืขื ืฉืชืืขื ืืื ืืชื ืืขืื ืืืจืฉื ืืืจ ืจ\' ืื ืื ืื ื ืคื ืืฉื ืจ\' ืืืืขืืจ ืืงืคืจ ืืขืฉื ืืจ\' ืืจืคืื ืฉืงืืฉ ื\' ืืืืช ื ืฉืื ืืืืืืื ืืชืจืืื ืฉืืื ืฉื ื ืืฆืืจืช ืืืืจ ืฉืื ืืืื ื ืื ืื ืื ืืฆื ืจ\' ืืืืื ืื ืืชืืจื ืื ืฆืืืื ืืืจ ืื ืฉืืขืชื ืขืืื ืฉืืชื ืืืืจ ืืช ืืฉืจืื ืืืืืจืกืช ืืืื ืืืืืช ืืชืจืืื ืฉืื ืื ืืืืจ ืื ืืืืืง ืืืืชื ืื ืฉืืชื ืืงื ืืืืจื ืชืืจื ืืืื ืงื ืืืืืจ ืื ืืชื ืืืืข ืืื ืฉืคืื ืื ืขื ืืช ืฉืืื ืืืืชื ืงืื ื ืืืชื ืืืืื ืืชืจืืื ืืกืฃ ืงืื ื ืืืชื ืืืืืืื ืืชืจืืื ืืช ืืฉืจืื ืฉืืืืื ืงืื ื ืืืชื ืืืืืืื ืืชืจืืื ืืื ื ืืื ืฉืืื ืืกืฃ ืงืื ื ืืืชื ืืืืืืื ืืชืจืืื ืืื ืื ืืขืฉื ืฉืืจื ืืืจื ืืืืื ืืื ืืจืืกื ืืช ืืฉืจืื ืืืืืช ืืชืจืืื ืขื ืฉืชืื ืก ืืืืคื ืื ืืชื ืืขืื ืืืจืฉื.'' None | sup>
1.4 An adult woman and a woman incapable of having children (aylonit)โtheir ketubah is 200. If she is married on the presumption that she was fit to bear children but it turned out that she was incapable, she has no ketubah. If he wants to uphold it, he gives a ketubah of 100 zuz.
5.1 The adult woman is like (sic!) one claimedโthey give her 12 months. If she were a minor, either she or her father is able to delay the marriage until she is of majority age. Rabbi Tarfon says: They give her everything terumah if she is claimed by a priest and the time limit of 12 months is up and they are still not married, she eats entirely terumah. When does this apply? From betrothal i.e. when the claiming 12 months is up, she is betrothed but still not married, but from marriage, Rabbi Tarfon agrees that they give her half hullin and half terumah. When does this apply? With a kohen\'s daughter married to a kohen, but an Israelite\'s daughter to a kohen, everyone agrees they raise all of her food from hullin. Rabbi Yehudah ben Betera says: Two parts terumah and one hullin. Rabbi Yehudah says: She should sell the terumah and buy with its value hullin. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Any place where they the sages mention \\"terumah\\", he gives double hullin. This was the original mishnah. Our rabbis said: A wife who is an Israelite\'s daughter doesn\'t eat terumah until she enters the bridal chamber, and a yevamah doesn\'t eat terumah until she has sex with her levir. If her husband dies after the time of claiming has passed, he inherits her. Said Rabbi Menahem ben Nafah in the name of Rabbi Liezer Ha-Kappar: A case, that Rabbi Tarfon who betrothed 300 wives for them to eat terumah, for they were years of famine. But Yoha ben Bagbag already sent to Rabbi Yehudah ben Beterah to Netzivin, he said to him: I heard about you that you say a betrothed Israelite\'s daughter betrothed to a kohen can eat terumah. He replied to him and said to him: I had assumed that you were an expert in the chambers of Torah, but you don\'t know how to do a kal va-homer! Just as a Canaanite slavegirl, whose sex with a kohen does not acquire her to allow her to eat terumah, isn\'t it logical that money would acquire her to eat terumah!? But what can I do? For the Hakhamim said: A betrothed Israelite\'s daughter can\'t eat terumah until she enters the bridal chamber. If she dies, her father inherits her.'' None |
|
8. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, katan (male minor) โข Betrothal, ketana (female minor) โข Betrothal, naโara โข betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 100; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 17
|
9. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, katan (male minor) โข Betrothal, ketana (female minor) โข Betrothal, naโara โข Rebekah, as an agent in betrothal narrative
Found in books: Kanarek (2014), Biblical narrative and formation rabbinic law, 81; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 17
|
10. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, a writ โข Betrothal, money โข Betrothal, sexual relations โข betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 310; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 22
|
11. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, naโar โข Betrothal, naโara โข betrothal, celibacy โข betrothal, refusal โข fornication,from betrothal
Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 172; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 18
|
12. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal, naโar โข Betrothal, naโara โข betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 100; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 18
|
13. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal โข betrothal โข betrothal, by purchase โข betrothal, by writ โข celibates, during betrothal
Found in books: Balberg (2023), Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture, 47; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 116; Porton (1988), Gentiles and Israelites in Mishnah-Tosefta, 223
|
14. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 22.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Anthropomorphism, Sympathy/Engagement โข heresy, engagement with, in Christian writings
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 57; Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 153
sup>
22.2 ืึฐืึธืึธืึธื ืึธืึทืข ืืื', ืจึทืึผึดื ืืึผื ึธื ืึฐืจึทืึผึดื ืึทืขึฒืงึนื ืึผึฐืจึทืึผึดื ืึธืึดืื ืึผึฐืฉืึตื ืจึทืึผึดื ืึทืึผึธื ืึผึทืจ ืึผึทืึฒื ึธื ืึธืึทืจ, ืึนื ืฉืึดืึฐืฉืึธื ืึผึฐืจึดืึผึธื ืงึนืึถื ืึฐืึธืึธื ืึธืจึดืืฉืืึนื, ืึทืึผึตืึทืข ืึตืื ืึผึฐืชึดืื ืึผึธืื, ืึถืึผึธื ืึฐืึธืึธืึธื ืึธืึทืข ืึถืช ืึทืึผึธื ืึดืฉืึฐืชึผืึน, ืืึนืึดืืขึท ืึผึถืจึถืึฐ ืึถืจึถืฅ ืึทืึผึนื. ืึผึธืึธืจ ืึทืึตืจ, ืึฐืึธืึธืึธื ืึธืึทืข, ืึธืึทืข ืึตืึตืืืึน ืฉืึทืึฐืึธื ื ึดืฉืึฐืึธื, ืึธืึทืข ืึธื ืขึธืึฐืึทืช ืึตืืึผ ืึทืึผึธื. ืึธืึทืจ ืจึทื ืึทืึธื ืึดืืึฐืึธื ืึดืืึฐืึดืึฐ ืึฐืึทืชึผึฐ ืึดืืึฐืึธื ืึฐืึธืึธื. ืึทืชึผึทืึทืจ ืึทืชึผึตืึถื ืึถืช ืงึทืึดื, ืึธืึทืจ ืจึทืึผึดื ืึถืึฐืขึธืึธืจ ืึผึถื ืขึฒืึทืจึฐืึธื ืฉืึฐืืฉืึธื ืคึผึฐืึธืึดืื ื ึทืขึฒืฉืืึผ ืึผึฐืืึนืชืึน ืึทืึผืึนื, ืึผืึน ืึผึทืึผืึนื ื ึดืึฐืจึฐืืึผ, ืึผืึน ืึผึทืึผืึนื ืฉืึดืึผึฐืฉืืึผ, ืึผืึน ืึผึทืึผืึนื ืืึนืฆึดืืืึผ ืชึผืึนืึธืืึนืช. ืึธืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ ืจึทืึผึดื ืึฐืืึนืฉืึปืขึท ืึผึถื ืงึธืจึฐืึธื ืขึธืืึผ ืึทืึผึดืึผึธื ืฉืึฐื ึทืึดื ืึฐืึธืจึฐืืึผ ืฉืึดืึฐืขึธื, ืงึทืึผึดื ืึผืชึฐืืึนืึธืชืึน, ืึฐืึถืึถื ืึผืฉืึฐืชึผึตื ืชึฐืืึนืืึนืชึธืื, ืึทืชึผึนืืึถืจ ืงึธื ึดืืชึดื ืึดืืฉื ืึถืช ื', ืึธืึทืช ืึธืึผ ืึธื ืึดืืชึผึฐืชึธื ืึผึฐื ึดืื, ืึธืึฐืจึธื ืึธื ืงึดื ึฐืึทื ืึผึทืขึฒืึดื ืึผึฐืึธืึดื. ืจึทืึผึดื ืึดืฉืึฐืึธืขึตืื ืฉืึธืึทื ืึถืช ืจึทืึผึดื ืขึฒืงึดืืึธื ืึธืึทืจ ืืึน ืึผึดืฉืึฐืึดืื ืฉืึถืฉึผืึดืึผึทืฉืึฐืชึผึธ ื ึทืืึผื ืึดืืฉื ืึผึทื ืืึน ืขึถืฉืึฐืจึดืื ืึผืฉืึฐืชึผึทืึดื ืฉืึธื ึธื, ืึทืึดืื ืึฐืจึทืงึผึดืื ืึดืขืึผืึดืื, ืึถืชึดืื ืึฐืึทืึผึดืื ืจึดืึผืึผืึดืื, ืึทืื ืึถืช ืึผึดืึฐืชึดืื ืึธืึธื ืึทืืึผ, ืึธืึทืจ ืึดืึผืึผ ื ึถืึฑืึทืจ ืงึธื ึดืืชึดื ืึดืืฉื ื', ืึธืึธื ืึทืึผึธืึธืจ ืงึธืฉืึถื, ืึถืึผึธื ืึถืช ื'. ืึธืึทืจ ืึตืืึผ (ืืืจืื ืื, ืื): ืึผึดื ืึนื ืึผึธืึธืจ ืจึตืง ืืึผื ืึดืึผึถื, ืึฐืึดื ืจึตืง ืืึผื ืึดืึผึถื, ืฉืึถืึตืื ืึทืชึผึถื ืืึนืึฐืขึดืื ืึดืึฐืจืฉื, ืึถืึผึธื ืึถืช ื', ืึฐืฉืึถืขึธืึทืจ ืึธืึธื ื ึดืึฐืจึธื ืึตืึฒืึธืึธื, ืึฐืึทืึผึธื ื ึดืึฐืจึตืืช ืึตืึธืึธื, ืึดืึผึธืื ืึฐืึตืืึธืึฐ (ืืจืืฉืืช ื, ืื): ืึผึฐืฆึทืึฐืึตื ืึผ ืึผึดืึฐืืึผืชึตื ืึผ, ืึนื ืึดืืฉื ืึผึฐืึนื ืึดืฉึผืึธื ืึฐืึนื ืึดืฉึผืึธื ืึผึฐืึนื ืึดืืฉื, ืึฐืึนื ืฉืึฐื ึตืืึถื ืึผึฐืึนื ืฉืึฐืึดืื ึธื."" None | sup>
22.2 "Now the man knew his woman Chava, etc. Rabbi Huna and Rabbi Yaakov the son of Rabbi Avin, in the name of Rabbi Aba bar Kahana said: Before the man, the creations had never had sexual relations, behold here it is not written \\"and he knows\\" rather, and it is written \\"and he knew\\", that is, he made known the way of the land to all. Another interpretation: And Adam knew - he knew from what bliss he was expelled; he knew what Chava did to him. Said Rav Acha: Chivyiah the snake is your snake, and you are the snake of Adam. \'And she conceived and gave birth to Kayin\' - Said Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryiah three wonders happened on that day:on that day they were created, on that day they had relations, on that day they had children. Said Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha: two went up to the bed and seven descended, Kayin and his female twin, Hevel and his two female twins. \'And she said: I acquired a man with God\' - the woman sees herself with a baby and says \'behold the acquiring of my husband is definitely in my hand.\'Rabbi Ishmael asked Rabbi Akiva: since you have served Nachum Ish Gam Zu for twenty two years, and he taught that every \'ach\' and every \'rak\' make for exclusion and every \'et\' and every \'gam\' make for inclusion, in this verse what is \'et\' doing here? He Akiva answered: if it were written \'I acquired a man of God w/o the \'et\'\' that would be a difficult thing, rather it says \'I acquired a man with God\'. He said to him: \'Because this is not an empty thing for you\' (Devarim 32:47), and if it was empty, it is because of you, because you cannot LIDROSH, rather \'with God\' means that in the past Adam was created from the adamah and Chavah was created from the adam. From here and onward, โin our image as our likenessโโnot man without woman and not woman without man, and not both of them without Shekhinah Godโs presence.", '' None |
|
15. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Crispina, betrothal to, Dioโs death notice of โข Crispina, betrothal to, Dioโs view of โข Crispina, betrothal to, Historia Augustaโs portrayal of โข Crispina, betrothal to, Senate, relationship with โข Crispina, betrothal to, as victim โข readers, active engagement/response
Found in books: Chrysanthou (2022), Reconfiguring the Imperial Past: Narrative Patterns and Historical Interpretation in Herodianโs History of the Empire. 32, 83, 84, 267, 268, 270, 282; Scott (2023), An Age of Iron and Rust: Cassius Dio and the History of His Time. 56, 57, 94, 137, 191
|
16. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Crispina, betrothal to, Dioโs view of โข readers, active engagement/response
Found in books: Chrysanthou (2022), Reconfiguring the Imperial Past: Narrative Patterns and Historical Interpretation in Herodianโs History of the Empire. 5, 10; Scott (2023), An Age of Iron and Rust: Cassius Dio and the History of His Time. 88
|
17. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข betrothal โข betrothal, annulment โข betrothal, as matrimony โข betrothal, ketubbah โข matrimony, to another during betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 307; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 138
104a ืืืืขื ืื ืืืชืืื ืืืืืื,ืืืจ ืจื ืคืคื ืื ื ืชืจืชื ืืชื ืืชื ืงืืืืชื ืืฉืืืช ืื ืืื ืืืืจื ืืชื ืืื ืืงืืื ืืชื ืืืื ืืืืื ืืืืชื ืืงืืื ืืชื ืืืชื ืืืืจื ืืชื ืืืืืชื ืืืืจื ืืชื ืืืชื ืืงืืื ืืชื:,ืื ืืืจ ืื ืืืืจ ืื ืฉืื ืืืช ืืฉืืืื ืื ืืื\': ืืืืื ืืืื ืืื ืฉืื ืืขืืื ืืืจื ืื ืื ืื ืชื ืื ืืืืืจ ืืืืืจื ืืืช ืืืจ ืขืคืจ ืื ื ืืืืจ ืื ืืข"ืค ืฉืืื ืื ืืื ืืชื ืืืืขื ืฉืื ืืืจ ืื ืืื ืฉืื ืืืื ืืืชืงืจื ืืืช ืืืจ,ืืจืื ืื ื ืืืืจ ืื ืืข"ืค ืฉืืื ืื ืืคื ืื ืืืืขื ืฉืื ืืืจ ืื ืืื ืฉืื ืืืื ืืืชืงืจื ืืจืื ืคืจืืก ืื ื ืืืืจ ืื ืืข"ืค ืฉืืื ืื ืจืืื ืื ืืืืขื ืฉืื ืืืจ ืื ืืื ืฉืื ืืืื ืืืชืงืจื ืคืจืืกื ืืืื ืืืจ ืืื ืฉืื ืืขืืื ืืืจื ืื ืืื ื ืื ื ืืื ืืื ืฉืื ืืขืืื ืืืจื ืื,ืืืจ ืฉืืืื ืื ืงืฉืื ืื ืืืืจ ืืื ืืืืืจ ืืืืืจ ืื ืืืืจ ืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืืืจ ืืืจ ืืื ืืืืืจ ืืืืืจ ืฉืื ืืขืืื ื"ื ื"ื ืืืืจ ืืืืืืจ ืงืคืืื,ืจืืื ื ืืืจ ืืืื ืืืืื ืื"ื ืืืืืจ ืืืืืจ ืืืงืืืจ ืื ืืืื ืืงืื ืืืื ืขืกืงืื ื ืืืช ืืฉืืืื ืืื ืืื ืืืืืจ ืืงืืืจ ืืื ืืืช ืืฉืืืื ืืืงืืืื ืืฉืชื:,| 104a You should have brought water in a bucket.,Rav Pappa said: With regard to these first two mishnayot, you find that they are correct, concerning both tecy, where the tet farmer gives a certain amount of produce to the owner and keeps the rest, as well as the case of a contractor, who gives a set proportion, e.g., one-quarter or one-third, of the yield to the owner, and keeps the rest. From this point forward, i.e., from the third mishna of the chapter until its end, that which is relevant to the case of a contractor is not applicable to tecy, and that which is relevant to tecy is not applicable to the case of a contractor.,ยง The mishna teaches: If the cultivator said to the landowner explicitly: Lease me this irrigated field, or he said: Lease me this field with trees, and the spring dried up or the trees were cut down, he may subtract from the produce he owes as part of his tecy. The Gemara asks: But why is this so? Let the owner say to him: I told you only the name, i.e., the type, of the field, but this does not mean it would actually be irrigated during the time you are cultivating it. Isnโt it taught in a baraita: In the case of one who says to another: I am selling you a beit kor field of dirt, although the field contains only a half-kor, once the buyer purchases the dirt it has come to him, i.e., he may not retract from the transaction, as the seller sold him the dirt only by the name, and he did not mean that its size was precisely a beit kor. The baraita adds: And this is the halakha only where that field is called by people a beit kor.,The baraita continues: Similarly, if he said: I am selling you a vineyard, then although it does not have vines, once he purchases the land it has come to him, as the seller sold him the field only by the name; and this is the halakha only where it is called a vineyard. Likewise, if he said: I am selling you an orchard, then even though it does not have pomegranates, once he purchases the land it has come to him, as he sold him only by the name; and again this is the case only where it is called an orchard. Apparently, the seller can say to him: I told you only the name. So too here, let the seller say to him: I told you only the name.,Shmuel said: It is not difficult; this baraita is comparable to a case where the owner of the land said to the tet farmer what he was leasing him, while in that mishna the tet farmer said to the owner of the land what he was leasing from him. The reason for the difference is that if the owner of the land said the terms to the tet farmer, then he can claim that he told him only the name, and the tet farmer cannot object. But if the tet farmer said the terms to the owner of the land, then he was clearly particular to receive a field that would be irrigated when he cultivated it.,Ravina said: Both this baraita and that mishna are referring to a case where the owner of the land told the tet farmer what he was leasing him, as implied by the mishna, but since the owner said: This irrigated field, by inference we are dealing with one who is standing inside it. Why, then, does the owner need to state the fact that it is an irrigated field? It is obvious simply from looking at it that it is irrigated. Rather, the owner must have said to him by way of emphasis that he is providing an irrigated field as it currently stands.,one who receives a field from another as a contractor and then lets it lie fallow and does not work the land at all, the court appraises it by evaluating how much it was able to produce if cultivated, and he gives his share of this amount to the owner. The reason is that this is what a cultivator writes to the owner in a standard contract: If I let the field lie fallow and do not cultivate it, I will pay with best-quality produce.,Rabbi Meir would expound common language used in legal documents written by ordinary Jews to deduce halakhic conclusions. Although these formulations were not prescribed by the Sages, one can nevertheless infer halakhot from them if they are used in legal documents. As it is taught in a baraita that presents a similar case to the mishna: Rabbi Meir says he is liable to pay, as the document states: If I let the field lie fallow and do not cultivate it, I will pay with best-quality produce.,Likewise, Rabbi Yehuda would also expound common language, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: In a case where a woman who has given birth is commanded to bring the offering of a childbearing woman and her husband is sufficiently wealthy, a person brings the offering of the rich on behalf of his wife. This is so even if his wife does not possess money of her own and perhaps should have been considered poor. Similarly, he may bring every offering that she is obligated to bring, such as a sin offering or guilt offering. He pays for all these offerings because this is what he writes to her in her marriage contract: I accept upon myself to repay you for all obligations that you have, even those from beforehand. Consequently, he must fund all of her offerings.,Similarly, Hillel the Elder would expound common language as well, as it is taught in a baraita: The inhabitants of Alexandria would betroth their wives a significant amount of time before the wedding, as was customary in those days, and at the time of their entry to the wedding canopy, others would come and snatch the women from their husbands. The Sages consequently sought to establish the children of these women as mamzerim. This is because with regard to sexual intercourse with other men, a betrothed woman has the status of a married woman. Consequently, if she is taken by another man, her children fathered by that man are mamzerim, just like children of a married woman who were fathered by a man other than her husband.,Hillel the Elder said to the children who came before him for a ruling on their status: Bring me your motherโs marriage contract for examination. They brought him their motherโs marriage contract, and he found that the following formulation was written in it: When you will enter the wedding canopy, be for me a wife. This shows that the marriage would not take effect at the time of her betrothal, but only after she would enter the wedding canopy. Consequently, the marriage did not occur at all, as she never entered the wedding canopy, and therefore these women did not cause their children to be mamzerim by engaging in intercourse with the other man.,The Gemara adds: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korแธฅa would also expound common language. As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korแธฅa says: One who lends money to another may not take more collateral from him than the value of his debt, as this is what the debtor writes to the creditor if the creditor temporarily returns a deposit for the debtorโs use: The payment to which you have a right, which it is upon me to pay, corresponds to the entire value of this item, indicating that the item cannot be greater in value than the debt itself.,The Gemara infers: The reason the creditor acquires the collateral is that he wrote this to him. But if the creditor did not write this to the debtor, would the creditor not acquire the collateral? But doesnโt Rabbi Yoแธฅa say: If a creditor took collateral from the debtor and returned the collateral to him and then the debtor died, the creditor removes the collateral from the debtorโs children. The reason for this is that although movable property of orphans is not acquired by their fatherโs creditor, the collateral is considered to belong to the creditor, and he can collect the debt from it.'' None | |
|
18. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Betrothal โข betrothal โข betrothal, Judea โข betrothal, vs. marriage โข fornication, during betrothal โข sexual relations, during betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 98; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 58, 100; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 109, 110, 114, 117
12a ืืืจ ืจืื ืืืช ืืืืจืช ืื ืกื ืืืืงืช ืืชืืื ืื ืืฆืืช ืืขืืื ืืฉ ืื ืืชืืื ืื ื ืจื ืืฉื ืืืจ ืืขืืื ืืขืืื ืืืื ืื ืืืช ืื ืืื ืืฉืื ื ืืื ืฉืืจื ืื ืกื ืจืืฉืื,ืื ืืืืฉ ืฉืื ืชืืชืื ืืื ืชื ืืืจ ืจื ืฉืจืืื ืืืื ืฉืงืืืฉ ืืืขื ืืืืชืจ,ืืืืื ืืืชื ื ืื ืืืชื ืืชืื ืืชืืื ืืืื ื ืืจืืฉื ืืืืฆื ืื ืื ืืฉืืืื ืืชืืืชื ืื ื ืืืื ืืื ืืขื ืช ืืชืืืื ืืชืืื ืื ืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ืืฉืืืช ืื ืืืื ืฉื ืื ืกื ืืืืคื ืืื ื ืืขืื,ืืืจ ืจืื ืืืช ืืืืจืช ืื ืกื ืืืืงืช ืืชืืื ืื ืืฆืืช ืืขืืื ืืชืืืชื ืื ื ืจื ืืฉื ืืืจ ืืขืืื ืืืื ืื ืืขืืื ืืืช ืื ืืื ืืฉืื ื ืืื ืฉืืจื ื ืื ืกื ืืืืคื,ืืืืืืฉ ืฉืื ืชืืชืื ืืื ืชื ืืืจ ืจื ืฉืจืืื ืืืื ืฉืงืืืฉ ืืืขื ืืืืชืจ,ืืื ืืืชื ื ืื ืืืจืืืชื ืื ืฉืื ืืืชื ืืชืื ืืืื ืืืชื ื ืื ืืืชื ื\' ืืื ืืืจืืืชื ืื ืืฉืื ืืืฆื ืืืจ ืื ืื ื ืืขืืื ืกืืื:,| 12a Rabba said: That is to say, if one married a woman with the presumptive status of a virgin, as there were witnesses that she did not engage in intercourse, and she was found to be a non-virgin, she is entitled to a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. The Gemara rejects the proof. Rav Ashi said: In general, actually, I would say to you that in that case she does not receive a marriage contract at all, as it is a mistaken transaction. But here it is different, and she does not totally lose her marriage contract, because the first husband brought her into his house. Therefore, the second husband should have considered that a woman who entered her husbandโs home is no longer a virgin.,The Gemara asks: And since there are witnesses that she did not engage in intercourse with the first husband, let us be concerned that perhaps she committed adultery after betrothal, while under the jurisdiction of the second husband, and rule that she is forbidden to him due to suspicion of adultery and is not entitled to a marriage contract at all. Rav Sherevya said: The baraita is referring to a case where he betrothed her and engaged in intercourse immediately. Therefore, there was no opportunity to engage in adultery between her betrothal and her marriage to the second husband.,Others taught this statement of Rabba with regard to the mishna: Concerning a virgin who is a widow, a divorcรฉe, or a แธฅalutza who achieved that status from a state of marriage, for all these women their marriage contract is one hundred dinars, and they are not subject to a claim concerning their virginity. The Gemara asks: How can you find a virgin from a state of marriage? It is in a case where she entered the wedding canopy and did not engage in intercourse.,Rabba said: That is to say, if one married a woman with the presumptive status of a virgin and she was found to be a non-virgin, her marriage contract is one hundred dinars. The Gemara rejects the proof. Rav Ashi said: In general, actually, I would say to you that in general, she does not receive a marriage contract at all, as it is a mistaken transaction. But here it is different, and she does not totally lose her marriage contract, because she entered the wedding canopy. Therefore, the second husband should have considered that a woman who entered her husbandโs home is no longer a virgin.,The Gemara asks: And let us be concerned that perhaps she committed adultery after betrothal, while under the jurisdiction of the second husband. Rav Sherevya said: The baraita is referring to a case where he betrothed her and engaged in intercourse immediately. Therefore, there was no opportunity to engage in adultery between her betrothal and her marriage to the second husband.,The Gemara notes: The one who taught the exchange between Rabba and Rav Ashi with regard to the baraita, where there is explicit testimony that she did not engage in intercourse with the first husband and nevertheless no proof can be brought that if he discovers that she is not a virgin she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars, all the more so would he say that the same is true with regard to the mishna. And the one who taught the exchange with regard to the mishna, however, would not say the same with regard to the baraita, due to the fact that the husband could say to her: I relied on witnesses. Therefore, proof can be brought from the baraita that if he discovered that she is not a virgin, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.,who eats at the house of his father-in-law in Judea after betrothal and with-out witnesses to attest to the fact that he was not alone with his betrothed is unable to make a claim concerning virginity after marriage because in accordance with the custom in Judea, the assumption is that he secluded himself with her, and the concern is that it was he who engaged in intercourse with her.,From the fact that the mishna teaches the halakha employing the phrase: A man who eats, by inference one may conclude that there is also a place in Judea where the groom does not eat at the house of his father-in-law, and does not enter into seclusion with his betrothed. Abaye said: Conclude from it that in Judea too there are different places with different customs, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda said: In Judea, at first they would seclude the groom and bride together for a brief period before their entry into the wedding canopy, so that he would grow accustomed to her companionship in order to ease the awkwardness when they would consummate the marriage. And in the Galilee they did not do so.,The baraita continues. In Judea, at first they would appoint for them two groomsmen shushvinin, one for him and one for her, in order to examine the groom and the bride at the time of their entry into the wedding canopy and thereafter, to ensure that neither would engage in deception with regard to the presence or absence of blood from the rupture of the hymen. And in the Galilee they would not do so. As the custom of appointing groomsmen would be relevant only in a case where the groom and the bride had not been together in seclusion prior to marriage, this is apparently a custom in Judea different from the first custom cited in the mishna, where they would enter into seclusion prior to marriage.,The baraita continues. In Judea, at first the groomsmen would sleep in the house in which the groom and bride sleep, in order to examine the sheet on which the marriage was consummated immediately following intercourse. This was in order to ensure that the groom would not attempt to obscure the blood of the rupture of the hymen and claim that the bride was not a virgin. And in the Galilee they would not do so.,The baraita concludes: And anyone who did not conduct himself in accordance with this custom cannot make a claim concerning virginity against the bride. The Gemara asks: Concerning which case in the baraita was this principle stated? If we say it is concerning the first clause of the baraita, regarding the custom to seclude the couple prior to marriage, in that case, the phrase: Anyone who conducted himself in accordance with this custom cannot make a claim concerning virginity, is what it needed to say, due to the concern that perhaps they had sexual relations before the marriage.,Rather, it is concerning the latter clause of the baraita: They would appoint for them two groomsmen to examine them, that the principle was stated. In that case, the phrase: Anyone who was not examined by the groomsmen, is what it needed to say, as it is dependent on the family of the bride, and not the phrase: Anyone who did not conduct himself in accordance with this custom, which indicates that it depends on him.,Abaye said: Actually, the principle is stated concerning the first clause; and emend the baraita and teach: Anyone who conducted himself in accordance with this custom. Rava said to him: But isnโt it teaching explicitly: Anyone who did not conduct himself in accordance with this custom? One should not corrupt a baraita due to a difficulty that arose in understanding it. Rather, Rava said that this is what the baraita is saying: Anyone who did not practice the custom of the Galilee in the Galilee, but instead observed the custom of Judea in the Galilee, cannot make a claim concerning virginity against the bride. Rav Ashi said: Actually, this principle could be applied concerning the latter clause, and teach: Anyone who was not examined. When it said in the baraita: Anyone who did not conduct himself in accordance with this custom, it is referring to the custom of being examined.,both a widow who is an Israelite woman and a widow who is the daughter of priests, her marriage contract is one hundred dinars. A court of priests would collect a marriage contract of four hundred dinars for a virgin daughter of a priest, twice the sum of the standard marriage contract for a virgin, and the Sages did not reprimand them.,taught in a baraita: And for a widow who is the daughter of priests, her marriage contract is two hundred dinars. The Gemara asks: But didnโt we learn in the mishna: For both a widow who is an Israelite woman and a widow who is the daughter of priests, their marriage contract is one hundred dinars?,Rav Ashi said: There were two ordices instituted: Initially, the court of priests instituted for a virgin daughter of a priest a marriage contract of four hundred dinars, and for a widow, a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.' ' None | |
|
19. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข Anthropomorphism, Sympathy/Engagement โข Betrothal
Found in books: Fishbane (2003), Biblical Myth and Rabbinic Mythmaking, 351; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 104
29a ืืืืืื ืช"ืช ืืืืฆืืช ืืืช ืืืืื ืกืช ืืืื ืืืจื ืขืืื ืขื ืจ\' ืืืืื ืืจ\' ืืืืขืื ืฉืืื ืืืื ืช"ืช ืืืืฆืืช ืืืช ืืืืื ืกืช ืืืื ืื"ื ืืฉืืื ืฉื ืื ืฆืืจืื ืืื ืืฉ ืฉื ืื ืฆืืจืื ืืื ืืืืืื,ืืืื ืื ืฆืืจืื ืืืจ ืจื ืฉืืืื ืืจ ืืื ืื ืืฉืืื ืืจื ืชืจืืกืจ ืืืคื ืืืจื ืืฉืืชื ืืืคื ืฉืืคืืจื ืืืืจื ืื ืชืจืืกืจ ืืืคื ืืืจื ืืืื ืืืื ืฉืืชื ืืืคื ืฉืืคืืจื ืขืืื ืืืจ ืืืื ืืืืืฆื ืืืจื ืืืืืื ืขื ืกืืืจื,ืจื ืฉืฉืช ืืืจ ืื ืชืื ืชื ืื ื ืืืืชื ืื ื ืชืื ืชื ืืฉืฉืื ืจืืืื ืืฃ ื ืืืืชื ืืก\' ืจืืืื ื"ื ืืืื ืืงืจื ืืชื ื ืืื ืืืื ืืืชื ื ืืืช ืืื ืฉืืขืืจื,ืชื ืื ืจ"ืฉ ืื ืืืื ืืืืจ ืืื ืืจืื ืืื ืืืืืื ืืฉืจืื ืืคื ื ืืงื"ื ืฉืืื ืืงืื ืฉืืื ืฉืืื ื ืขืืื ืืื ืืืฆืจืื ืฉืืื ื ืขืืื ืฉื ืืืจ (ืฉืืืื ื ื, ืื) ืื ืืื ื ืืืืชื ืืืืช ืืืื ืืืืืชื ืืืฆืจืื ืืื\' ืืื ืืืื ืฉืืื ื ืขืืื ืฉื ืืืจ (ืืฉืขืืื ืื, ืื) ืืืขื ืื ืฉืืืชื ืืืื ืืืฃ ืืฉืื ืขืชืืืื ืืืืื ืฉืืื ื ืขืืื ืฉื ืืืจ (ืืืจืื ื, ื) ืืฉื ื\' ืืืืื ืืช ืฉืืืชื ืืืฉืื ืื ื ืืืจ ืืื ืืฉื ืืืื ืฉืืงื"ื ืฉื ืขืืื ืืืื ืืืืืืช,ืืืื ืืืื ืืืจ ืืืื ืืื ืื ืืฉืชื ืืืืฆื ืืืื ืื ืืฉืชื ืืฉืฃ ืืืชืื ืื ืืจืืขื ืืื ืชืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืื ืืื ืื ืืื ืืืื ืื ืืื ืืืจ ืืืื ืชืืชื ืื ืืื ืืจืืืงื ื ืคืจืกื ืขืืืื ื ืืืฆืืื ื ืืชื ืืืื ืืฉืืืื ืืืื ืืื ืืชืื ืืื ืืฉืชื ืืฉืฃ ืืืชืื ืื ืืจืืขื ืืชืื ืฉืืื ื ืฉืืขื ืงืื ืจืืืฉื ืงืื ืื ืคืงื,ืจื ืฉืฉืช ืืื ืืชืื ืืื ืื ืืฉืชื ืืฉืฃ ืืืชืื ืื ืืจืืขื ืืชืื ืฉืืื ื ืืื ื ืคืง ืืชื ืืืืื ืืฉืจืช ืืงื ืืืขืชื ืืื ืืืจ ืืคื ืื ืจืืฉ"ืข ืขืืื ืืฉืืื ื ืขืืื ืื ื ืืื ืืคื ื ืื ืืืจ ืืื ืฉืืงืืื,(ืืืืงืื ืื, ืื) ืืืื ืืื ืืืงืืฉ ืืขื ืืืจ ืจืื ืืฆืืง ืืื ืืชื ืื ืกืืืช ืืืชื ืืืจืฉืืช ืฉืืืื ืืจ"ื ืืืจ ืื ืืืช ืจืืื ื ืฉืืืื,ืืจืฉ ืจืื ืืื ืืืชืื (ืชืืืื ืฆ, ื) ื\' ืืขืื ืืชื ืืืืช ืื ื ืืื ืืชื ืื ืกืืืช ืืืชื ืืืจืฉืืช ืืืจ ืืืื ืืจืืฉ ืืืื ืืจืืกื ื ืืืืชื ืืืฆืืื ื ืืื ืื ืฉืชื ืืืื ืืฉืืขืืช ืืื ืืงืืืจ ืืื (ืชืืืื ืื, ื) ื\' ืืืืชื ืืขืื ืืืชื ืืืื ืืจืืกื ื ืืื ืื ืืฉืชื,ืชื ืื ืจ"ื ืืงืคืจ ืืืืจ ืขืชืืืื ืืชื ืื ืกืืืช ืืืชื ืืืจืฉืืช ืฉืืืื ืฉืืงืืขื ืื"ื ืฉื ืืืจ (ืืจืืืื ืื, ืื) ืื ืืชืืืจ ืืืจืื ืืืืจืื ืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืจืื ืง"ื ืืื ืชืืืจ ืืืจืื ืฉืื ืืื ืืื ืืคื ืฉืขื ืืืืื ืชืืจื ื ืงืืขืื ืืืจืฅ ืืฉืจืื ืืชื ืื ืกืืืช ืืืชื ืืืจืฉืืช ืฉืงืืจืื ืืืจืืืฆืื ืืื ืชืืจื ืขืื"ื,ืืจืฉ ืืจ ืงืคืจื ืืื ืืืชืื (ืชืืืื ืกื, ืื) ืืื ืชืจืฆืืื ืืจืื ืืื ืื ืื ืืฆืชื ืืช ืงืื ืืืืจื ืืื ืืื ืชืจืฆื ืืื ืขื ืกืื ื ืืืืื ืืขืื ืืืืื ืืชื ืืฆื ืกืื ื ืืชืื ืืื ืืื ืื ืื ืืืชืื ืืชื (ืืืงืจื ืื, ื) ืื ืืื ืื ืืง ืืืจ ืจื ืืฉื ืฉ"ื ืืื ืืื ืืืืืจ ืืขื ืืื ืืื:,ืืื ืขืืฉืื ืืืชื ืงืคื ืืจืื: ืืื ืงืคื ืืจืื ืืืจ ืจืื ืงืคื ืืจืื ืืฉืื ืืื ืืฉืื ืืืื ืืืืจ ืืืืงืืคื ื ืืืจื ืืืขืื ืืื,ื"ืจ ืืืื ืื ืืื ืฉืืื ืืขืืงืจื ืืืชืจ,ืืจ"ื ืืจ ืืฆืืง ืื ืื ืก ืข"ื ืฉืื ืืขืฉืืช ืงืคื ืืจืื ืืืชืจ ืืขืฉืืชื ืงืคื ืืจืื ืื"ืจ ืืืื ืืืจ ืจ"ื ืื ืื ืก ืืืื"ื ืืืชืคืื ืืืชืจ ืืขืฉืืชื ืงืคื ืืจืื ืฉื ื\' (ืืืืงืื ืื, ื) ืืืื ืขื ืืืจืฅ ืืคื ื ื\' ืืืืขืืื ืืื ืืจื ืฉืขืจ ืฆืคืื ืืืฉืชืืืืช ืืฆื ืืจื ืฉืขืจ ื ืื:,ืขืื ืื ืขืฉืืื ืื ืืชืืืฉ ืืคื ื ืขืืืช ื ืคืฉ: ืืืชื ืื ืืื ื ืชืืืฉ ืืืืืื ืืื ืชืืืฉ ืืื ืื ืื ืชื ื ื ืื ืืชื ื\' ืชืืืฉ ืืืืืื ืชื ื,ืช"ืจ ืืืช ืืงืืจืืช ืืื ื ืืืืื ืืื ืงืืืช ืจืืฉ ืืื ืืจืขืื ืืื ืืืื ืืืื ืืืืืืื ืืื ืืืช ืืืื ืืืื ืืืงืืื ืืื ืขืฉืืื ืืื ืืืงื ืฉืืจืคื ืืืงืืื ืืคื ื ืืืื ืืชืื,ืืืืื ืืืืืื ืืกืืคื ืืืื ืฉืฉืืจืคื ืืืงืืื ืืื ืืืื ืืชืื ืืืื ืืื ืืจืืฉื:,| 29a One interrupts his Torah study to carry out the dead for burial and to escort a bride to her wedding. They said about Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Elai, that he would interrupt his Torah study to carry out the dead for burial and to escort a bride to her wedding. The Gemara qualifies this ruling: In what case is this statement said? Only where there are not sufficient numbers of other people available to perform these mitzvot and honor the deceased or the bride appropriately. However, when there are sufficient numbers, additional people should not interrupt their Torah study to participate.,The Gemara asks: And how many people are considered sufficient? Rav Shmuel bar Inya said in the name of Rav: Twelve thousand men and another six thousand men to blow horns as a sign of mourning. And some say a different version: Twelve thousand men, among whom are six thousand men with horns. Ulla said: For example, enough to make a procession of people all the way from the town gate abbula to the place of burial.,Rav Sheshet said: As the Torah was given, so it should be taken away, i.e., the same honor that was provided when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai should be provided when the Torah is taken through the passing away of a Torah scholar. Just as the Torah was given in the presence of six hundred thousand men, so too its taking should be done in the presence of six hundred thousand men. The Gemara comments: This applies to someone who read the Bible and studied halakhot for himself. But for someone who taught others, there is no limit to the honor that should be shown to him.,ยง It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoแธฅai says: Come and see how beloved the Jewish people are before the Holy One, Blessed be He. As every place they were exiled, the Divine Presence went with them. They were exiled to Egypt, and the Divine Presence went with them, as it is stated: โDid I reveal myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt?โ (I\xa0Samuel 2:27). They were exiled to Babylonia, and the Divine Presence went with them, as it is stated: โFor your sake I have sent to Babyloniaโ (Isaiah 43:14). So too, when, in the future, they will be redeemed, the Divine Presence will be with them, as it is stated: โThen the Lord your God will return with your captivityโ (Deuteronomy 30:3). It does not state: He will bring back, i.e., He will cause the Jewish people to return, but rather it says: โHe will return,โ which teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will return together with them from among the various exiles.,The Gemara asks: Where in Babylonia does the Divine Presence reside? Abaye said: In the ancient synagogue of Huzal and in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Nehardeโa. And do not say that the Divine Presence resided here and there, i.e., in both places simultaneously. Rather, at times it resided here in Huzal and at times there in Nehardeโa. Abaye said: I have a blessing coming to me, for whenever I am within a distance of a parasang from one of those synagogues, I go in and pray there, due to the special honor and sanctity attached to them. It was related that the father of Shmuel and Levi were once sitting in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Nehardeโa. The Divine Presence came and they heard a loud sound, so they arose and left.,It was further related that Rav Sheshet was once sitting in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Nehardeโa, and the Divine Presence came but he did not go out. The ministering angels came and were frightening him in order to force him to leave. Rav Sheshet turned to God and said before Him: Master of the Universe, if one is wretched and the other is not wretched, who should defer to whom? Shouldnโt the one who is not wretched give way to the one who is? Now I am blind and wretched; why then do you expect me to defer to the angels? God then turned to the angels and said to them: Leave him.,The verse states: โYet I have been to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they have comeโ (Ezekiel 11:16). Rabbi Yitzแธฅak said: This is referring to the synagogues and study halls in Babylonia. And Rabbi Elazar said: This is referring to the house of our master, i.e., Rav, in Babylonia, from which Torah issues forth to the entire world.,Rava interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: โLord, You have been our dwelling place in all generationsโ (Psalms 90:1)? This is referring to the synagogues and study halls. Abaye said: Initially, I used to study Torah in my home and pray in the synagogue. Once I heard and understood that which King David says: โLord, I love the habitation of Your houseโ (Psalms 26:8), I would always study Torah in the synagogue, to express my love for the place in which the Divine Presence resides.,It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Elazar HaKappar says: In the future, the synagogues and the study halls in Babylonia will be transported and reestablished in Eretz Yisrael, as it is stated: โSurely, like Tabor among the mountains, and like Carmel by the sea, so shall he comeโ (Jeremiah 46:18). There is a tradition that these mountains came to Sinai at the giving of the Torah and demanded that the Torah should be given upon them. And are these matters not inferred through an a fortiori argument: Just as Tabor and Carmel, which came only momentarily to study Torah, were relocated and established in Eretz Yisrael in reward for their actions, all the more so should the synagogues and study halls in Babylonia, in which the Torah is read and disseminated, be relocated to Eretz Yisrael.,Bar Kappara interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: โWhy do you look askance teratzdun, O high-peaked mountains, at the mountain that God has desired for His abodeโ (Psalms 68:17)? A Divine Voice issued forth and said to all the mountains that came and demanded that the Torah be given upon them: Why do you seek tirtzu to enter into a legal dispute din with Mount Sinai? You are all blemished in comparison to Mount Sinai, as it is written here: โHigh-peaked gavnunnimโ and it is written there, with regard to the blemishes that disqualify a priest: โOr crookbacked gibben or a dwarfโ (Leviticus 21:20). Rav Ashi said: Learn from this that one who is arrogant is considered blemished. The other mountains arrogantly insisted that the Torah should be given upon them, and they were therefore described as blemished.,ยง The mishna teaches that even if a synagogue fell into ruin, it may not be made into a kappendarya. The Gemara asks: What is meant by kappendarya? Rava said: A shortcut, as implied by its name. The Gemara clarifies: What do you mean by adding: As implied by its name? It is like one who said: Instead of going around the entire row of houses makkifna addari to get to the other side, thereby lengthening my journey, I will enter this house and walk through it to the other side. The word kappendarya sounds like a contraction of makkifna addari. This is what Rava meant by saying: As implied by its name.,Rabbi Abbahu said: If a public path had initially passed through that location, before the synagogue was built, it is permitted to continue to use it as a shortcut, for the honor due to a synagogue cannot annul the publicโs right of access to the path.,Rav Naแธฅman bar Yitzแธฅak said: With regard to one who enters a synagogue without intending to make it into a shortcut, when he leaves he is permitted to make it into a shortcut for himself, by leaving through the exit on the other side of the building. And Rabbi แธคelbo said that Rav Huna said: With regard to one who enters a synagogue to pray, he is permitted to make it into a shortcut for himself by leaving through a different exit, and it is fitting to do so, as it is stated: โAnd when the people of the land shall come before the Lord in the appointed seasons, he that enters by way of the north gate to bow down shall go forth by the way of the south gateโ (Ezekiel 46:9). This indicates that it is a show of respect not to leave through the same entrance through which one came in; it is better to leave through the other side.,ยง The mishna teaches: If grass sprang up in a ruined synagogue, although it is not befitting its sanctity, one should not pick it, due to the anguish that it will cause to those who see it. It will remind them of the disrepair of the synagogue and the need to rebuild it. The Gemara asks: But isnโt it taught in a baraita: One may not pick the grass and feed it to oneโs animals, but he may pick it and leave it there? The Gemara answers: When we learned the prohibition against picking the grass in the mishna as well, we learned only that it is prohibited to pick it and feed it to oneโs animals, but it is permitted to leave it there.,The Sages taught in a baraita: In a cemetery, one may not act with frivolity; one may not graze an animal on the grass growing inside it; and one may not direct a water channel to pass through it; and one may not gather grass inside it to use the grass as feed for oneโs animals; and if one gathered grass for that purpose, it should be burnt on the spot, out of respect for the dead.,The Gemara clarifies: With regard to the phrase: Out of respect for the dead, to which clause of the baraita does it refer? If we say it is referring to the last clause, that if one gathered grass that it should be burnt out of respect for the dead, then one could ask: Since the grass is burnt on the spot, and not publicly, what respect for the dead is there in this act? Rather, the phrase must be referring to the first clause of the baraita, and it explains why it is prohibited to act with frivolity.,Shabbatot during and surrounding the month of Adar, a Torah portion of seasonal significance is read. When the New Moon of Adar occurs on Shabbat, the congregation reads the portion of Shekalim on that Shabbat. If the New Moon occurs during the middle of the week, they advance the reading of that portion to the previous Shabbat, and, in such a case, they interrupt the reading of the four portions on the following Shabbat, which would be the first Shabbat of the month of Adar, and no additional portion is read on it.,On the second Shabbat, the Shabbat prior to Purim, they read the portion: โRemember what Amalek didโ (Deuteronomy 25:17โ19), which details the mitzva to remember and destroy the nation of Amalek. On the third Shabbat, they read the portion of the Red Heifer Para (Numbers 19:1โ22), which details the purification process for one who became ritually impure through contact with a corpse. On the fourth Shabbat, they read the portion: โThis month haแธฅodesh shall be for youโ (Exodus 12:1โ20), which describes the offering of the Paschal lamb. On the fifth Shabbat, they resume the regular weekly order of readings and no special portion is read.,For all special days, the congregation interrupts the regular weekly order of readings, and a special portion relating to the character of the day is read. This applies on the New Moons, on Hanukkah, and on Purim, on fast days, and on the non-priestly watches, and on Yom Kippur.,We learned in a mishna there (Shekalim 1:1): On the first of Adar they make a public announcement concerning the forthcoming collection of half-shekels. The money is used for the communal offerings in the Temple in the coming year.'' None | |
|
20. None, None, nan (5th cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: โข betrothal โข fornication, during betrothal
Found in books: Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 313; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 183
|
