Se a filha de um israelita se casou com um Cohein e ele morreu, deixando-a grávida, seus servos não comem terumah por causa da porção do feto (nos servos). [Embora ela tenha filhos dele e coma terumah, seus servos tzon-barzel não comem terumah; porque eles pertencem aos herdeiros, e o feto tem uma porção neles, e o feto não tem poder para fazê-los comer terumah—ou porque ele sustenta que um feto no ventre de um estranho (para o sacerdócio), (ie, um israelita) é um estranho, ou porque ele sustenta que aquele que nasce faz com que outros comam; quem ainda não nasceu não come, como está escrito (Levítico 22:11): "E aquele que nasceu em sua casa— eles podem comer ", que pode ser lido:" Eles podem causar comer ".] Porque um feto desqualifica [Se a filha de um Cohein era casada com um israelita, e ele a deixava grávida, e ela não tinha outro filho, o o feto a desqualifica de retornar à casa de seu pai.], e não faz com que comer. [Se a filha de um israelita era casada com um Cohein e ele a deixava grávida, o feto não tem poder para fazê-la comer, e o mesmo se aplica a seus escravos.] Estas são as palavras de R. Yossi: Eles disseram a ele: Agora que você nos testemunhou a respeito da filha de um israelita de um Cohein, a filha de um Cohein também. —seus servos não devem comer terumah por causa da porção do feto (neles). Pois eles são seus escravos, e comem apenas por causa dele, e ele não tem poder para fazê-los comer. A halachá não está de acordo com 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.
