doctor

Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;

Jesus said, "No prophet is welcome in their own village. No doctor heals those who know them."

A second time the master Zachyas, doctor of the law, said to Joseph and Mary: Give me the boy, and I shall hand him over to master Levi, who shall teach him his letters and instruct him. Then Joseph and Mary, soothing Jesus, took Him to the schools, that He might be taught His letters by old Levi. And as soon as He went in He held His tongue. And the master Levi said one letter to Jesus, and, beginning from the first letter Aleph, said to Him: Answer. But Jesus was silent, and answered nothing. Wherefore the preceptor Levi was angry, and seized his storax-tree rod, and struck Him on the head. And Jesus said to the teacher Levi: Why do you strike me? You shall know in truth, that He who is struck can teach him who strikes Him more than He can be taught by him. For I can teach you those very things that you are saying. But all these are blind who speak and hear, like sounding brass or tinkling cymbal, in which there is no perception of those things which are meant by their sound. And Jesus in addition said to Zachyas: Every letter from Aleph even to Thet is known by its arrangement. Say first, therefore, what Thet is, and I will tell you what Aleph is. And again Jesus said to them: Those who do not know Aleph, how can they say Thet, the hypocrites? Tell me what the first one, Aleph, is; and I shall then believe you when you have said Beth. And Jesus began to ask the names of the letters one by one, and said: Let the master of the law tell us what the first letter is, or why it has many triangles, gradate, subacute, mediate, obduced, produced, erect, prostrate, curvistrate. And when Levi heard this, he was thunderstruck at such an arrangement of the names of the letters. Then he began in the hearing of all to cry out, and say: Ought such a one to live on the earth? Yea, he ought to be hung on the great cross. For he can put out fire, and make sport of other modes of punishment. I think that he lived before the flood, and was born before the deluge. For what womb bore him? Or what mother brought him forth? Or what breasts gave him suck? I flee before him; I am not able to withstand the words from his mouth, but my heart is astounded to hear such words. I do not think that any man can understand what he says, except God were with him. Now I, unfortunate wretch, have given myself up to be a laughing-stock to him. For when I thought I had a scholar, I, not knowing him, have found my master. What shall I say? I cannot withstand the words of this child: I shall now flee from this town, because I cannot understand them. An old man like me has been beaten by a boy, because I can find neither beginning nor end of what he says. For it is no easy matter to find a beginning of himself. I tell you of a certainty, I am not lying, that to my eyes the proceedings of this boy, the commencement of his conversation, and the upshot of his intention, seem to have nothing in common with mortal man. Here then I do not know whether he be a wizard or a god; or at least an angel of God speaks in him. Whence he is, or where he comes from, or who he will turn out to be, I know not. Then Jesus, smiling at him with a joyful countenance, said in a commanding voice to all the sons of Israel standing by and hearing: Let the unfruitful bring forth fruit, and the blind see, and the lame walk right, and the poor enjoy the good things of this life, and the dead live, that each may return to his original state, and abide in Him who is the root of life and of perpetual sweetness. And when the child Jesus had said this, immediately all who had fallen under malignant diseases were restored. And they did not dare to say anything more to Him, or to hear anything from Him.

Because of this, incorruptibility breathed out. It followed after the one who sinned, so that they might rest, because forgiveness is what remains for the light in need, the Word of fullness. For the doctor hurries to the place where there’s sickness, because that’s what he (or she) wants to do. The one in need, then, doesn’t hide it, because one (the doctor) has what they need. In this way the fullness, which has no need but fills the need, is what he provided from himself to fill up what’s needed, so that they might receive grace; because when they were in need, they didn’t have grace. Because of this, a diminishing took place where there is no grace. When what was diminished was restored, what they needed was revealed as fullness. This is the discovery of the light of Truth which enlightened them, because it doesn’t change.

Because of this, incorruptibility breathed out. It followed after the one who sinned, so that they might rest, because forgiveness is what remains for the light in need, the Word of fullness. For the doctor hurries to the place where there’s sickness, because that’s what he (or she) wants to do. The one in need, then, doesn’t hide it, because one (the doctor) has what they need. In this way the fullness, which has no need but fills the need, is what he provided from himself to fill up what’s needed, so that they might receive grace; because when they were in need, they didn’t have grace. Because of this, a diminishing took place where there is no grace. When what was diminished was restored, what they needed was revealed as fullness. This is the discovery of the light of Truth which enlightened them, because it doesn’t change.

Now the Jews had many writers, and each of them wrote what he pleased, and no two of them agreed in what they wrote, because they could not stand on a foundation of truth. And even our own writers, the children of the Church, cannot show us the certainty of the real truth. They cannot show how the ascent of the body of Adam to Golgotha took place, nor whence came the fathers (or, ancestors) of Melchisedek, and the fathers of the blessed woman Mary. And the children of Israel being urged by the Church, and being unable to ascertain the truth, waxed reckless, and wrote, as it were, in the madness of error. And as concerning the table of succession of the sixty-three families, which [reach] from Adam to Christ, the Greek writers, and the Hebrew writers, and the Syrian writers, can neither show whence each head of a family took his wife, nor whose daughter she was. Now each divine doctor (or, teacher) has laid down for the Church one true doctrine, and they have given unto believers the armour wherewith they can fight and overcome her enemies. Besides this, the grace of Christ hath granted unto us that which was lacking in them, and this we will cast into the rich treasury [of their knowledge]. And this, with great diligence, we have bestirred ourselves to do, even as our truly loving brother in Christ, the illustrious Namdésaya (Nemesius?) greatly desireth. And although I have been hindered through my dilatoriness, thou hast through thy love of learning, not been dilatory. And because of thy loving kindness towards me, and also because I myself am eager not to withhold from thee that which thou requirest of me, I will [here] write down the true table of succession. Hear, O my brother Nemesius (?) the following table of succession which I write for thee; none of the [other] doctors hath been able to light upon it. The following are the sixty-three generations from which the Incarnation of Christ is descended, and their order is thus:—

When the children of Israel came to the wilderness of Sin, Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron died, and they buried her. And there was no water for them to drink; and the children of Israel murmured against Moses and said, ‘ Would that we had all died with those who are dead already, and that we had not come hither to die with our beasts and our possessions! Why did the Lord bring us out from Egypt to this desert land, in which there are neither pomegranates nor grapes?’ Moses and Aaron went to the tabernacle, and fell upon their faces before the Lord, and the Lord said to them, ‘ Gather together the children of Israel, and let Moses smite the rock with the rod, and water shall come forth and all the people shall drink;’ and Moses called that water ‘ the water of strife.’ The children of Israel gathered themselves together unto Moses and Aaron, and they murmured against them saying, ‘ Why have ye brought us out to this desert to die of thirst and hunger?’ And the Lord was angry with them, and sent serpents upon them, and many of the people died by reason of the serpents. And they gathered themselves together unto Moses and Aaron and said to them, ‘ We have sinned before God and before you.’ God said to Moses, ‘ Make a serpent of brass, and hang it upon the top of thy rod, and set it up among the people; and let every one whom a serpent shall bite look upon the brazen serpent, and he shall live and not die.’ This serpent which Moses set up is a type of the crucifixion of our Lord, as the doctor saith, ‘ Like the serpent which Moses set up, He set Him up also, that He might heal men of the bites of cruel demons.’

After Elijah comes and conquers the son of destruction, and encourages the believers, for a space and a time which is known to God alone, there will appear the living sign of our Lord’s Cross, honoured and borne aloft in the hands of the Archangel Gabriel. Its light will overpower the light of the sun, to the reproach and putting to shame of the infidels and the crucifying Jews. As soon as the life-giving Cross appears before our Lord, as the Doctor saith, ‘ His victory comes before Him,’ etc., then a powerful light will fill the whole vaulted space between the heavens and the earth, the radiance and light whereof will be above all (other) lights; and suddenly will the mighty sound of the first trumpet of the Archangel be heard, concerning which our Lord said, e At midnight there will be a cry, “ Behold the Bridegroom cometh, go ye forth to meet Llim.” ’ At this trumpet the sun shall become dark, the moon shall not display its light, the stars shall drop from the heavens like leaves, and the powers of the heavens shall be moved. The earth shall totter and tremble, the mountains and hills shall melt, the sea shall be disturbed and shall cause terrible sounds to be heard. The rivers shall submerge the earth, the trees shall be uprooted, buildings shall fall, towns and villages shall be overturned, and high walls and strong towers shall be thrown down. The wild beasts and cattle and fowl and fish shall come to an end and perish; and everything shall be destroyed, except a few human beings who shall remain alive, and whom the resurrection shall overtake, of whom Paul has said, ‘We who are left shall not overtake them that sleep,’ meaning to say that those who are found alive at the time of the resurrection will not sleep the sleep of death; as the apostle says again, ‘ Behold I tell you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.’ As touching the heavens, some say that they will be rent, and that the waters which are above the firmament will descend, for it is not possible for the substance of water to pass through the substance of the firmament. Others say that as water passes through a tree or a piece of pottery, and sweat through the skin, so also will men enter into heaven and not be prevented, and (in like manner too) will the waters descend from above. Others say that the firmament will be rolled up like the curtain of a tent.

If a father and a son have seen the new moon, they should both go [to Jerusalem], not that they can join together as witnesses but so that if one of them is disqualified the other may join with another witness. Rabbi Shimon says that a father and son and all relatives are eligible to testify to the appearance of the new moon. Rabbi Yose said: it happened once that Tobias the doctor saw the new moon in Jerusalem along with his son and his freed slave. The priests accepted his evidence and that of his son and disqualified his slave. But when they appeared before the court they accepted his evidence and that of his slave and disqualified his son.

Rabbi Akiva further asked: If a limb hangs loose from the body of a living beast, what is the law? They replied: We have heard nothing about this, but we have heard about a limb hanging loose from the body of a man, that it is clean. And thus those that were afflicted with boils used to do in Jerusalem. He would go on the eve of Pesah to the doctor, and he would cut the limb until only contact of a hairbreadth was left; he then stuck it on a thorn and then tore himself away from it. In this manner both that man and the physician could make their pesah offering. And it seems to us that your case may be derived from this by a kal vehomer.

The following hides are susceptible to midras uncleanness: A hide which he intended to use as a rug, A hide used as an apron, A hide used as the lower covering of a bed, A hide used by a donkey-driver, A hide used by a flax-worker, A hide used by a porter, A hide used by a doctor, A hide used for a crib, A hide put over a child's chest, A hide for a cushion. A hide for a covering. All these are susceptible to midras uncleanness. A hide for wrapping up combed wool and a hide worn by a wool-comber: Rabbi Eliezer says it is susceptible to midras, But the sages say that it is susceptible to corpse uncleanness only.

It is written (1Kings 17:1) “Elijah the Tisbite, from the inhabitants of Gilead, said to Aḥab: By the Living Eternal One, the God of Israel, before Whom I stood, there will not be dew nor rain these years except by my word.” Rebbi Berekhia said, Rebbi Yasa and the rabbis. One of them said, he was heard both for dew and for rain; the other one said, he was heard for rain but was not heard for dew, from (1Kings 18:1): “Go, appear before Aḥab and I shall give rain, etc.” And he who said, he was heard both for dew and for rain, where was the vow of dew dissolved? Rebbi Tanḥuma from Edreï said, they are of the opinion that a vow that was dissolved partially is dissolved totally. Some want to say, on the occasion of the son of the woman from Sarepta, (1Kings 17:20) “He called on the Eternal and said, o Eternal, my God, etc.” Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, about one who stole a doctor’s bag. When he left, his son was injured.He returned to him and said: Please, sir doctor, heal my son. He said to him: Go and return my bag because it is full of medicines, and I shall heal your son. So the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Elijah: Go and lift the vow of dew because the dead are resurrected only by dew, then I shall resurrect the son of the Sareptan. And from where that the dead will live only by dew? (Is. 26:19) “Your dead will live, the corpses will arise. Wake up and jubilate, those who dwell in dust! For a dew of light is Your dew, וְאֶרֶץ רְפָאִים תַּפִּיל.” Rebbi Tanḥum from Edreï said, “the earth will give up those that are deposited in it.”

It is written (1Kings 17:1) “Elijah the Tisbite, from the inhabitants of Gilead, said to Aḥab: By the Living Eternal One, the God of Israel, before Whom I stood, there will not be dew nor rain these years except by my word.” Rebbi Berekhia said, Rebbi Yasa and the rabbis. One of them said, he was heard both for dew and for rain; the other one said, he was heard for rain but was not heard for dew, from (1Kings 18:1): “Go, appear before Aḥab and I shall give rain, etc.” And he who said, he was heard both for dew and for rain, where was the vow of dew dissolved? Rebbi Tanḥuma from Edreï said, they are of the opinion that a vow that was dissolved partially is dissolved totally. Some want to say, on the occasion of the son of the woman from Sarepta, (1Kings 17:20) “He called on the Eternal and said, o Eternal, my God, etc.” Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, about one who stole a doctor’s bag. When he left, his son was injured.He returned to him and said: Please, sir doctor, heal my son. He said to him: Go and return my bag because it is full of medicines, and I shall heal your son. So the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Elijah: Go and lift the vow of dew because the dead are resurrected only by dew, then I shall resurrect the son of the Sareptan. And from where that the dead will live only by dew? (Is. 26:19) “Your dead will live, the corpses will arise. Wake up and jubilate, those who dwell in dust! For a dew of light is Your dew, וְאֶרֶץ רְפָאִים תַּפִּיל.” Rebbi Tanḥum from Edreï said, “the earth will give up those that are deposited in it.”

One from the family of the Patriarch lost his possessions; they provided for him in pottery vessels, he ate and threw up. The doctor told him, is not the main preparation of food in the cooking pan? Eat out of the pan!

Rebbi Zeriqan, Simeon bar Abba, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A medical doctor who is a ḥaver, if he feeds a sick person who is an am haäreẓ, shall put the food into his patient’s hand but not into his mouth. That is, if it is demay, but if it is certain, it is forbidden even to put it in his hand. This means, if it is the patient’s property, but the doctor’s is forbidden for a Jew; for a descendant of Noah it is permitted even if it is certain and the patient’s property, but the doctor’s is forbidden. But if it was a limb taken from a living animal it is forbidden even if it is the patient’s property, that he should not be caused to stumble.

Rebbi Zeriqan, Simeon bar Abba, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A medical doctor who is a ḥaver, if he feeds a sick person who is an am haäreẓ, shall put the food into his patient’s hand but not into his mouth. That is, if it is demay, but if it is certain, it is forbidden even to put it in his hand. This means, if it is the patient’s property, but the doctor’s is forbidden for a Jew; for a descendant of Noah it is permitted even if it is certain and the patient’s property, but the doctor’s is forbidden. But if it was a limb taken from a living animal it is forbidden even if it is the patient’s property, that he should not be caused to stumble.

Rebbi Zeriqan, Simeon bar Abba, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: A medical doctor who is a ḥaver, if he feeds a sick person who is an am haäreẓ, shall put the food into his patient’s hand but not into his mouth. That is, if it is demay, but if it is certain, it is forbidden even to put it in his hand. This means, if it is the patient’s property, but the doctor’s is forbidden for a Jew; for a descendant of Noah it is permitted even if it is certain and the patient’s property, but the doctor’s is forbidden. But if it was a limb taken from a living animal it is forbidden even if it is the patient’s property, that he should not be caused to stumble.

Rebbi Yasa and Rebbi Immi. One had a toothache and his colleague instructed him; the other one had an earache and his colleague instructed him. We do not know who said what. Since Rebbi Yasa asked Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa’s doctor, how feels Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa’s tooth, and since Rebbi Yasa never said an unnecessary word, it was he who instructed about the tooth.

It is written Elijah the Tisbite, from the inhabitants of Gilead, said to Aḥab: By the Living Eternal One, the God of Israel, before Whom I stood, there will not be dew nor rain these years except by my word. Rebbi Berekhia said, Rebbi Yose and the rabbis. One of them said, he was heard both for dew and for rain; the other one said, he was heard for rain but was not heard for dew, from: Go, appear before Aḥab and I shall give rain on the face of the earth. He who said, he was heard both for dew and for rain, where was the vow of dew dissolved? Rebbi Tanḥum from Edrei said, they are of the opinion that a vow that was dissolved partially is dissolved totally. Some want to say, on the occasion of the son of the woman from Sarepta: He called on the Eternal and said, o Eternal, my God, also the widow with whom I am dwelling You are doing evil to kill her son. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, about one who stole a doctor’s bag. When he left, his son was injured. He returned to him and said: Please, sir doctor, heal my son. He said to him: Go and return my bag because it is full of medicines, and I shall heal your son. So the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Elijah: Go and lift the vow of dew because the dead are resurrected only by dew, then I shall resurrect the son of the Sareptan. And from where that the dead will live only by dew? Your dead will live, the corpses will arise. Wake up and jubilate, those who dwell in dust! For a dew of light is Your dew, וָאָרֶ֭ץ רְפָאִ֥ים תַּפִּֽיל. What means וָאָרֶ֭ץ רְפָאִ֥ים תַּפִּֽיל? Rebbi Tanḥum from Edrei said, “the earth will give up what is deposited in it.”

It is written Elijah the Tisbite, from the inhabitants of Gilead, said to Aḥab: By the Living Eternal One, the God of Israel, before Whom I stood, there will not be dew nor rain these years except by my word. Rebbi Berekhia said, Rebbi Yose and the rabbis. One of them said, he was heard both for dew and for rain; the other one said, he was heard for rain but was not heard for dew, from: Go, appear before Aḥab and I shall give rain on the face of the earth. He who said, he was heard both for dew and for rain, where was the vow of dew dissolved? Rebbi Tanḥum from Edrei said, they are of the opinion that a vow that was dissolved partially is dissolved totally. Some want to say, on the occasion of the son of the woman from Sarepta: He called on the Eternal and said, o Eternal, my God, also the widow with whom I am dwelling You are doing evil to kill her son. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, about one who stole a doctor’s bag. When he left, his son was injured. He returned to him and said: Please, sir doctor, heal my son. He said to him: Go and return my bag because it is full of medicines, and I shall heal your son. So the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Elijah: Go and lift the vow of dew because the dead are resurrected only by dew, then I shall resurrect the son of the Sareptan. And from where that the dead will live only by dew? Your dead will live, the corpses will arise. Wake up and jubilate, those who dwell in dust! For a dew of light is Your dew, וָאָרֶ֭ץ רְפָאִ֥ים תַּפִּֽיל. What means וָאָרֶ֭ץ רְפָאִ֥ים תַּפִּֽיל? Rebbi Tanḥum from Edrei said, “the earth will give up what is deposited in it.”

Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel stated: For any hurt which has a fixed medical fee, she is healed from her ketubah. If it does not have a fixed medical fee, she is healed from the estate. As the following: A woman came to Rebbi Joḥanan. He asked her: Did your doctor give a fixed price? She said, no. Did not Rebbi Ḥaggai say in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: “Do not turn yourself into an pleader,” that one shall not disclose the judgment to a party? He knew her to be honest.

“If she went to an Elder and her dissolved her vow, she is preliminarily married. To a doctor and he healed her, she is not preliminarily married.” What is the difference between the Elder and the doctor? The elder uproots the vow from its start; the doctor heals only for the future. Some Tannaïm state: Even if she went to an Elder and her dissolved her vow, she is not preliminarily married. The baraita follows Rebbi Eleazar, as we have stated there: “Rebbi Eleazar said, they forbade this only because of the other.” What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar? It would have been logical about a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage … because a vow which does not have to be investigated by a Sage. Some Tannaïm state: She is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce. Some Tannaïm state: She is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce. They wanted to say that he who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce, is Rebbi Eleazar, and he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, are the rabbis. Everything follows the rabbis. He who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce: Since she knows that if she went to an Elder, he would dissolve her vow, since she does not go therefore she can be married without a bill of divorce. But he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, that she should not go to an Elder who would dissolve her vow, then the preliminary marriage would become retroactively valid for her and it would turn out that her children become bastards. Therefore she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce.

“If she went to an Elder and her dissolved her vow, she is preliminarily married. To a doctor and he healed her, she is not preliminarily married.” What is the difference between the Elder and the doctor? The elder uproots the vow from its start; the doctor heals only for the future. Some Tannaïm state: Even if she went to an Elder and her dissolved her vow, she is not preliminarily married. The baraita follows Rebbi Eleazar, as we have stated there: “Rebbi Eleazar said, they forbade this only because of the other.” What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar? It would have been logical about a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage … because a vow which does not have to be investigated by a Sage. Some Tannaïm state: She is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce. Some Tannaïm state: She is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce. They wanted to say that he who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce, is Rebbi Eleazar, and he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, are the rabbis. Everything follows the rabbis. He who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce: Since she knows that if she went to an Elder, he would dissolve her vow, since she does not go therefore she can be married without a bill of divorce. But he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, that she should not go to an Elder who would dissolve her vow, then the preliminary marriage would become retroactively valid for her and it would turn out that her children become bastards. Therefore she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce.

“If she went to an Elder and her dissolved her vow, she is preliminarily married. To a doctor and he healed her, she is not preliminarily married.” What is the difference between the Elder and the doctor? The elder uproots the vow from its start; the doctor heals only for the future. Some Tannaïm state: Even if she went to an Elder and her dissolved her vow, she is not preliminarily married. The baraita follows Rebbi Eleazar, as we have stated there: “Rebbi Eleazar said, they forbade this only because of the other.” What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar? It would have been logical about a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage … because a vow which does not have to be investigated by a Sage. Some Tannaïm state: She is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce. Some Tannaïm state: She is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce. They wanted to say that he who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce, is Rebbi Eleazar, and he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, are the rabbis. Everything follows the rabbis. He who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce: Since she knows that if she went to an Elder, he would dissolve her vow, since she does not go therefore she can be married without a bill of divorce. But he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, that she should not go to an Elder who would dissolve her vow, then the preliminary marriage would become retroactively valid for her and it would turn out that her children become bastards. Therefore she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce.

Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav, Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Abba bar Ḥana: Two who brought a bill of divorce do not have to declare: It was written before us and signed before us. Rebbi Yose ben Yose in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They have to. He himself who brought the bill of divorce does not have to deliver the bill in the presence of two [witnesses] in order to declare her a divorcee in the presence of two. “If he gave her the bill, took it from her, and threw it into the sea or into a river. If later he says to her that it was an empty papyrus or a paid bond, he cannot be believed to disqualify her.” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: If he cannot disqualify her, who can? He said to him, since she was declared a divorcee in the presence of two [witnesses], he cannot be believed to disqualify her. If he gave her a bill of divorce which was found to be invalid, they forced him to give her a replacement. This case came before the rabbis and they declared it valid. Did we not say, he cannot be believed to disqualify her? There, the flaw was not proved; here the flaw was proved. As the following: Ḥinena, the son of Rebbi Asi, was a medical doctor and threw a bill of divorce to his wife. She cried. Her neighbor came, grabbed it from her, and gave her an empty papyrus. The case came before the rabbis and they took it into account. But did not Rebbi Yasa say in Rebbi Joḥanan’s name: If the designation was checked and found to be based on [the testimony of] women or children, the designation is invalid? There, the designation was not mentioned. But here the name “bill of divorce” was mentioned. And some want to say, if he asserted that it was a valid bill of divorce, but she cried, her neighbor came, grabbed it from her, and gave her an empty papyrus.

“If she went to an Elder and he dissolved her vow, she is preliminarily married. To a doctor and he healed her, she is not preliminarily married.” What is the difference between the Elder and the doctor? The Elder uproots the vow from its start; the doctor heals only for the future. Some Tannaïm state: Even if she went to an Elder and he dissolved her vow, she is not preliminarily married. The baraita follows Rebbi Eleazar, as we have stated there: “Rebbi Eleazar said, it would have been logical about a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage, because the Elder uproots the vow from its start. Why did they forbid a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage? Because of a vow which does not have to be investigated by a Sage. Some Tannaïm state: She is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce. Some Tannaïm state: She is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce. They wanted to say that he who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce is Rebbi Eleazar, and he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce are the rabbis. Everything follows the rabbis. He who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, the rabbis. He who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce: Since she knows that if she went to an Elder, he would dissolve her vow, since she does not go therefore she can be married without a bill of divorce. What is the reason of him who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, that she should not go to an Elder who would dissolve her vow, then the preliminary marriage would become retroactively valid for her and it would turn out that her children became bastards. Therefore she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce.

“If she went to an Elder and he dissolved her vow, she is preliminarily married. To a doctor and he healed her, she is not preliminarily married.” What is the difference between the Elder and the doctor? The Elder uproots the vow from its start; the doctor heals only for the future. Some Tannaïm state: Even if she went to an Elder and he dissolved her vow, she is not preliminarily married. The baraita follows Rebbi Eleazar, as we have stated there: “Rebbi Eleazar said, it would have been logical about a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage, because the Elder uproots the vow from its start. Why did they forbid a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage? Because of a vow which does not have to be investigated by a Sage. Some Tannaïm state: She is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce. Some Tannaïm state: She is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce. They wanted to say that he who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce is Rebbi Eleazar, and he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce are the rabbis. Everything follows the rabbis. He who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, the rabbis. He who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce: Since she knows that if she went to an Elder, he would dissolve her vow, since she does not go therefore she can be married without a bill of divorce. What is the reason of him who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, that she should not go to an Elder who would dissolve her vow, then the preliminary marriage would become retroactively valid for her and it would turn out that her children became bastards. Therefore she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce.

“If she went to an Elder and he dissolved her vow, she is preliminarily married. To a doctor and he healed her, she is not preliminarily married.” What is the difference between the Elder and the doctor? The Elder uproots the vow from its start; the doctor heals only for the future. Some Tannaïm state: Even if she went to an Elder and he dissolved her vow, she is not preliminarily married. The baraita follows Rebbi Eleazar, as we have stated there: “Rebbi Eleazar said, it would have been logical about a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage, because the Elder uproots the vow from its start. Why did they forbid a vow which has to be investigated by a Sage? Because of a vow which does not have to be investigated by a Sage. Some Tannaïm state: She is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce. Some Tannaïm state: She is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce. They wanted to say that he who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce is Rebbi Eleazar, and he who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce are the rabbis. Everything follows the rabbis. He who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, the rabbis. He who says, she is allowed to marry without a bill of divorce: Since she knows that if she went to an Elder, he would dissolve her vow, since she does not go therefore she can be married without a bill of divorce. What is the reason of him who says, she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce, that she should not go to an Elder who would dissolve her vow, then the preliminary marriage would become retroactively valid for her and it would turn out that her children became bastards. Therefore she is forbidden to marry without a bill of divorce.

HALAKHAH: “Medical costs. If he hit a person, he has to pay that person’s medical costs,” etc. Rebbi Jeremiah asked: If there was a growth around the wound and complications ensued because of the wound, what is the rule? Since it is written: “And healing he shall heal,” if [the patient] did not follow the doctor’s instructions, he is [not liable]. It was stated in another baraita: If [the wound] was covered with scab, he must pay for medical treatment. It was stated: “Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, if there was a growth around the wound, even if complications ensued because of the wound, he must pay for medical treatment but he is not liable to pay for his loss of earnings. Rebbi Simeon says, in this paragraph Scripture introduced a novelty stating that he has to pay for loss of earnings together with medical treatment: ‘Only his loss of earnings he shall compensate and healing he shall heal.’ ”

If she fell sick and was healed, the medical costs are on the estate. It was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, for any hurt which has a fixed medical fee, she is healed from her ketubah; if it does not have a fixed medical fee, she is healed from the estate.” As the following: The eye of a female relative of Rebbi Simeon bar Abba hurt. She came to Rebbi Joḥanan. He asked her: Did your doctor mention a fixed fee? If [the fee] is fixed, from your ketubah, if it is not fixed, your husband will give it to you. But did we not state: “Do not turn yourself into a pleader”, and did not Rebbi Ḥaggai say in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, it is forbidden to disclose a judgment to a party? They said, Rebbi Joḥanan knew her to be an honest woman; therefore, he disclosed it to her. If her husband wants a treatment at a fixed rate, but she wants one without fixed rate, does one not listen to her husband? Rebbi Mattaniah said, only if the case not be before him. But if the case be before him, he has to tell it as it is.

“A Jewish woman should not be a midwife for a Non-Jew, for she brings a son to pagan worship; but a Non-Jew may be a midwife for a Jewish woman.” It was stated so: From the outside but not the inside. She should not put her hand inside not to squish the fetus in her innards, and she should not give her a cup of root-extract to drink. If she was a medical doctor? This will come as what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he was a professional healer it is permitted. And here, if she was a medical doctor it is permitted. [Rebbi Yose bar Abun, these questions … [doc]tor permitted.]

“A Jewish woman should not be a midwife for a Non-Jew, for she brings a son to pagan worship; but a Non-Jew may be a midwife for a Jewish woman.” It was stated so: From the outside but not the inside. She should not put her hand inside not to squish the fetus in her innards, and she should not give her a cup of root-extract to drink. If she was a medical doctor? This will come as what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he was a professional healer it is permitted. And here, if she was a medical doctor it is permitted. [Rebbi Yose bar Abun, these questions … [doc]tor permitted.]