Si la hija de un israelita se casó con un Cohein, y él murió, dejándola embarazada, sus esclavos no comen terumah debido a la porción del feto (en los esclavos). [Aunque ella tiene hijos de él y come terumah, sus lazos tzon-barzel no comen terumah; porque pertenecen a los herederos, y el feto tiene una porción en ellos, y el feto carece de poder para hacer que coman terumah—ya sea porque sostiene que un feto en el útero de un extraño (al sacerdocio), (es decir, un israelita) es un extraño, o porque sostiene que el que nace hace que (otros) coman; el que aún no ha nacido no causa comer, está escrito (Levítico 22:11): "Y el que ha nacido en su casa— pueden comer ", que se puede leer:" Pueden causar que coman ".] Para un feto descalifica [Si la hija de un Cohein se casó con un israelita, y él la dejó embarazada, y ella no tuvo otro hijo, el el feto la descalifica para que no regrese a la casa de su padre.], y no causa comer. [Si la hija de un israelita se casó con un Cohein, y él la dejó embarazada, el feto carece de poder para hacerla comer, y lo mismo se aplica a sus esclavos.] Estas son las palabras de R. Yossi, que le dijeron: Ahora que nos has testificado acerca de la hija de un israelita a Cohein, la hija de un Cohein, también —sus esclavos no deben comer terumah debido a la porción del feto (en ellos). Porque son sus esclavos, y comen solo por su culpa, y él carece del poder para hacer que coman. La halajá no está de acuerdo con R. Yossi.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Yevamot
בת ישראל שנשאת לכהן – even מגול slaves (i.e., that the husband has the fruition without responsibility for loss or deterioration) , they may consume [Terumah/priest’s due] because they are the acquisition of a Kohen who purchased merchandise, meaning to say, the wife that is his purchase of a Kohen who purchased these particular slaves, as it is written (Leviticus 22:11): “But a person who is a priest’s property by purchase [may eat of them (i.e., the sacred donations) and those born into his household may eat of his food],” for the inference of "קנין כספו"/”the priest’s property” does not come other than for this exegesis: that a Kohen who has as purchased property with his money, that soul, which is the slave of the Kohen who bought a soul may eat of it (i.e., his food as a member of his household).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
Introduction
This mishnah continues to discuss slaves that are part of a wife’s dowry and their ability to eat terumah, which depends on her status as a daughter of an Israelite or a priest, as well as the status of her husband, Israelite or priest.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
If the daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest, and she brought him in slaves, they are permitted to eat terumah whether they are melog slaves, or tzon barzel slaves. When the daughter of an Israelite marries a priest she is allowed to eat terumah. The melog slaves (see yesterday’s mishnah for a definition of melog and tzon barzel) may eat terumah because they belong to her and she eats terumah. The tzon barzel slaves may eat terumah because they belong to her husband who is a priest, and a priest’s slaves eat terumah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yevamot
If the daughter of a priest was married to an Israelite and she brought him in slaves, they may not eat terumah whether they are melog slaves or tzon barzel slaves. When the daughter of a kohen is married to an Israel, she forfeits her right to eat terumah. Her melog slaves cannot continue to eat terumah because they are owned by her and she cannot eat. The tzon barzel slaves belong to the husband, who obviously cannot eat nor give them terumah.
