israelite

There, we have stated: “The Non-Jew, Rebbi Meїr says, is evaluated but does not evaluate; Rebbi Jehudah says, he evaluates but is not evaluated. Both agree that they make vows and are objects of vows.” Rebbi Jeremiah asked: For him who says there that he evaluates, here can he declare a nazir? For him who says there that he is evaluated, here can he be declared a nazir? How would it be possible for him to [be declared a nazir]? A Israelite can declare a Gentile to be a nazir. Would he listen to him? But the Israelite said, “I am a nazir,” the Gentile heard it and said, “I am responsible for what this one said.” It is only as if he paid a debt. How would it be possible for him to [declare a nazir]? A Gentile can declare an Israelite to be nazir. Since an Israelite cannot declare [another] Israelite to be a nazir, a Gentile cannot declare an Israelite to be a nazir. But it must be that the Gentile said, “I am a nazir”, the Israelite heard it and said, “I am taking upon me what this one said.” What did you exclude from him? An Israelite is subject to “not to desecrate”, a Gentile is not subject to “not to desecrate”. Rebbi Jonah said, Israelites can be relieved by a Sage, Gentiles cannot be relieved by a Sage. Rebbi Yose said, Israelites need a Sage to be relieved, Gentiles do not need a Sage to be relieved. It follows that Rebbi (Jonah) [Yose] follows Rebbi Abbahu. A Gentile woman came before Rebbi Abbahu, who said to Abime bar Tobi: Go and find her an opening by unforeseen circumstances. And Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Aḥa, who said that Laban was Kushan-Riš‘ataim. Why was he called “Kushan the doubly bad”? Because he committed two evils. One that he desecrated his oath, the other that he subjugated Israel for eight years.

There, we have stated: “The Non-Jew, Rebbi Meїr says, is evaluated but does not evaluate; Rebbi Jehudah says, he evaluates but is not evaluated. Both agree that they make vows and are objects of vows.” Rebbi Jeremiah asked: For him who says there that he evaluates, here can he declare a nazir? For him who says there that he is evaluated, here can he be declared a nazir? How would it be possible for him to [be declared a nazir]? A Israelite can declare a Gentile to be a nazir. Would he listen to him? But the Israelite said, “I am a nazir,” the Gentile heard it and said, “I am responsible for what this one said.” It is only as if he paid a debt. How would it be possible for him to [declare a nazir]? A Gentile can declare an Israelite to be nazir. Since an Israelite cannot declare [another] Israelite to be a nazir, a Gentile cannot declare an Israelite to be a nazir. But it must be that the Gentile said, “I am a nazir”, the Israelite heard it and said, “I am taking upon me what this one said.” What did you exclude from him? An Israelite is subject to “not to desecrate”, a Gentile is not subject to “not to desecrate”. Rebbi Jonah said, Israelites can be relieved by a Sage, Gentiles cannot be relieved by a Sage. Rebbi Yose said, Israelites need a Sage to be relieved, Gentiles do not need a Sage to be relieved. It follows that Rebbi (Jonah) [Yose] follows Rebbi Abbahu. A Gentile woman came before Rebbi Abbahu, who said to Abime bar Tobi: Go and find her an opening by unforeseen circumstances. And Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Aḥa, who said that Laban was Kushan-Riš‘ataim. Why was he called “Kushan the doubly bad”? Because he committed two evils. One that he desecrated his oath, the other that he subjugated Israel for eight years.

There, we have stated: “The Non-Jew, Rebbi Meїr says, is evaluated but does not evaluate; Rebbi Jehudah says, he evaluates but is not evaluated. Both agree that they make vows and are objects of vows.” Rebbi Jeremiah asked: For him who says there that he evaluates, here can he declare a nazir? For him who says there that he is evaluated, here can he be declared a nazir? How would it be possible for him to [be declared a nazir]? A Israelite can declare a Gentile to be a nazir. Would he listen to him? But the Israelite said, “I am a nazir,” the Gentile heard it and said, “I am responsible for what this one said.” It is only as if he paid a debt. How would it be possible for him to [declare a nazir]? A Gentile can declare an Israelite to be nazir. Since an Israelite cannot declare [another] Israelite to be a nazir, a Gentile cannot declare an Israelite to be a nazir. But it must be that the Gentile said, “I am a nazir”, the Israelite heard it and said, “I am taking upon me what this one said.” What did you exclude from him? An Israelite is subject to “not to desecrate”, a Gentile is not subject to “not to desecrate”. Rebbi Jonah said, Israelites can be relieved by a Sage, Gentiles cannot be relieved by a Sage. Rebbi Yose said, Israelites need a Sage to be relieved, Gentiles do not need a Sage to be relieved. It follows that Rebbi (Jonah) [Yose] follows Rebbi Abbahu. A Gentile woman came before Rebbi Abbahu, who said to Abime bar Tobi: Go and find her an opening by unforeseen circumstances. And Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Aḥa, who said that Laban was Kushan-Riš‘ataim. Why was he called “Kushan the doubly bad”? Because he committed two evils. One that he desecrated his oath, the other that he subjugated Israel for eight years.

There, we have stated: “The Non-Jew, Rebbi Meїr says, is evaluated but does not evaluate; Rebbi Jehudah says, he evaluates but is not evaluated. Both agree that they make vows and are objects of vows.” Rebbi Jeremiah asked: For him who says there that he evaluates, here can he declare a nazir? For him who says there that he is evaluated, here can he be declared a nazir? How would it be possible for him to [be declared a nazir]? A Israelite can declare a Gentile to be a nazir. Would he listen to him? But the Israelite said, “I am a nazir,” the Gentile heard it and said, “I am responsible for what this one said.” It is only as if he paid a debt. How would it be possible for him to [declare a nazir]? A Gentile can declare an Israelite to be nazir. Since an Israelite cannot declare [another] Israelite to be a nazir, a Gentile cannot declare an Israelite to be a nazir. But it must be that the Gentile said, “I am a nazir”, the Israelite heard it and said, “I am taking upon me what this one said.” What did you exclude from him? An Israelite is subject to “not to desecrate”, a Gentile is not subject to “not to desecrate”. Rebbi Jonah said, Israelites can be relieved by a Sage, Gentiles cannot be relieved by a Sage. Rebbi Yose said, Israelites need a Sage to be relieved, Gentiles do not need a Sage to be relieved. It follows that Rebbi (Jonah) [Yose] follows Rebbi Abbahu. A Gentile woman came before Rebbi Abbahu, who said to Abime bar Tobi: Go and find her an opening by unforeseen circumstances. And Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Aḥa, who said that Laban was Kushan-Riš‘ataim. Why was he called “Kushan the doubly bad”? Because he committed two evils. One that he desecrated his oath, the other that he subjugated Israel for eight years.

Example. The elder Rebbi Hoshaia and Rebbi Judah Neśia were sitting together. Rebbi Joḥanan ran und whispered into Rebbi Hoshaia’s ear: May a Cohen who is injured in his testicles marry the daughter ofconverts? He asked him, what did he tell you? He answered, a question which a carpenter, son of carpenters, cannot resolve. He did not ask me about a convert, since she is like a whore for him. He did not ask about an Israelite daughter, whom he will desecrate. He asked only about the daughter of converts! Is the daughter of converts not an Israel? You have to explain it following Rebbi Jehudah, who said, the daughter of a male convert has the status of the daughter of a desecrated male.

R. Zera exclaimed, "But it is not so! For lo, I united them but mishap befel me!" He asked him, "What was the mishap? That thou didst carry myrtle into the king's palace? Why, thou shouldest even have offered some reward to be privileged to behold a king. For R. Johanan has said : A man should always be eager to run to meet a king of Israel ; and not only to meet an Israelite king, but even a king of the other nations, for if he be worthy, he will distinguish between the kings of Israel and the kings of other peoples."

He replied : Our predecessors jeopardised their lives for the sanctification of the Name, but we do not. As it once happened with Rab Adda b. Ahabah who noticed a heathen woman wearing a karbalta in the street; thinking that she was an Israelite, he went up to her and tore it from off her. It was then discovered that she was a heathen, and they fined him four hundred Zuzim. He said to her, "What is thy name ?" She replied, "Matun." He said, "Matun, Matun, is worth four hundred Zuzim."

Rab Judah said : It is forbidden to read the Shema' in the presence of a naked gentile. Why is a gentile specified ? Even by a naked Israelite it is likewise [forbidden] ! [That it is forbidden with an Israelite is obvious] ; but it was necessary to specify the case of a gentile. For thou mightest have said : Since it is written with reference to the gentiles, "Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20), argue that [in this matter the naked gentile is to be considered] only like an ass ; therefore he informs us that to them also [when exposed] is "nakedness" attributed ; for it is written, "And they saw not their father's nakedness" (Gen. ix. 23).

Rab Judah said : It is forbidden to read the Shema' in the presence of a naked gentile. Why is a gentile specified ? Even by a naked Israelite it is likewise [forbidden] ! [That it is forbidden with an Israelite is obvious] ; but it was necessary to specify the case of a gentile. For thou mightest have said : Since it is written with reference to the gentiles, "Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20), argue that [in this matter the naked gentile is to be considered] only like an ass ; therefore he informs us that to them also [when exposed] is "nakedness" attributed ; for it is written, "And they saw not their father's nakedness" (Gen. ix. 23).

Rab Joseph said : This teaching applies only to the Israelite kings ; but for the kings of other peoples he must stop.

Abbai said : It refers to a Samaritan who is a Haber. Raba said : Thou mayest even suppose that it refers to a Samaritan who is an 'Am ha'ares, and we are here dealing with the 'Am ha'ares so designated by the Rabbis who disagree in this matter with R. Meir. For there is a teaching : Who is an 'Am ha'ares? Whoever does not eat his non-holy food in a condition of ritual purity — these are the words of R. Meir ; but the Sages say : Whoever does not properly tithe his fruits. These Samaritans, however, do properly apportion the tithe, for they are careful to observe what is written in the Torah. The teacher has said : The commandments to which the Samaritans adhere they observe more scrupulously than the Israelite.

One may make the response "Amen" after an Israelite who pronounces a benediction, but not after a Samaritan who pronounces a benediction until he has heard the whole of the benediction.

Our Rabbis have taught : We may make the benediction over a light kindled by a gentile from an Israelite or kindled by an Israelite from a gentile, but not over a light kindled by a gentile from a gentile. Why is [the light kindled] by a gentile from a gentile different that one may not [say the benediction over it] ?

Our Rabbis have taught : We may make the benediction over a light kindled by a gentile from an Israelite or kindled by an Israelite from a gentile, but not over a light kindled by a gentile from a gentile. Why is [the light kindled] by a gentile from a gentile different that one may not [say the benediction over it] ?

Because it has not "rested." If so, the light kindled by an Israelite from a gentile may likewise not have "rested" !

And shouldest thou say that the light which is prohibited ceases to exist whereas the other is quite a different one and came into being in the hand of the Israelite, there is the teaching : Who causes a flame to issue into the public way [on the Sabbath] has incurred guilt ; but why has he incurred guilt ? What he has taken up he has not set down, and what he has set down he has not taken up!

There is certainly also a prohibition [about the light kindled by an Israelite from a gentile], but when he says the benediction he does so over the additional part which is permitted. If so, a light kindled by a gentile from a gentile should also be allowed !

Our Rabbis have taught : Were one walking [at the conclusion of the Sabbath] outside the town and saw a child holding a torch, he makes inquiries ; if the child is an Israelite, he says the benediction [over the lighted torch], but if a gentile, he does not.

Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: We are here dealing with a point of time near to the setting of the sun; so if it were an adult, it is obvious that he must certainly be a gentile. But in the case of a child, one might say it is an Israelite and it is by chance that he is holding [the torch].

That is to say an Israelite may respond although he has not heard the whole of the benediction. But since he has not heard it, how can he fulfil his obligation?

A certain Min said to R. Ishmael : I dreamt that I poured oil upon olives. He replied that he had outraged his mother, He said to him : I dreamt that I plucked a star. He replied : Thou hast stolen the son of an Israelite. He said to him : I dreamt that I swallowed a star. He replied : The son of an Israelite thou didst sell and eat up the proceeds. He said to him : I dreamt that my eyes kissed one another. He replied that he had outraged his sister. He said to him : I dreamt that I kissed the moon. He replied that he had outraged the wife of an Israelite. He said to him : I dreamt that I walked in the shade of a myrtle. He replied that he had outraged a betrothed maiden. He said to him : I dreamt there was a shadow over me and yet it was beneath me. He replied that he had gratified an unnatural lust. He said to him : I dreamt that ravens came to my bed. He replied : Thy wife has been unfaithful with many men. He said to him: I dreamt that doves came to my bed. He replied: Many women hast thou defiled. He said to him : I dreamt that I held two doves and they flew away. He replied : Thou didst marry two women and parted from them without a document of divorce.

A certain Min said to R. Ishmael : I dreamt that I poured oil upon olives. He replied that he had outraged his mother, He said to him : I dreamt that I plucked a star. He replied : Thou hast stolen the son of an Israelite. He said to him : I dreamt that I swallowed a star. He replied : The son of an Israelite thou didst sell and eat up the proceeds. He said to him : I dreamt that my eyes kissed one another. He replied that he had outraged his sister. He said to him : I dreamt that I kissed the moon. He replied that he had outraged the wife of an Israelite. He said to him : I dreamt that I walked in the shade of a myrtle. He replied that he had outraged a betrothed maiden. He said to him : I dreamt there was a shadow over me and yet it was beneath me. He replied that he had gratified an unnatural lust. He said to him : I dreamt that ravens came to my bed. He replied : Thy wife has been unfaithful with many men. He said to him: I dreamt that doves came to my bed. He replied: Many women hast thou defiled. He said to him : I dreamt that I held two doves and they flew away. He replied : Thou didst marry two women and parted from them without a document of divorce.

A certain Min said to R. Ishmael : I dreamt that I poured oil upon olives. He replied that he had outraged his mother, He said to him : I dreamt that I plucked a star. He replied : Thou hast stolen the son of an Israelite. He said to him : I dreamt that I swallowed a star. He replied : The son of an Israelite thou didst sell and eat up the proceeds. He said to him : I dreamt that my eyes kissed one another. He replied that he had outraged his sister. He said to him : I dreamt that I kissed the moon. He replied that he had outraged the wife of an Israelite. He said to him : I dreamt that I walked in the shade of a myrtle. He replied that he had outraged a betrothed maiden. He said to him : I dreamt there was a shadow over me and yet it was beneath me. He replied that he had gratified an unnatural lust. He said to him : I dreamt that ravens came to my bed. He replied : Thy wife has been unfaithful with many men. He said to him: I dreamt that doves came to my bed. He replied: Many women hast thou defiled. He said to him : I dreamt that I held two doves and they flew away. He replied : Thou didst marry two women and parted from them without a document of divorce.

But did Abaye say that R. Meir is concerned because of the possibility of death while R. Judah is not concerned? But haven't we learned: If the daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest, and her husband went to a country beyond the sea, she may eat of terumah on the presumption that he is still alive

3. On the third of Marḥeshwan one is to begin praying for rain; Rabban Gamaliel says, on the seventh of that month, fifteen days after the feast of Tabernacles, so that even the tardiest Israelite may reach the Euphrates.

After he had trimmed his hair he put the garments on him, and said to him, Mount and ride. He replied: I am not able, as I am weak from the days of fasting. So Haman stooped down and he mounted [on his back]. When he was up he kicked him. He said to him: Is it not written in your books, “Rejoice not when your enemy fails” (Proverbs 24:17)? He replied: That refers to an Israelite, but in regard to you it is written, “And you shall step on their high places” (Deuteronomy 33:29).

Since Rav read as a lay Israelite, why did he not bless after finishing? Was it not because another was to read after him?

It is also reasonable to assume that Rav read as kohen, because if you should think that he read as an Israelite, why did he say a blessing before reading? It was after the enactment.

If he says, [instead of] “And you shall not give any of your seed…”. In the school of R. Ishmael it was stated: The verse speaks of an Israelite who has intercourse with a Gentile woman and gives birth through a son for idolatry.

Huna b. Manoah said in the name of R. Aha the son of R. Ika: It is permitted to an Israelite to say to a non-Jew, “Take your idol and put it in your shin tof.” Ashi said: It is permissible to disgrace a person with the term gimel shin who has terrible reports about him. It is permissible to praise a person who has good reports about him and if one does praise him, “blessings shall rest upon his head.”

the case of a man who has to use violence, the other of one whose approaches are admitted. And, if you like, I will say that both are cases of one who has to use violence, and yet there is no difficulty. The one is the case of the wife of a priest, the other that of the wife of an ordinary Israelite.

Mishnah: A father is exiled because of [killing accidentally] his son and the son is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] his father. Any person is exiled by way [killing accidentally] an Israelite and an Israelite is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] them except for a foreign resident. A foreign resident is only sent to exile for a [killing a fellow] foreign resident.

Mishnah: A father is exiled because of [killing accidentally] his son and the son is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] his father. Any person is exiled by way [killing accidentally] an Israelite and an Israelite is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] them except for a foreign resident. A foreign resident is only sent to exile for a [killing a fellow] foreign resident.

"Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." "Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." To include what? To include a slave and a Samaritan. We have already taught about this as they taught in a baraita: A slave and a Samaritan are exiled or lashed by way of [committing a crime against] an Israelite. And an Israelite is exiled or lashed by way of a slave or Samaritan.

"Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." "Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." To include what? To include a slave and a Samaritan. We have already taught about this as they taught in a baraita: A slave and a Samaritan are exiled or lashed by way of [committing a crime against] an Israelite. And an Israelite is exiled or lashed by way of a slave or Samaritan.

"Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." "Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." To include what? To include a slave and a Samaritan. We have already taught about this as they taught in a baraita: A slave and a Samaritan are exiled or lashed by way of [committing a crime against] an Israelite. And an Israelite is exiled or lashed by way of a slave or Samaritan.

"Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." "Everyone is exiled by way of [killing accidentally] an Israelite." To include what? To include a slave and a Samaritan. We have already taught about this as they taught in a baraita: A slave and a Samaritan are exiled or lashed by way of [committing a crime against] an Israelite. And an Israelite is exiled or lashed by way of a slave or Samaritan.

This works out well if a slave or Samaritan is exiled by way of an Israelite or lashed. [He is exiled in a case where] he killed him [accidentally] and lashed [in a case where] he cursed him. But an Israelite who is exiled or lashed by way of Samaritan?! It works well with exile [in a case where] he killed him [accidentally]. But lashing, why? [If you say] because he cursed him, "the chieftain of your people do not curse" (Exodus 22:27)! [I.e. a Samaritan is not on of your people and thus this prohibition for which the punishment is lashes should not apply in this case]

This works out well if a slave or Samaritan is exiled by way of an Israelite or lashed. [He is exiled in a case where] he killed him [accidentally] and lashed [in a case where] he cursed him. But an Israelite who is exiled or lashed by way of Samaritan?! It works well with exile [in a case where] he killed him [accidentally]. But lashing, why? [If you say] because he cursed him, "the chieftain of your people do not curse" (Exodus 22:27)! [I.e. a Samaritan is not on of your people and thus this prohibition for which the punishment is lashes should not apply in this case]

Rather, Rav Aha son of Yaakov said: It's a case where he [the Israelite] testified against him [the Samaritan that he would be liable for lashing] and he was found guilty of falsely testifying [so whatever punishment he tried to give the Samaritan, he would suffer]. Similarly regarding a slave who testified against [an Israelite that would be punished with lashes] and was found to be a false witness—can a slave even give testimony?! [Therefore, this solution must be wrong because this half of the baraita doesn't make sense]. Rather, Rav Aha son of Rav Ika said: Here is what we are dealing with [where slave and Samaritan are lashed because of Israelite]: a case where he struck him with a wound

Rather, Rav Aha son of Yaakov said: It's a case where he [the Israelite] testified against him [the Samaritan that he would be liable for lashing] and he was found guilty of falsely testifying [so whatever punishment he tried to give the Samaritan, he would suffer]. Similarly regarding a slave who testified against [an Israelite that would be punished with lashes] and was found to be a false witness—can a slave even give testimony?! [Therefore, this solution must be wrong because this half of the baraita doesn't make sense]. Rather, Rav Aha son of Rav Ika said: Here is what we are dealing with [where slave and Samaritan are lashed because of Israelite]: a case where he struck him with a wound

Rather, Rav Aha son of Yaakov said: It's a case where he [the Israelite] testified against him [the Samaritan that he would be liable for lashing] and he was found guilty of falsely testifying [so whatever punishment he tried to give the Samaritan, he would suffer]. Similarly regarding a slave who testified against [an Israelite that would be punished with lashes] and was found to be a false witness—can a slave even give testimony?! [Therefore, this solution must be wrong because this half of the baraita doesn't make sense]. Rather, Rav Aha son of Rav Ika said: Here is what we are dealing with [where slave and Samaritan are lashed because of Israelite]: a case where he struck him with a wound

"Everyone gets exiled for killing an Israelite accidentally, and vice versa] except through [killing accidentally] a foreign resident." Therefore, a foreign resident is [considered] an idol worshiper! But read the end [of the Mishnah]! "A foreign resident is exiled on account of [killing accidentally] a foreign resident [which would imply that they aren't like idol worshipers as they actually get exiled]! Rav Kahanah said: This is not a difficulty. Here [where the punishment is exile] is where a foreign resident kills a foreign resident, and here [where he does not get exile] is where a foreign resident kills an Israelite.

"Everyone gets exiled for killing an Israelite accidentally, and vice versa] except through [killing accidentally] a foreign resident." Therefore, a foreign resident is [considered] an idol worshiper! But read the end [of the Mishnah]! "A foreign resident is exiled on account of [killing accidentally] a foreign resident [which would imply that they aren't like idol worshipers as they actually get exiled]! Rav Kahanah said: This is not a difficulty. Here [where the punishment is exile] is where a foreign resident kills a foreign resident, and here [where he does not get exile] is where a foreign resident kills an Israelite.

Some say that they contrasted the two verses together. It's written: "For the children of Israel, and for the foreign resident in your midst there shall be six cities" (Numbers 35:15). And it is written: "There shall be for you all cities of refuge" (Numbers 35:12)—for you—not for the resident foreigners! Rav Kahanah said: This is not a difficulty. Here [in the second verse] is where a resident foreigner killed an Israelite, and here [in the second verse] is where a resident foreigner killed a resident foreigner.

Rav Hisda said: This is not a difficulty! Here [where he is exiled] is where he killed in a downward motion, and here [where he is not exiled] is where he killed in an upward motion. [I.e:] If [he killed him] in a downward motion, [in which case] an Israelite would be exiled, then exile should be enough for the [resident foreigner] as well. If [he killed him] in an upward motion, [in which case] an Israelite is exempt, then the resident foreigner is put to death.

Rav Hisda said: This is not a difficulty! Here [where he is exiled] is where he killed in a downward motion, and here [where he is not exiled] is where he killed in an upward motion. [I.e:] If [he killed him] in a downward motion, [in which case] an Israelite would be exiled, then exile should be enough for the [resident foreigner] as well. If [he killed him] in an upward motion, [in which case] an Israelite is exempt, then the resident foreigner is put to death.

Rava said to him: And is it not a kal vahomer (logical inference from a light to serious case)!? [This kal vahomer will show that your argument doesn't work]. Just as [in the case of] a downward motion an Israelite would be exiled, exile should be enough for a resident foreigner too; then [in the case of] an upward motion, an Israelite is an exempt, should [the resident foreigner really] be killed?!

Rava said to him: And is it not a kal vahomer (logical inference from a light to serious case)!? [This kal vahomer will show that your argument doesn't work]. Just as [in the case of] a downward motion an Israelite would be exiled, exile should be enough for a resident foreigner too; then [in the case of] an upward motion, an Israelite is an exempt, should [the resident foreigner really] be killed?!

MISHNA: And these are the ones who receive lashes. One who cohabits with his sister, with his father's sister, with his mother's sister with his brother' wife's sister, with his brother's wife, with his father's brother's wife, or with a nidda [i.e. a menstruating lady]. A widow with a high priest, a divorcee or a arkham who received chalutzah with a regular priest, a mamzeres [i.e. illegitimate woman] or nasina [i.e. a Gibeonite woman] with an Israelite, the daughter if a priest with a nasan or a mamzer. [All of these aforementioned cohabitations are subject to lashes.]