Talmud for Yevamot 8:1

הֶעָרֵל וְכָל הַטְּמֵאִים, לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בַתְּרוּמָה. נְשֵׁיהֶן וְעַבְדֵּיהֶן, יֹאכְלוּ בַתְּרוּמָה. פְּצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה, הֵן וְעַבְדֵיהֶן יֹאכְלוּ, וּנְשֵׁיהֶן לֹא יֹאכֵלוּ. וְאִם לֹא יְדָעָהּ מִשֶּׁנַּעֲשָׂה פְצוּעַ דַּכָּא וּכְרוּת שָׁפְכָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ יֹאכֵלוּ:

One who is uncircumcised [an uncircumcised Cohein whose brothers died because of circumcision] and all who are unclean may not eat terumah. [This is derived from the Paschal offering, concerning which it is written (Exodus 12:48): "And no uncircumcised one shall eat of it."] Their wives and their bondsmen may eat terumah. [For because of non-circumcision and uncleanliness they do not leave the category of Cohanim; it is just that they themselves are wanting amendment.] A petzua dakka and a k'ruth shafchah (see 8:2) — they and their bondsmen eat, and their wives do not eat. [For he makes her a chalalah by cohabiting with her in that she cohabits with one who is unfit for (marriage with) her.] And if he did not cohabit with her from the time he became a petzua dakka and a k'ruth shafchah [If she were married to him before this, and he did not cohabit with her after he became a petzua dakka], they may eat.

Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim

HALAKHAH: “He who was impure,” etc. Impure by a corpse⁵Num. 9:10., I not only have impure by a corpse, from where forced or in error? The verse says, every man, [it added]⁶Babli 93a.. So far following Rebbi Aqiba; following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Ismael stated, impure by a corpse is not equal to a far-away trip, nor is a far-away trip equal to impure by a corpse, what is common to them⁷This is the third hermeneutical principle of R. Ismael. Sifry Num. 69, Tosephta 8:2 (in the name of R. Aqiba); Targum Pseudo-Jonathan 9:10. is that he did not make the First and shall make the Second; also I am adding those forced or in error who did not make the First that they shall make the Second. Intentional from where? Rebbi Zeˋira said, but the man, to add the one acting intentionally⁸Num. 9:13: But the man who was pure.
This contradicts the position of R. Aqiba in the Tosephta, that both those impure by a corpse and those on a far trip are prevented from making the First Pesaḥ and therefore the third hermeneutical principle excludes the one who intentionally omitted the First even though he was pure and not far away. Cf. Babli 93a/b.. We have stated; “if in error or by force;” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, “if in error, or by force, or intentional.⁹Tosephta 8:1.” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah implies this, “because these are not liable for extirpation but those are liable for extirpation;” who is subject to extirpation if not intentional?

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Chagigah

“The hermaphrodite.” All your males²⁶Ex. 23:17, Deut. 16:16, description of who is required to appear in the Temple on a festival of pilgrimage. Babli 4a; Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpatim Chap. 20 (ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 333)., to exclude the hermaphrodite. There³⁸Mishnah Shabbat19:3. The entire paragraph essentially is found in Šabbat19, Notes 99–109, Yebamot8:1., we have stated: “One does not desecrate the Sabbath for a case of doubt³⁹Whether the baby was actually born on a Sabbath or maybe on Friday or Sunday. In the latter case he may not be circumcised on the Sabbath. {or} for a hermaphrodite; Rebbi Jehudah permits for the hermaphrodite.” What does Rebbi Jehudah say in this case⁴⁰Does R. Jehudah agree with the Mishnah which excludes the hermaphrodite from the duty of pilgrimage?? Let us hear from the following: Joḥanan ben Dahavai said in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, neither does the blind one⁴¹Who is excluded from the duty of pilgrimage. Tosephta 1:1, Babli 2a, Sanhedrin4b, Arakhin 2b.. Nobody says “neither” unless he agrees with the preceding statement⁴²That the hermaphrodite is excluded.. The argument of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted. There he says except, but here he says including. Rebbi Jehudah and the rabbis explain the same verse⁴³Gen. 17:14, establishing the duty of circumcision. The verse emphasizing male is not needed to exclude female circumcision since the limb to be circumcised always is referred to as flesh, and therefore designates the only boneless limb, the penis, which characterizes males.. The rabbis explain uncircumcised. Why does the verse say, an uncircumcised male? Only if he be totally male⁴⁴While the hermaphrodite can be circumcised, having a penis, and has to be circumcised since his maleness may be the dominant trait, he cannot be classified as male.. Rebbi Jehudah explains male⁴⁵Babli Šabbat 137a. Instead of all your males, he reads your total maleness.. Why does the verse say, uncircumcised? Even if he is only partially uncircumcised. But here, all your males, to exclude the hermaphrodite.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Full Chapter Next Verse