mishnah

MISHNAH: But the following must be said in the holy language: The recitation for the first fruits, ḥalîṣah, blessings and curses, the priestly blessing, the benedictions of the High Priest, the portion about the king, the portion about the calf whose neck was broken, the [priest] anointed for war at the time he speaks to the people. The recitation for the first fruits, how? “You shall begin and say before the Eternal, your God” but further on it says, “the Levites shall begin and say to all the men of Israel in an elevated voice”. Since “beginning” further on means in the holy language, so also here in the holy language. Ḥalîṣah how? “She shall begin and say: So shall be done to the man” but further on it says, “the Levites shall begin and say to all the men of Israel in an elevated voice”. Since “beginning” further on means in the holy language, so also here in the holy language. Rebbi Jehudah says, “She shall begin and say so,” [it is invalid] unless she says exactly that text.

MISHNAH: Blessings and curses, how? When Israel had crossed the Jordan they came to Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal in Samaria, next to Sichem which is close to the terebinths of guidance, as it is said: “They are on the other side of the Jordan, etc.”, and at another place it says: “Abram traveled through the Land up to the place of Sichem, up to the terebinth of guidance.” Since the terebinth of guidance mentioned there is at Sichem so the the terebinths of guidance mentioned here are at Sichem.

MISHNAH: Six tribes climbed to the top of Mount Gerizim and six tribes climbed to the top of Mount Ebal while the Cohanim, the Levites, and the ark were below in the middle. The Cohanim were surrounding the ark, the Levites the Cohanim, and all of Israel [were] on both sides, as it was said: “And all of Israel, its Elders, its policemen, its judges were standing on both sides of the ark …” They turned their faces towards Mount Gerizim and opened with the blessing: “Blessed be the man who will not make a hewn or molten [image], the Eternal’s abomination, made by an artisan, and will not put it up in secret.” These and those did answer and say: Amen. They turned their faces towards Mount Ebal and opened with the curse: “Cursed be the man who would make a hewn or molten [image], the Eternal’s abomination, made by an artisan, and would put it up in secret.” These and those did answer and say: Amen, until they finished blessings and curses.

MISHNAH: After that they brought the stones, built the altar, whitewashed it with lime, and wrote on it all the words of this Torah in seventy languages, as it is written: “well explained”. They took the stones, went and stayed in their place overnight.

MISHNAH: How is the priestly blessing? In the countryside they recited it as three blessings, but in the Temple as one blessing. In the Temple one says the Name as it is written, but in the countryside by its circumlocution. In the countryside the Cohanim lift their hands to the height of their shoulders but in the Temple over their heads except for the High Priest who does not lift his hands over the diadem. Rebbi Jehudah says, the High Priest also lifts his hands over his head, as it is said: “Aaron lifted his hands towards the people and blessed them.” How are the blessings of the High Priest? The organizer of the synagogue takes a Torah scroll and gives it to the president of the synagogue; the president of the synagogue gives it to the Second; the Second gives it to the High Priest. The High priest receives it standing, he stands and reads “after the death” and “but on the tenth”; he rolls the Torah tight, puts it in his bosom and says: More than what I read before you is written here. “And on the tenth” in Numbers he recites by heart, and recites eight benedictions: For the Torah, for the Temple service, for thanksgiving, for forgiveness of sins, for the Temple, for Israel, for the Cohanim, and the remainder of the prayer.

MISHNAH: How does the reading of the king proceed? At the end of the last day of Tabernacles, on the eighth, at the end of the Sabbatical year, one makes a wooden platform for him and he sits on it, as it is said: “At the end of seven years, at the assembly of the Sabbatical years at the festival of Tabernacles, when all of Israel appears.” The organizer of the synagogue takes a Torah scroll and gives it to the president of the synagogue; the president of the synagogue gives it to the Second; the Second gives it to the High Priest, the High Priest gives it to the king. The king stands to receive it, he reads sitting down. King Agrippas stood to receive, he read while standing, and the Sages praised him. When he reached “you cannot put over yourselves a strange man who is not your brother”, tears flowed from his eyes. They said to him, do not fear Agrippas, you are our brother, you are our brother.

MISHNAH: And he reads from the beginning of “These are the words” to Šema‘,Šema‘, “And it shall be if you listen,” “tithing you shall tithe,” “when you will have finished tithing,” blessings and curses [and the paragraph of the king], until he finishes the entire paragraph. The benedictions which the High Priest recites, the king recites, except that he substitutes “for the holidays of pilgrimage” instead of “forgiving of sins”.

MISHNAH: The priest anointed for war was speaking holy language when he was addressing the people, as it is said: “It shall be when you approach war, the Cohen shall come near”, that is the priest anointed for war, “shall speak to the people”, in the holy language, “and say to them: Hear, o Israel, you are approching today war against your enemies,” against your enemies but not against your brothers, not Jehudah against Simeon and not Simeon against Benjamin, for if you would fall in their hands they would have mercy on you.

MISHNAH: As it was said further: “The men who were mentioned by name got up, they took charge of the prisoners and all their naked ones they clothed from the booty.” You are going against your enemies and if you should fall into their hands they would not have mercy on you.

MISHNAH: “Your heart should not soften, do not fear, nor become impulsive, do not become impressed before them.” Your heart should not soften because of the neighing of horses or the gleam of swords. Do not fear, because of the shaking of shields and the stomping of military boots. Do not become impulsive because of the sound of horns, nor be impressed because of the sound of cries. “For the Eternal, your God, is He Who goes with you to make war on your enemies to save you.” They come with victories of flesh and blood, but you come with the victory of the Omnipresent. The Philistines came with the victory of Goliath; how did he end? In the end, he fell by the sword and they fell with him. But you, you are not so but “for the Eternal, your God, is He Who goes with you to make war on your enemies to save you,” that is the camp of the Ark.

MISHNAH: “The policemen shall speak to the people, saying: Who is the man who built a new house and did not inaugurate it; he should go and return to his house,” etc. Not only he who builds a house, but also one who builds a barn, a cow-shed, a wood-shed, a storage facility. Not only he who builds, but also one who buys, or inherits, or who received as a gift.

MISHNAH: “And who is the man who planted a vineyard and did not redeem it,” etc. Not only one who planted a vineyard but also one who planted five fruit trees, even from five different kinds. Not only one who planted but also one who sank or grafted, also one who buys, or inherits, or who received as a gift.

MISHNAH: “ Who is the man who became betrothed to a woman and did not take her,” etc. Not only one betrothed to a virgin, even one betrothed to a widow, even to one who waits for her brother-in-law. Even if he heard that his brother had died in the war he then returns and leaves. All those who listen to the Cohen in the front lines return and provide food and water and improve the roads.

MISHNAH: The following do not return: If somebody builds a portico, a covered walkway, or a verandah, or planted four fruit trees or five futile trees, or remarried his divorcee. [In the case of] a widow for the High Priest, a divorcee or one having received ḥalîṣah for an ordinary Cohen, a bastard or Gibeonite girl for an Israel, a Jewish girl for a bastard or a Gibeonite, he would not be returning. Rebbi Jehudah says, also he who rebuilt his house on its foundations would not be returning. Rebbi Eleazar said, also one who built a brick house in the Sharon would not return.

MISHNAH: But the following do not leave at all: If he built a house and inaugurated it, planted a vineyard and redeemed it, he who married his preliminarily married spouse, he who took in his sister-in-law, for it is said: “Free he shall be for his house for one year”. “His house”, that is his house; “shall be”, that is his vineyard; “and give pleasure to his wife”, that is his wife; “whom he took”, to include his sister-in-law. These do not provide food and water and do not improve the roads.

MISHNAH: “The policemen shall add and say to the people: ‘Who is the man fearful and faint-hearted, let him go and return to his house. Rebbi Aqiba says, “fearful and faint-hearted” in its simple meaning, that he cannot stand in military engagements and see a drawn sword. Rebbi Yose the Galilean says, “fearful and faint-hearted” is one who is fearful because of his sins; therefore the Torah appended him to all of these that he should return because of them. Rebbi Yose said, a widow for the High Priest, a divorcee or one having received ḥalîṣah for an ordinary Cohen, a bastard or Gibeonite girl for an Israel, a Jewish girl for a bastard or a Gibeonite, that is the “fearful and faint-hearted”.

MISHNAH: “When the policemen finish to speak to the people, the officers will have taken up position at the head of the people.” Behind the people one puts up people with backups armed with iron axes and they have permission to break the legs of anyone who desires to abandon his post since flight is the start of falling, as it is said: “Israel fled from before the Philistines and a great plague was among the people.” Further on it says, “the men of Israel fled from before the Philistines and slain fell on Mount Gilboa.” About what have these things be said? About a war of choice, but in a war of obligation everybody goes out, even a groom from his room and a bride from her bridal chamber. Rebbi Jehudah said, about what have these things been said? About a war of obligation, but in a war of duty everybody goes out, even a groom from his room and a bride from her bridal chamber.

So is the Mishnah: “Since flight is the start of falling”.

MISHNAH: [The portion of] the calf whose neck was broken, in the holy language. For it is said: “If a murder victim be found on the land, etc. Then your Elders and judges should go out.” Three from the High Court in Jerusalem had to go out. Rebbi Jehudah says five, since it is written “your Elders”, two, “and your judges”, two. Since no court may have an even number of members, one adds another one.

MISHNAH: If [the corpse] was found hidden in a heap, or hanging from a tree, or floating on the water, one did not break the neck as it is written “on the earth” but not hidden in a heap, “fallen” but not hanging from a tree, “on the field” but not floating on the water. If he was found close to the border, a town in which Gentiles live, or a town without a court, one did measure only from a town with a court. If he was found exactly in the middle between two towns, both bring a total of two calves, the words of Rebbi Eliezer; but the Sages say that one town brings one calf whose neck is broken but two towns do not bring two calves, and Jerusalem does not bring a calf whose neck is broken.

MISHNAH: From where did they measure? Rebbi Eliezer says, from his navel. Rebbi Aqiba says, from his nose. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob said, from the place which makes him slain, from his neck.

MISHNAH: If his head is found at another place than his body, one brings his head to his body, the words of Rebbi Eliezer; Rebbi Aqiba says, the body to his head.

MISHNAH: When the Elders of Jerusalem had completed their work and left, the Elders of that town bring “a cattle calf, one which never had been used for work, which never had drawn under a yoke.” Bodily defects do not disqualify it. One brings it down to an etan valley; the meaning of etan is “hard”. Even if it is not hard it is qualified. One breaks its neck with a stiletto from behind. Its place is forbidden to be used for sowing or agricultural works; it may be used to card flax or to hew stones.

HALAKHAH: “One which never had been used for work,” intentionally, “which never had drawn under a yoke,” intentionally or unintentionally. Rebbi Jonah explains the Mishnah: “One which never had been used for work,” intentionally, “which never had drawn under a yoke,” intentionally or unintentionally, if it actually had drawn. Rebbi Yose explained the Mishnah: Intentionally even if it had not drawn, unintentionally if it actually had drawn. It turns out that Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Yose the rabbis. Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Ismael, since Rebbi Ismael says, anything which was in a set and left the set to teach leaves its set and stands in its new meaning. Therefore, he has to spell out “one which never had been used for work,” intentionally, “which never had drawn under a yoke,” intentionally or unintentionally, if it actually had drawn. Rebbi Yose follows the rabbis, since the rabbis say, anything which was in a set and left the set to teach remains in its set and in its new meaning. Therefore, he has to spell out: intentionally even if it had not drawn, unintentionally if it actually had drawn.

HALAKHAH: “One which never had been used for work,” intentionally, “which never had drawn under a yoke,” intentionally or unintentionally. Rebbi Jonah explains the Mishnah: “One which never had been used for work,” intentionally, “which never had drawn under a yoke,” intentionally or unintentionally, if it actually had drawn. Rebbi Yose explained the Mishnah: Intentionally even if it had not drawn, unintentionally if it actually had drawn. It turns out that Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Yose the rabbis. Rebbi Jonah follows Rebbi Ismael, since Rebbi Ismael says, anything which was in a set and left the set to teach leaves its set and stands in its new meaning. Therefore, he has to spell out “one which never had been used for work,” intentionally, “which never had drawn under a yoke,” intentionally or unintentionally, if it actually had drawn. Rebbi Yose follows the rabbis, since the rabbis say, anything which was in a set and left the set to teach remains in its set and in its new meaning. Therefore, he has to spell out: intentionally even if it had not drawn, unintentionally if it actually had drawn.

An old man asked the rabbis of Caesarea: Does the breaking of its neck clear its ṭerefa from its impurity? They said to him, is that not a Mishnah: “He who cuts the throat and it turns out to be ṭerefa.” He said to them, but I asked about breaking the neck and you answer me cutting the throat! They said to him, but did not Rebbi Yannai say, the words of Rebbi Meïr, even if it was ṭerefa he is guilty? He said to them, you answer me from that of Rebbi Yannai?

MISHNAH: The Elders of that town wash their hands with water at the place where the calf's neck was broken and say: "Our hands did not spill this blood," etc. Did we ever think that the court was spilling blood? But, that he did not come to our attention and we sent him away, or that we did not see him and left him. The priests say: “Purge for Your people Israel which You did redeem, o Eternal.” They did not have to say that “the blood was purged for them,” but the Holy Spirit announces to them that when they follow this procedure the blood will be purged for them. If the killer was found before the calf should have its neck broken, it should leave and graze in the flock. If after the calf’s neck was broken it should be buried at its place because if came from the start in a doubtful case; it purged its doubt and left. If the killer was found after the calf’s neck was broken, he should be executed.

Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, it is holy while still alive. The Mishnah said so: “it should leave and graze in the flock.” What shall it leave? It shall leave its holiness.

MISHNAH: If one witness says, I saw the murderer, and one witness says, I did not see him; or a woman said, I saw, but another woman said, I did not see, they did break the neck. If one witness said I saw, but two said, we did not see, they did break the neck. I two said, we saw, but one said to them, you did not see, they did not break the neck.

MISHNAH: When professional murderers prevailed, breaking of the calf’s neck became obsolete, when Eleazar ben Dinai came who was called Teḥina ben Perisha. They turned to call him murderous son.

MISHNAH: When the adulterers prevailed, the spell-inducing water stopped and Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai abolished it, as it is said: “I shall not care if your daughters are whoring,” etc.

MISHNAH: When Yose ben Yo‘ezer from Ṣereda and Yose ben Joḥanan from Jerusalem died, the grape bunches disappeared, as it was said: “There is no bunch to eat, no early ripe fig that my soul desires.”

MISHNAH: The High Priest Joḥanan disestablished the declaration of tithes. He also eliminated the arousers and the hitters. Up to his days the hammer was hitting in Jerusalem and in his days nobody had to ask about demay.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Our Mishnah after the people were suspected of giving tithe to Cohanim. There is support for Rebbi Joḥanan in one and disagreement with him in one. Disagreement with him as we have stated there: “Similarly, the daughter of a Cohen [married] to a Levite should eat neither heave nor tithe.” We understand that she should not eat heave. But tithe any way you take it, if she is a Cohen’s daughter she should eat, if she is a Levite’s wife she should eat. Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: [It follows] him who says one does not give tithe to Cohanim. That means, he himself says one gives heave to Cohanim.

MISHNAH: When the Synhedrion was disestablished, the epithalamium stopped at wedding feasts as it was said: “They shall not drink wine in song.”

MISHNAH: After the earlier prophets died, Urim and Tummim stopped. When the Temple was destroyed, the shamir and flowing bee’s honey stopped and trusting men disappeared, as it was said: “Help, o Eternal, for the pious man is finished, for the trusting have vanished from mankind.”

MISHNAH: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says in the name of Rebbi Joshua: Since the day the Temple was destroyed there is no day without a curse, and the dew did not descend for a blessing; and the taste of fruits disappeared. Rebbi Yose says, also the fat of fruits disappeared. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, purity took away taste, tithes took away the fat of grain, immorality and sorcery killed everything.

MISHNAH: During Vespasian’s war they decided about grooms’ crowns and the erus. During Quietus’s war they decided about brides’ crowns and that nobody should teach Greek to his son. During the last war they decided that a bride should not be carried in a litter through the city; our teachers permitted that a bride should be carried in a litter through the city.

Mishnah: “And the erus.” resisa.

MISHNAH: When Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom disappeared. When the elder Rabban Gamliel died, the honor of Torah disappeared, purity and self-discipline died. When Ismael ben Phiabi died, the splendor of priesthood died. When Rebbi died, meekness and fear of sin died. When Rebbi Meїr died, the inventors of parables disappeared. When Rebbi Aqiba died, the preachers disappeared. When Ben Azai died, the perseverers disappeared. When Ben Zoma died, the students disappeared. When Rebbi Joshua died, good disappeared from the world When Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah died, wealth disappeared from the Sages. When Rabban Gamliel died, locusts came and troubles increased. When Rebbi Ḥanina ben Dosa and Yose the small died, piety disappeared. Why was he called Yose of the small room? For he was the concentrate of pious men. Rebbi Phineas ben Yaїr says, after the Temple was destroyed, fellows and freeborn were ashamed and covered their heads, people of [good] deeds shrivelled, strong-armed people and informers became dominant, nobody explains, nobody desires and nobody asks. On whom can we rely? On our Father in Heaven. The great Rebbi Eliezer says, from the day the Temple was destroyed, the Sages were diminished to be like scribes, the scribes like community servants, the community servants like common people; the common people go and degenerate, nobody desires and nobody asks. On whom can we rely? On our Father in Heaven. On the heels of the Messiah impertinence will grow, inflation will lead, the vine will give its fruit but the wine will be expensive, the government will turn heretic, nobody rebukes, the assembly hall will be a brothel, Galilee will be destroyed and Gaulanitis become deserted, frontier dwellers will move from city to city and nobody will have mercy on them, the wisdom of scholars will be defective, those who fear sin will be despised, truth will be absent, young men will insult Elders, Elders will stand before the young, “a son will abuse his father, a daughter rebel against her mother and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, the enemies of a person are his family”, the generation is dog-faced, a son is not ashamed before his father. What do we have to rely on? Our Father in Heaven.

MISHNAH: A virgin is married on Wednesday and a widow on Thursday, for in smaller towns court convenes two times per week, on Monday and Thursday, so if he has a complaint about virginity he can quickly go to court

Rebbi Eleazar explains the reason given in the Mishnah, that if he has a complaint about virginity he can quickly go to court. A baraita supports Rebbi Eleazar: Since the time of danger they used to marry on Tuesdays and the Sages did not object; about Monday one does not listen to him, but if it was because of a danger it is permitted. What is “because of a danger”? because of sorcery. What is the difference between Monday and Tuesday? One who waits one day cannot be compared to one who waits two days. Why not let him wait two days? That his acquisition should not be sweet for him. Why should his acquisition not be sweet for him? One cannot tolerate it, since Rebbi Hila said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, if he found the door open, he is forbidden to keep her because she might have been unfaithful. Could we not suspect that she was raped? A rape is public knowledge. And even if you suspect that she was raped, there is no other doubt. There is a doubt whether she was raped or whether she was [willingly] opened. From the words of the Torah one has to be stringent. Rebbi Yose said, if you suspect that she was raped, there are two doubts. There is a doubt whether she was raped or whether she was [willingly] opened; there is a doubt whether it happened after she was preliminarily married or before. From the words of the Torah, with two doubts one has to be lenient.

Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Aḥa, said in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: It is forbidden to judge money matters on Friday. Does not a Mishnah object: “Therefore, one does not judge criminal matters on Friday or any day before a holiday”? Therefore, one judges money matters! Also, Rebbi Ḥiyya stated thus: One judges money matters on Friday but not criminal matters. One is for practice, the other for Torah study.

MISHNAH: The ketubah of a virgin is 200 and that of a widow one mina. The ketubah of virgins who after a preliminary marriage become widows, divorcees, or who received ḥalîṣah, is 200 and they are subject to a claim of non-virginity. The ketubah of a proselyte, a prisoner, and a slave who were redeemed, freed, or converted at less than three years and one day of age, is 200 and they are subject to a claim of non-virginity.

HALAKHAH: “The ketubah of a virgin is 200 and that of a widow one mina,” etc. Huna in the name of Samuel: In the Temple šeqel. Rebbi Abba bar Bina said, circulating coin. A Mishnah supports Rebbi Abba bar Bina: “The five tetradrachmas of the firstborn are in Tyrian coinage, the 30 of the slave, the 50 of the rapist and the seducer, the 100 of the slanderer, are all computed in Temple šeqels in Tyrian coinage.” A woman’s ketubah is not stated with them. Rebbi Abin said, did they not learn the ketubah of a woman from the rapist and the seducer? Since the rapist and the seducer are mentioned, it is as if women’s ketubah was stated with them.

At less than three years and one day of age, Rebbi Yose in the name of [Rav] Ḥiyya bar Ashi, Rebbi Jonah, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: What is this like? One makes a dimple in the flesh which straightens out by itself. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Like one who muddies a source which becomes clear again. Rebbi Yose said, a Mishnah says so: Younger than that, it is as if one puts a finger on an eye. Rebbi Abun said: “I am calling to Almighty God, to the God who decides with me.” If a girl is three years and one day old, if the Court decided to lengthen, her hymen repairs itself, otherwise her hymen does not repair itself.

MISHNAH: If an adult male had sexual relations with an underage girl, or an underage boy with an adult female, or one injured by wood, their ketubot are 200 [zuz], the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, the ketubah of one injured by wood is a mina.

MISHNAH: For virgins who after a final marriage become widows, divorcees, or who received ḥalîṣah, their ketubah is a mina and they are not subject to a claim of non-virginity. For a proselyte, a prisoner, and a slave who were redeemed, converted, or freed at more than three years and one day of age, their ketubah is a mina and they are not subject to a claim of non-virginity.

MISHNAH: If somebody eats at his father-in-law’s in Judea without chaperones cannot claim missing virginity since he is alone with her. Both for an Israel widow as a Cohanim widow the ketubah is a mina. The court of priests collected 400 zuz for a virgin, to which the Sages did not object.

MISHNAH: Somebody married a woman and found that she was no virgin. She says, I was raped after you had married me preliminarily, so your field was flooded. He says not so, but it happened before I married you preliminarily; therefore, my acquisition was made in error. Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer say, she is believed. Rebbi Joshua said, we do not live off her mouth but there is a presumption that she had sexual relations before she was preliminarily married unless she provides proof of her statement.

There, we have stated: “If she had bodily defects while still in her father’s house, the father has to bring proof.” Rebbi Eleazar asked Rebbi Joḥanan: Is this Mishnah from Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer? Not from Rebbi Joshua? He said to him, those are everybody’s words. There is a difference because bodily defects have a way to appear. Rebbi Yose said, formerly we saw rabbis who compared bodily defects to [defects of] virginity. These can be inferred from those and those can be inferred from these. Bodily defects from claims of missing virginity: For if he slept with her in her father’s house, the father has to provide proof. Claims of missing virginity from bodily defects: For if she developed bodily defects and there is a doubt whether it happened after she entered his domain or before she entered his domain, the husband has to provide proof, from claims of missing virginity. But if she lost her virginity, was it not in her father’s house? Nevertheless, you say, the husband has to provide proof; so here also, the husband has to provide proof.

MISHNAH: She says, I was injured by wood, but he says not so, you were trampled on by a man; Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer say, she is believed. Rebbi Joshua said, we do not live off her mouth but there is a presumption that she was trampled on by a man unless she provides proof of her statement.

MISHNAH: If she was seen speaking to a man and one asked her, what kind of man is this? He is Mr. X, a Cohen; Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer say, she is believed. Rebbi Joshua said, we do not live off her mouth but there is a presumption that she was lying with a Gibeonite and a bastard unless she provides proof of her statement.

MISHNAH: If she was pregnant and one asked her, what kind of fetus is this? He is from Mr. X, a Cohen; Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Eliezer say, she is believed. Rebbi Joshua said, we do not live off her mouth but there is a presumption that she is pregnant from a Gibeonite or a bastard unless she provides proof of her statement.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Yose said: It happened that, when a girl was raped while she went to draw water from the spring, Rebbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri said: If most people of the town can marry into the priesthood then she can marry into the priesthood.

MISHNAH: If a woman became widowed or divorced and she claims to have been married as a virgin, but he says not so, I married you as a widow, if there are witnesses that she went out in hinuma or with uncovered hair, her ketubah is 200 [zuz]. Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, the distribution of roasted kernels also is proof.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Joshua agrees that if somebody says to another: “This field did belong to your father but I bought it from him,” that he is trustworthy since the mouth which forbade is the mouth which permits. But if there are witnesses that it did belong to [the second man’s] father and [the first] said, I bought it, he is not trustworthy.

MISHNAH: If witnesses said, this is our signature, but we were under duress, or underage, or disqualified, these are trustworthy. But if there are witnesses to identify their signatures, or their signatures are confirmed from another document, they are not trustworthy.

HALAKHAH: “If witnesses said, this is our signature,” etc. It was stated: And similarly, the witnesses who testified whether to declare impure or pure, or to remove or include, or to forbid or permit, or to obligate or absolve, if they say we did invent this before their testimony was investigated by the court, they can be believed; after their testimony was investigated by the court, they are not trustworthy.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, they considered witnesses who signed a document as if their testimony had been investigated by the court. If they say, these are our signatures, and others say, these are their signatures, Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Their [testimony] does not add and does not detract. Rebbi Yose said, our Mishnah says so, “if there are witnesses to identify their signatures, or if their signatures are confirmed from another document, they are not trustworthy.”

MISHNAH: If one says, this is my signature and that is my colleague’s signature, and the other says, this is my signature and that is my colleague’s signature, they are trustworthy. If each of them says, that ismy signature, each of them needs another with him, the words of Rebbi, but the Sages say, everybody is trustworthy to confirm his own signature.

MISHNAH: If a woman said, I was married but I am divorced, she is to be trusted, since the mouth which forbade is the mouth which permits. But if there are witnesses that she is married and she says, I am divorced, she is not trustworthy.

MISHNAH: 6: If a woman said, I was kidnapped but I am pure, she is to be trusted, since the mouth which forbade is the mouth which permits. But if there are witnesses that she was kidnapped and she says, I am pure, she is not trustworthy. If the witnesses came after she was married, she should not leave.

MISHNAH: Two women who were kidnapped and each one of them says I am pure, are not trustworthy. But if they testify one for the other they can be trusted. Similarly, if of two men each one says that he is a Cohen, the cannot be trusted. But if they testify for one another, they can be trusted.

HALAKHAH: “Similarly, if of two men,” etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The Mishnah is valid for countryside sanctified food. But for family matters and the sanctified food of the altar one needs two witnesses. But was it not stated: One raises to priesthood, levitic status, or Israel, by the testimony of one witness. One understands priesthood and levitic status. But the status of an Israel? Is that not regarding family status? To give him the tithe of the poor.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Jehudah says, one does not elevate to the priesthood by the testimony of one witness. Rebbi Eleazar said, when is this? If there are protesters; but if there are no protesters, one elevates to the priesthood by the testimony of one witness. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says in the name of Rebbi Simeon, the son of the second in command, that one elevates to the priesthood by the testimony of one witness.

MISHNAH: A woman who was jailed by Gentiles, if because of money matters, she is permitted to her husband; if because of criminal matters, she is prohibited to her husband. If a city was conquered after a siege, all wives of priests in it are disqualified; but if they have witnesses, even a slave, even a slave girl, those are trustworthy; but nobody is trustworthy about himself. Rebbi Zachariah, the son of the butcher, said, by the Temple! Her hand did not leave my hand from the moment the Gentiles entered Jerusalem until they left! They said to him, nobody testifies on his own behalf.

MISHNAH: In the following cases, one is trustworthy to testify as an adult about what one saw in one’s minority. A man is trustworthy to say, this is my father’s handwriting, my teacher’s handwriting, my brother’s handwriting; I remember that this person went out in hinuma and uncovered hair, or that this man left school to immerse himself to eat heave, or that he took his part with us on the threshing floor, or that this place is bet happeras, or this far we went on the Sabbath. But a person is not trustworthy to say that X had a right of way at this place, or that X had a space for eulogies at this place.

MISHNAH: The following adolescent girls can claim a fine: From someone who has intercourse with a bastard girl, or a Gibeonite or a Samaritan girl, and one who comes to a female proselyte, a kidnap victim, or a slave girl who was redeemed, converted, or freed, at less than three years and one day of age. Also from one who has intercourse with his sister, or his father’s sister, or his mother’s sister, or his wife’s sister, or his brother’s wife, or his paternal uncle’s wife, or a menstruating girl; he has to pay the fine since it is not a capital crime even though he is subject to extirpation.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina said, a man who rapes or seduces an orphan girl does not have to pay. Rebbi Abba bar Mamai said, that is a disagreement, it follows Rebbi Yose the Galilean. But following Rebbi Aqiba she can claim the fine and the fine becomes her property. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah said “at less than three years and one day of age,” and is she not like an orphan? And did we not state: “Because he raped her,” that includes an orphan for a fine, the words of Rebbi Yose the Galilean? Rebbi Aḥai said, explain it that he had intercourse with her when her father was alive; when her father died, he already had the obligation to give to her father.

There, we have stated: “If somebody eats heave intentionally, he pays the principal but not the fifth.” And we have stated: “The following are flogged.” Here you say, he is flogged, and there you say, he pays. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Mishnah is two-sided: If he was cautioned, he is flogged; if he was not cautioned, he pays. Rebbi Joḥanan is of the opinion that in a case where there is flogging or restitution, when he pays he is not flogged. Why should he not be flogged and have to pay? (Deut. 25:2) “Corresponding to his guilt.” You sentence him for one offence but you may not sentence him for two offences. The verse speaks of one who may incur two punishments (Deut. 25:2): “The judge shall have him laid down and flogged in his presence a number [of times] because of his guilt.”

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was not cautioned should he not pay since when cautioned he would be flogged? A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “If somebody eats heave in error, he pays principal and fifth,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged? He explains it following Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, as we have stated: “The following adolescent girls can claim a fine,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged? He explains it following Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Rebbi Meïr learned from the calumniator. (Deut. 22:18) “They shall punish him,” flogging; (Deut. 22:19) “and they shall fine him”, money. But the rabbis say, [the law of] the calumniator is separate because of its novelty; one cannot learn from a novelty! Because nowhere else will a person become guilty by speech, but here he becomes guilty by speech; therefore, nothing can be inferred. Another explanation: one cannot transfer the rules of either payment or flogging. Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he [eats] fat in error but is intentional about the sacrifice, if he was cautioned he will be flogged and has to bring a sacrifice? So here, he is flogged and he pays. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, (Deut. 25:2) “Because of his guilt.” If two possibilities are given to the court, one chooses one of them. This excludes matters in the power of Heaven.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was not cautioned should he not pay since when cautioned he would be flogged? A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “If somebody eats heave in error, he pays principal and fifth,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged? He explains it following Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, as we have stated: “The following adolescent girls can claim a fine,” but if he was cautioned, will he not be flogged? He explains it following Rebbi Meïr since Rebbi Meïr said, he is flogged and pays. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Rebbi Meïr learned from the calumniator. (Deut. 22:18) “They shall punish him,” flogging; (Deut. 22:19) “and they shall fine him”, money. But the rabbis say, [the law of] the calumniator is separate because of its novelty; one cannot learn from a novelty! Because nowhere else will a person become guilty by speech, but here he becomes guilty by speech; therefore, nothing can be inferred. Another explanation: one cannot transfer the rules of either payment or flogging. Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he [eats] fat in error but is intentional about the sacrifice, if he was cautioned he will be flogged and has to bring a sacrifice? So here, he is flogged and he pays. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, (Deut. 25:2) “Because of his guilt.” If two possibilities are given to the court, one chooses one of them. This excludes matters in the power of Heaven.

Our Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish! “If somebody eats heave intentionally he pays the principal but not the fifth.” In the opinion of Nathan bar Hoshaiah who said he pays, it is understandable. In the opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan who said, if he was cautioned he is flogged, but if he was not cautioned he pays, he explains it as intentional without cautioning. In the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish there is no difference between intentional and unintentional, between cautioned or not cautioned. He explains following Rebbi Meïr who says, he is flogged and he pays.

Rebbi Ḥinena said before Rebbi Mana: Even if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish thought the entire Mishnaiot were Rebbi Meïr’s, does the verse agree with Rebbi Meïr? Is it not written (Lev. 22:14): “If a person ate consecrated food in error”? But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish must hold that the fifth is a sacrifice. But even if he holds that the fifth is a sacrifice, can the principal be a sacrifice? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, the Mishnah declares that the principal is a fine, as we have stated: “He does not pay in heave but in totally profane food which is turned into heave.” If he had to pay from what he ate, it would be fine. And it was stated: “If he ate impure heave, he has to pay in pure profane food, but if he paid in impure profane, he discharged his obligation.” Does he not owe him the price of wood? That shows that the principal is a fine and since the principal is a fine, the fifth also is a fine. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion. Just as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, there, everybody was under the obligation of (Ex. 20:16) “Do not become a false witness against your neighbor”, but this one was treated separately, (Deut. 19:19) “do to him what he intended to do to his brother”, to pay money; also here, everybody was under the obligation of (Lev. 22:10) “no outsider shall eat holy [food],” but this one was treated separately, (Lev. 22:14) “if somebody should eat holy [food] in error,” to pay money.

MISHNAH: The following cannot claim a fine: One who comes to a proselyte woman, a kidnap victim, or a slave girl who was redeemed, converted, or freed, at more than three years and one day of age. Rebbi Jehudah says, the redeemed kidnap victim is in her holiness even if she is an adult.

MISHNAH: The one who comes to his daughter, his granddaughter from his daughter or his son, his wife’s daughter, his wife’s granddaughter from her daughter or her son does not pay the fine since he committed a capital crime and should be executed by the court; for anybody committing a capital crime does not pay cash as it is said: “If there is no case of murder, a fine shall be imposed.”

Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: We understand that, since it said “if there is no case of murder, a fine shall be imposed”, that if it is a case of murder, you shall take life for life? Why does the verse say, it is a case of murder? To add the case of premeditation and warning. Rebbi Yose said, is that not a Mishnah, “for anybody committing a capital crime does not pay cash”, that it deals not only with cases of error. Ḥizqiah said, one states a baraita: “The slayer of an animal must pay for it but the slayer of a human shall be put to death.” Just as you did not make a difference between unintentional and intentional action of a slayer of an animal to force him to pay money, so you should not make a difference between unintentional and intentional action of a slayer of a human to free him from paying money.

MISHNAH: If an adolescent girl had been preliminarily married but was divorced, Rebbi Yose the Galilean says she cannot collect the fine; Rebbi Aqiba says, she can collect the fine and it belongs to her.

MISHNAH: The seducer pays for three things and the rapist for four. The seducer pays for shame, diminution of value, and fine. The rapist in addition pays for suffering; the seducer does not pay for suffering. The rapist pays immediately, the seducer only if he divorces her. The rapist drinks from his pot; the seducer may divorce if he wishes.

MISHNAH: How does he drink from his pot? Even if she is lame, even if she is blind, or even if she is afflicted with boils. If a matter of immorality was found with her or she could not marry in Israel, he may not keep here since it is written: “She shall be his wife,” a wife appropriate for him.

MISHNAH: About an orphan girl who had been preliminarily married and was divorced, Rebbi Eleazar says that the rapist has to pay but the seducer does not.

HALAKHAH: “About an orphan girl who had been preliminarily married and was divorced,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it turns out that Rebbi Eleazar follows the opinion of his teacher Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba said that she can collect the fine and it belongs to her, so Rebbi Eleazar said that she can collect the fine and it belongs to her. Then also for a seduced one? Rebbi Jeremiah said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, explain it that she remitted it to him. Can anybody remit anthing that does not belong to him? Explain it for an orphan; as it was stated in the House of Rebbi thus: The orphan, Rebbi Eleazar said that the rapist has to pay her but the seducer does not. Can anybody remit something which is not in his possession? Let us hear from the following, as Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ura: The fine is not due from the first moment on. As we have stated there: “If she came to court before her father died, [the payments due] belong to her father and if the father died they belong to the brothers.” If you say that the fine is due from the first moment, it would belong to the brothers from the first moment! Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Ḥisda: The Mishnah deals with shame and diminution of value. As Rebbi Mana said, how is it? The rapist is obligated for everything and the seducer is free from everything. Rebbi Abin said, [Rebbi] Shammai asked: What does it mean that the rapist has to pay but the seducer does not? The rapist has to pay everything but the seducer is free [from paying] for shame and diminution of value but is obligated for the fine. That is Rebbi Aqiba’s. Or, the rapist is free [from paying] for shame and diminution of value but is obligated for the fine but the seducer is free from everything? That is Rebbi Yose the Galilean’s.

MISHNAH: How much is shame worth? Everything depends on the offender and the offended. For diminution of value one considers her as if she were a slave girl to be sold; how much would she have been worth before and how much would she be worth now. The fine is equal for everybody since everything determined by the Torah is equal for everybody.

MISHNAH: Anytime there is a sale there is no fine and anytime there is a fine there is no sale. The underage girl is subject to sale but not to fine; the adolescent can claim a fine but has no sale; the adult has neither fine nor sale.

MISHNAH: One who says, I seduced X’s daughter, pays for shame and diminution of value on his own testimony but he does not pay the fine. One who says, I stole and I slaughtered or sold, pays the value on his own testimony but neither double restitution nor four or five times. My ox killed X or X’s ox, he pays on his own testimony. My ox killed X’s slave, he does not pay on his own testimony. This is the principle: Anybody who has to pay more than the damage he caused does not pay on his own testimony.

MISHNAH: Payments for shame, diminution of value, and fine of a seduced adolescent girl belong to her father, as are payments for suffering for the victim of an attack. If she appeared in court during her father’s lifetime, they are the father’s; after the father’s death they are the brothers’. If she did not appear in court until after the father’s death, they belong to herself.

MISHNAH: If she did appear in court before she became an adult, [the payments] belong to her father, after the father’s death, they belong to the brothers. If she did not appear in court before she became an adult, they belong to herself. Rebbi Simeon says, if she did not collect before the father died, they belong to herself. Her earnings and what she finds, even if she had not collected [by the time] the father died, belong to the brothers.

Rebbi Ze‘ira sent to Rav Naḥman bar Jacob and Rebbi Immi bar Pappai: Who owns the earnings of the daughter? They said to him, the diligent said, herself. Who is the diligent? Samuel! Rebbi Mattanah said, it was said in the name of Rebbi as explanation of a verse: “You shall give them as inheritance to your sons to inherit property,” those to your sons and not your daughters to your sons; the verse speaks about the earnings of the daughter. Rebbi Yudan said, the Mishnah says so: “Her earnings and what she finds, even if she had not collected when the father died, belong to the brothers.” Anything she earned during her father’s lifetime. But what she earned after her father’s death according to everybody is hers.

MISHNAH: If somebody gives his daughter in preliminary marriage and she was divorced, in preliminary marriage and she was widowed, the ketubah belongs to him. If he gave her in definitive marriage and she was divorced, in definitive marriage and she was widowed, the ketubah belongs to her. Rebbi Jehudah says, the first ketubah is his. They said to him, from the moment he gave her in definitive marriage, he no longer has any power over her.

MISHNAH: If a proselyte woman converted together with her daughter and the latter committed adultery, she is [executed] by strangling; she has neither a door of her father’s house nor 100 tetradrachmas. If she was conceived not in holiness but born in holiness, she is [executed] by stoning; she has neither a door to her father’s house nor 100 tetradrachmas. If she was conceived and born in holiness, she is a Jewish woman in all respects. If she has a father but no door to her father’s house, or a door to her father’s house but no father, she is stoned since the door to her father’s house was mentioned only as a commandment.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina: One who rapes or seduces an orphan is free. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, this is in dispute; following Rebbi Yose the Galilean. But following Rebbi Aqiba a fine is due, and the fine belongs to herself. Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah says so: “She has neither a door to her father’s house nor 100 tetradrachmas;” is she not like an orphan? Rebbi Immi and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi both say, one who calumniates an underage girl is free. Rebbi Hoshaiah said, that is correct. If she were an adult who was not warned, would there be any case? And an underage girl who was warned is like an adult who was not warned.

Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rav Hamnuna in the name of Rav Ada bar Aḥawa: She cannot be executed unless she is an adolescent at the time of the execution. What is the reason? “They shall execute the adolescent at her father’s door.” But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state: If she whored in her father’s house and [the husband] calumniated her after she became an adult, he is not flogged nor does he pay 100 tetradrachmas but either she or the witnesses are executed by stoning. A Mishnah disagrees with Rav Ada bar Aḥawa: “If he escaped after being sentenced and then his pubic hair grew fully.” There, you can say “they shall execute the adolescent” who whored; can you say here “they shall execute him”, the son?

MISHNAH: The father has the benefit to give his daughter in preliminary marriage by money, contract, or intercourse; he has the right to what she finds and to her earnings, to dissolve her vows, and to receive her bill of divorce, but cannot eat usufruct in her lifetime. If she is definitively married, the husband in addition eats usufruct in her lifetime but is required to pay for her upkeep, her ransom, and her burial. Rebbi Jehudah says, even the poorest in Israel should not provide for her less than two flutes and one wailing woman.

MISHNAH: She always remains in the father’s power until she enters the husband’s power for definitive marriage. If the father entrusted her to the husband’s emissaries she is in the husband’s power. If the father went with the husband’s emissaries, or the father’s emissaries went with the husband’s emissaries, she is in the father’s power. If the father’s emissaries entrusted her to the husband’s emissaries, she is in the husband’s power.

MISHNAH: The father is not obligated to support his daughter. This inference did Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah explain in the vineyard of Jabneh: “The sons shall inherit and the daughters be supported.” Since the sons do not inherit before their father’s death, neither are the daughters supported before their father’s death.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Jehudah ben Ḥananiah: They voted at Usha that a man has to feed his underage children. Rebbi Joḥanan said, we know who participated in that vote. Uqba came before Rebbi Joḥanan who said to him: Uqba, feed your children. He answered, Master, why? He said to him: Evil Uqba, feed your children. Rebbi Ulla said, a Mishnah confirms that a man has to feed his underage children, since we have stated there: “If she is nursing, she has to work less and one adds to her food.”

Rav Huna insists on interpreting the contract text. Rav Huna explained: “The sons shall inherit but the daughters must be fed.” Since the sons inherit movables, the daughters also are fed from movables. Samuel said, the daughters are not fed from movables. A Mishnah supports Samuel: “The female children you shall have from me shall dwell in my house and be supported from my property.” It was stated on this: From real estate but not from movables. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda said: Rav Huna follows Rebbi and Samuel follows Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar, as it was stated: “One uses both guaranteed property and non-guaranteed property for the support of the wife and the daughters, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, guaranteed property may be taken by sons from sons, by daughters from daughters, by sons from daughters, and by daughters from sons. But non-guaranteed property may be taken by sons from daughters but not by daughters from sons.” They said, Rav Huna reversed himself. They said, that was well done, ketubah is a biblical commandment but support of the daughters is from their words. May their words uproot a biblical commandment? It must be that they differ about the money contained in their mother’s ketubah. [Even if you say, they differ about the money contained in their mother’s ketubah.] But is the money stipulated in their mother’s ketubah not also real estate?

MISHNAH: If he did not write her a ketubah, a virgin collects 200 [zuz] and a widow 100, for this is a stipulation enforced by the court. If he substituted something valued at a mina for the 200 zuz and did not write “that all my property is guaranty for your ketubah,” he still is obligated by it, for this is a stipulation enforced by the court.

HALAKHAH: “If he did not write her a ketubah,” etc. The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s, since Rebbi Meïr said: “Anybody who writes for a virgin less that 200 [zuz] or a mina for a widow engages in immoral intercourse.” Who needs it? Rebbi Meïr! Even though Rebbi Meïr says that any contract which does not contain an alienation clause cannot be foreclosed, here he agrees that it can be foreclosed.

MISHNAH: If he did not write her “if you are kidnapped I shall ransom you and bring you back as my wife,” or for Cohens’ wives “I shall return you to your country,” he is obligated, for this is a stipulation enforced by the court. If she was kidnapped he is obligated to ransom her. If he said, here is her divorce document and her ketubah, let her redeem herself; he is not allowed to do that. If she was smitten, he is obligated to heal her. If he said, here is her divorce document and her ketubah, let her redeem herself; he is allowed to do that.