txt/Halakhah/Shulchan Arukh/Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer/English/Wikisource English Shulchan Aruch.txt

Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer
שולחן ערוך, אבן העזר
Wikisource English Shulchan Aruch
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Translation:Shulchan_Aruch/Even_ha-Ezer

Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer





Siman 1

Every man is obligated to marry a woman in order to be fruitful, and to multiply and anyone who doesn't engage in being fruitful and multiplying is as if he spills blood, and lessens the appearance, and causes the divine presence to depart from Israel. Rem"a: He who does not marry is not allowed to make a blessing or to engage in Torah etc. and he is not called a man, and when he marries a woman, his sins are cast into doubt, as it is said: "One who has found a wife has found goodness and obtains favor in the eyes of God." (Proverbs 18:22)
One can only sell a sefer Torah in order to learn Torah or marry a woman.
It is incumbent on every man that they should marry a woman at the age of 18 and the diligent get married at 13 and this mitzvah is for those who choose it, but before the age of 13 one should not marry, because it is similar to harlotry. If 20 years go by and he has not taken a wife and he who lets 20 years pass, or he who does not want to marry, the courts can force him to marry in order to fulfill the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiplying. What are the things that might delay marriage? If he is busy with Torah, or if it is too burdensome and he fears to marry a women in order that he is not burdened in his livelihood and he will not fail in Torah it is permitted to delay. Rem"a: In this time, its custom that one does not force in regards to this. Likewise he who does not fulfill the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiplying and he comes to marry a woman who is not a bat banim, for example...
He who spends all of his entire life engrossed in Torah study like Ben Azai and did not marry a woman is not considered a sinner, as his urges did not overcome him.
Once a man has had a son and a daughter, he has fulfilled the obligation to be fruitful and multiply. And a ben siris (castrated son) and a nekivah ayalonit (girl who doesn't achieve signs of puberty) do not count. Rem"a: The ram is the male of the flock, in other words, that the woman has a male nature and those signs she does not have like breasts of a woman and her voice is thick...doesn't stick out from her body like women]
If a man and a woman bear children and they die, and they leave behind sons, the man dies having fulfilled the mitzvah to be fruitful and multiply. What are the circumstances for this case? When there are grandchildren, a male and a female, and they came from the son and the daughter (of the obligated individal of halakha 5) despite the fact that the male grandchild comes from the daughter and the female grandchild comes from the son, since they came from his two kids, they fulfill the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiplying. But if he has a son and a daughter and they die and only one grandchild remains he still has not fulfilled his obligation. Rem"a: if the son is a mamzer or deaf-mute, or an idiot, or a minor, he has fulfilled the mitzvah.
If he had sons that in his lifetime and he was an idolater and all parties converts (to Judaism) it this case his mitzvah is fulfilled. But if he has children when he is a slave and he and they are freed he has not fulfilled his obligation until he bears one after he is freed.
Even though he fulfilled the obligation of be fruitful and multiply, he is forbidden from being without a wife and he needs to marry a woman who is capable of bearing children (see Yevamot 61b). He may sell a sefer Torah in order to do so if he has a doubt that he has enough children or if he has a doubt that he has married a women of child bearing capability. If he does not have children he sells so that he can marry a woman capable of bearing children but if he has children he should not sell it and marry a woman who is capable of bearing children, but he should not be without a wife. And some say, that even if he has sons, he sells the sefer Torah to marry a woman capable of bearing children. Isserless: However, if it is recognized that the will not be more grandchildren and it is not appropriate that more will not be born to him, he marries a women who is not capable of bearing children, and thus if he has many sons and he fears that if he marries a woman of child bearing age an altercation will come and discord will come between the children and his wife he is permitted to marry a woman who is not capable of bearing children but it is forbidden to settle down without a wife because of this fear.
A man may marry a number of women provided that he has the means to sustain them, and what we find is that the sages gave worthy suggestion that a man marry no more than four women so that he may fulfill his sexual obligation once a month. In a place where they are accustomed to only marry one woman they are not permitted to marry another woman. Note: it is forbidden to marry two women in two places.

It is good to make a Takanah in relation to forbidding and to excommunicate a person who takes more than one wife
If he swears that he will never marry another woman but 10 years go by and she has not born a child, this will be explained in Siman 118.
A woman is not obligated in the mitzvah of being fruitful and multiplying [this idea is talked about in siman 154] <i>RMA: nonetheless some say that she should not remain unmarried, due to suspicion.</i>
Laws associated with someone who marries a woman and 10 years pass and she does not bear a child will be explained there (siman 118).

Siman 2

A man should not marry a woman who has any kind of inappropriateness. [Isserless: Anyone who marries an inappropriate wife for money will bring them children who are not respectable, but aside from that, if there is no inappropriateness on her, rather he just marries her for money, it is allowed. If someone wants to marry an inappropriate wife, his family members may protest him. If he does not want to be supervised by them, he may make a type of sign such that their offspring will not intermingle with that of his family; and someone who offered a lot of money for him to get married and then took back the offer (even though they got married) he should not hold his wife like a hostage because of this and he should not quarrel with her over her family's property, and someone who does this will not be successful and the relationship will not be a good one because the money that a man takes along with his wife is not appropriate money; and anyone who does this is called someone who "marries for money". Rather, everything that a father or mother in-law gives him should be taken with a good-eye (a full heart) and he will be successful.]
Any family with the presumption of a good lineage and he's permitted to marry her a priori. Nevertheless, if you see two families that always irritate one another [Isserless: or two individuals that irritate one another]or you see a family that are upholders of mitzvot and argue always or you see a man that argues disputes with everyone and especially brazen, then we should suspect their lineage and it is fitting to distance oneself from them b/c these are disqualifying characteristics. Similar a person who always invalidates others, for example he puts a stain on the lineage of families or on individuals and he says about them, that that they are mamzerim then we suspect him of being a mamzer. And if he says that they are slaves then we suspect that he is a slave. And all who invalidates others, that blemish (actually) invalidates him. And likewise he who is brazen, cruel, and hates others and he doesn't show them loving kindness we suspect him the most, lest he is gibionite (see Mishnah Torah, Isuri Biya 19:17).
3. When the purity of a families lineage has been disputed, whoever two people testify that there was intermingled with one another, a mamzer or a challal or that they have slaves in their lineage, behold this is doubtful. And if it is a family of priests no one may marry a women from them until they will check about her up through four generations because there are eight involved: her mother, her maternal grandmother, the mother of her maternal grandfather, the maternal grandmother of her maternal grandfather. And likewise we check the mothers of the fathers side: the mother of her paternal grandmother, the mother of her paternal grandfather, and the mother of the mother of her paternal grandfather. And if the family that was called into question is a Levite or Israelite they add to the checking of them another one and we find that they check 10 mothers. But a women that is brought to be married doesn't need to check (her husband's family) because kosher women are not warned against marrying blemished men.
Anyone who is called a mamzer or netin or challal or a servant and he is silent about his status, we suspect him and his family and we don't marry them even if we check as was explained. [Isserless: There are some that say this applies only to a family that is known to blend with one of these psulim (inappropriate ones), but an individual that is called thus and keeps quiet, means nothing. There are others who say that all this (from the Mechaber) only applies to earlier generations where Beis Din would keep track of the yichus of families and appropriately apply punishments, so if someone is silent, it can be considered that he admits since he knows that the truth will be revealed. But now, silence is an indication only that he does not want to argue or fight and is thus praiseworthy, so rather today, we accept this as a sign of good yichus as long as he does not cause an argument. Others say that we do not say at all that 'silence is like an admission' and that all this only goes as a sign against the accuser himself and we question his Yichus (not the accused one). Yet, if he is trying to Possel his children in front of him and he remains silent, the silence is never considered and admission (not even by the Mechaber) although, it does raise some concern and reason to check his family. And in all cases, someone who hears troubling words about other matters (aside from Yichus) and he remains silent, this is a clear sign of proper upbringing and that he is appropriate to marry.]
A family that might have in their lineage a suspected chalal any kosher woman may marry one of these. And if she is widowed she is forbidden to a Cohen A Priori. But [after the fact] if she is married [to a priest], she doesn't need to be divorced because of these two doubts: Maybe she became a widow of this chalal and maybe she is not a widow. Even if you say that she is a widow maybe he is not chalal. [Isserless: And some hold this is Davka for a the widow herself, since she has a chazaka of Kashrus (having been married to a Kohen) but this does not apply to her daughter and if she is already married, he must divorce her. But, others are Maikel and make no distinction between the widow and her daughter)] But if someone who was certainly a chalal marries into a family, then every women in that family is forbidden (to a priest) until he the priest does an investigation. If she was married (without an investigation), she is then divorced. And this is also the rule if a doubtful or certain mamzer marries into a family. [Isserless: Yet all this is particularly for someone about whom it is known, but a family that is blended with (at least one known) passul that is not known to the public, for example this one or that one was tamei and the knowledge of this passul is not appropriate for public exposure, rather we assume a Hazakah of Kashrut that all the families that become tamei in Israel are Kosher in the days of the Messiah and in every place, this is kosher to reveal and demonstrates their modesty. This is davka for a family that is blended with tameiim, but any time that this tuma is not blended (and the passulim are known) then the tameiim should be revealed and publicly announced about them so that kosher people will keep away from them.]
Israelite man should always make an effort to marry a scholar's daughter and to marry his daughter to a scholar. If he can't find a daughter of a scholar he marries the daughter of a gedolei hador (great Rabbi) and he can't find a gedolei hador he marries the daughter of one of the heads of the congregations and if he can't find one of the heads of congregations he marries a collector of Tzedakah and if he he can't find that he marries a school teacher but his daughter should not marry an am haaretz (simpleton). [Isserless: Pertaining to their daughters he says, cursed is the one that lies with beasts and all this pertains to the am haaretz because they are not diligent with the mitzvot. But its a mitzvah for a man to marry the daughter of his sister and there are those who say even the daughter of his brother].
A man shouldn't marry a women from a leporous family nor from a nekafim. If a family has three instances the next children will have the presumption of being this way.
An am ha'aretz should not marry a cohen. And if he marries one, their pairing will not develop well (Pesachim 49a) because she will die or it (meaning the child) will die from the pregnancy or problems will come between them. But a scholar that marries an Cohen woman, this is pleasant and praiseworthy for then the Torah and the Priesthood will be found in the same place.
A young man should not marry an old woman and an old man should not marry a young girl for this thing causes whoredom.
A man should not marry a woman with the intention of divorcing her and if he announces from the beginning that he is going to marry her for a few days then that is permitted.
A man should not marry a woman in one land and marry another woman in a different land lest the children of this one and that one (meaning, of each woman) pair off with each other and we find that a brother marries his sister but a famous person and his children are well known because of him, then it is permitted (to marry women in different lands).

Siman 3

Someone who comes in our time and says, "I am a Cohen," we don't believe him and we don't raise him to Priesthood by his own word and he does not read (the) first (Aliyah) from the Torah and he does not raise his hands (for the Priestly blessing of the congregation). [Rama: But there are those who say that he is believed in order to read first from the Torah and to raise his hands (for the blessing) in our time since we don't have tithing from the Torah, about which we should be concerned that perhaps they would raise him (inappropriately) to (one who accepts holy) tithings. Thus, it is established as our universal custom not to accept tithings in our time and thus, we have no concern for this practice (of allowing him to read first from the Torah and raising his hands)] And we do not feed him from the kodshim of Israel unless there is at least one witness (that his is in fact a Priest). Nonetheless, he would make himself Assur to marry a divorcee a harlot or a Hallal and he would not be allowed to Metamei himself by the dead, but if he did marry or become tamei, he would suffer whiplashes and the woman whom he married (improperly) [who is for him pasula for Cohanim] a safek H'llala. If he was questioned in a way as to not reveal the purpose of the discussion (L'fi Tumo and reveals that he knows for sure that he is a Cohen) he would be believed. How is it possible to question him in a way that does not reveal the intent of the question? Ask him to recall the time when he was a child that "I would ride on my father's shoulders and he would remove me from school take off my clothes and Tovel me in the mikveh so I would eat Trumot after sunset and my friends separated from me and they would call me "Yochanan Who Eats Challah [Terumah]," Here, our holy sages would raise him to priesthood status by himself.
If there was one witness that testified (that he is a Cohen), he is believed in order to feed him (the Cohen) tithes in these times, and he can read the first Aliyah from the Torah and to raise his hands (for the congregation). Even his father is believed for him and legal/court-documents can support his claim to Priesthood in these times, how so? if it was written in a court/legal-document he may show the document that was written with his name, Ploni Cohen borrowed from Ploni so much money and witnesses signed this document, thus, he will have the Hazaka of priesthood (on account of the document) like the Cohanim of this time. Hence, he may raise his hands and read First from the Torah and to be a priest like the priests of this time. [Rama: And there are those who say that even if he signed the document himself "I am Ploni the Cohen" this counts as a witness in these times.]
If one of the "Anusim" (Jews who were forced to convert) bears witness that one of them is Muchzak (known by Hazaka) in priesthood, he may be raised to read (First Aliyah) from the Torah and we are not concerned that he is a Kuti (goy).
Even if two came and they each give witness to the other as being a priest, they are believed and we are not concerned that they are acting together to reward each other.
We believe an adult who says "I remember when I was a child that I saw this Ploni (guy) immerse (in a mikveh) and eat tithings," we raise him to read first from the Torah by his words and he will be a Cohen (priest) like other Cohanim of our time.
Someone who comes and says "I am a Cohen" and a single witness testifies that he knows his father that he is a Cohen, we do not raise him to priesthood by his word lest he is really a Hallal (ineligible for Cahuna by his mother) until there is testimony (from at least one witness) that he (himself) is a Cohen. But, if his father is known by hazakah to be a priest or if two witnesses testify that his father is a priest, thus, that would suffice to make his father known as a priest. [Rama: In all instances, we follow the Hazakah, we even burn and stone based on (the principle of) Hazakah].
Someone who's father is established as a Cohen but some voice were raised that he is the son of a divorcee or the son of a Halitzah (so he would be passul for priesthood, even if his father was a priest), we are concerned for him and we take him down (to disallow him as a Cohen). If one witness came afterwards and testified that he is Kosher, we raise him up again to Priesthood by this testimony. If then 2 more witnesses came to testify together that he is a Hallal (disqualified) we take him down again. Then, if one more witness came to testify that he is Kosher, we raise him up once again since this last witness combines with the first witness and we have two witnesses that testify that he is Kosher versus two who testify that he is passul. These two witnesses (for Kashrut) push off two (who would passul him) and the voice against him since these two are like 100 and he remains a Cohen based on these two witnesses and the establishment of his father.
A woman who did not wait 3 full months after she was (last) with her husband and she gave birth and she does not know if the baby is a 9 month baby from the first husband or a 7 month baby from the second husband and the first one was a Cohen and the second was from Israel, this makes a Saffek (doubtful) Cohen. The same would be true for a baby Cohen who was confused with an Israel baby and they grew up, each of these are a Saffek Cohen and we impose on them the strictures of Cohanim and strictures of Israel; They can only marry a woman who is fit to marry a priest and they may not be Metamei from the dead and they can't eat Trumot (priestly tithes) and if he married a divorcee, he must divorce her but he does not get whiplashes for marrying her.
Two Cohanim whos babies got mixed up or the wife of a Cohen who did not wait after her husband (died) 3 months before marrying another Cohen and we don't know if the baby is a 9 month baby from the first husband or a 7 month baby from the second husband, in any case, he is a Cohen and we impose on him the strictures of both fathers; he would be required to be an Onen for all the possible relatives (from both fathers' relatives when they die) and they would be in Onenus for him and he would not be allowed to be Metamei from either of the family members and they would not be allowed to be metamei for him. In which cases do these apply? where the marriage was proper, but if this was through harlotry (or another forbidden relation, but certainly with a Cohen) we silence him from the category of priesthood as we would do if we don't know for certain who is the father (but we are certain that he is a Cohen and not a Halal). What is this case? for example, there are 10 Cohanim out of which one of them and had relations with her (the widow or pnuya); even though he is certainly a priest, such that if he intentionally metameis himself with the dead or marries a divorcee, he would get whiplashes but he would not perform the holy services at the Temple or eat priestly tithings (since he does not know exactly who is his father). [Rama: If she was a penuya (a kosher single girl who is not a harlot by the Torah) who had relations with a Cohen and within 3 months married a different Cohen, the offspring is passul from the priesthood. Although, a Cohen who has carnal relations with a penuya and admits that the child is his son, the child is a Cohen for all things (including Trumot and Avoda) and we are not concerned that perhaps she is giving over her nefesh as a harlot.

Siman 4



Siman 5



Siman 6



Siman 7



Siman 8

Cohanim, Leviim, and Yisraelim are permitted to cohabit with one another and the child retains the (ancestral) status of the man
Leviim, Yisraelim, and Challim (those whose father is a Cohen and whose mother is someone forbidden to Cohanim) are permitted to cohabit with one another and the child retains the (ancestral) status of the man
Leviim, Yisraelim, Challim, converts, and freed slaves are permitted to cohabit with one another. A male convert or freed slave who marry a female Levi, Yisraelite, of Chalilit, their son is an Yisraelite. A male Yisraelite, Levi, or Chalil who marries a female convert or freed slave, the child retains the (ancestral) status of the man.
Anyone who marries someone who is forbidden to them, the child retains that status of the one who has a defect. If one of them is invalid to a Cohen then the offspring (of their union) will be invalid to a Cohen. If one of them is invalid to the community of Israel (ex. a Mamzer), their offspring will be invalid to the community of Israel.
The child of a female maidservant, non-Jewish woman retain their status (lit. are just like them) whether or not she became pregnant in a valid way (kasher) or an invalid way (pasal).

Siman 9


A man whose two wives die may not prevent himself from marrying a third

Siman 10



Siman 11



Siman 12



Siman 13



Siman 14



Siman 15

These are the forbidden unions that stem from ervah, those from the Torah and those from the rabbis. Those that are from the Torah, kiddushin doesn't take effect. Those that are from the rabbis, kiddushin does take effect and you must deliver a get. And likewise a betrothal with a doubtful ervah also needs a get.
A man's mother is forbidden to him according to the Torah, but his grandmother is only forbidden to him from rabbinic law and this law doesn't stop even through the great great great grandmother.
The mother of his mother's father is forbidden to him through rabbinic law, her alone.
The mother of his father is forbidden to him through rabbinic law and this law doesn't stop even through the great great great grandmother.
The mother of his father's father is forbidden to him through rabbinic law, her alone. His father's wife is forbidden to him through the Torah whether or not she's his wife through nisuin (ie fully married) or through erusin (engaged). Whether or not his father is living or whether he's dead or if he divorced her. (Isserles: But if she is his handmaiden she is permitted to him). But if the father took her in force the woman is permitted to him.
His paternal grandfather's wife is forbidden to him according to rabbinic law and this doesn't cease because the wife of Jacob our Father is forbidden for every one of us.

Siman 16



Siman 17



Siman 18



Siman 19



Siman 20



Siman 21

A person must stay very far from women. He is forbidden to signal with his hands or his feet, or to hint with his eyes, to one of the arayos. He is forbidden to be playful with her, to be frivolous in front of her, or to look upon her beauty. Even to smell the perfume upon her is forbidden. He is forbidden to gaze at women doing laundry. He is forbidden to gaze at the colorful garments of a woman whom he recognizes, even if she is not wearing them, lest he come to have [forbidden] thoughts about her. If one encounters a woman in the marketplace, he is forbidden to walk behind her, but rather [must] run so that she is beside or behind him. One may not pass by the door of a promiscuous woman [or: a prostitute], even four cubits [around 6–8 ft or 2–2.5 m] distant. If one gazes even at the little finger of a woman with the intent to have pleasure from it, it is as though he gazed at her shameful place. It is forbidden to listen to the voice of an erva or to look at her hair. If one intentionally does one of these things, we give him lashes of rebellion. These things are also forbidden in the case of ordinary Biblical prohibitions.
Jewish women may not go with uncovered head in the marketplace, whether married or not.
It is permissible to gaze at an unmarried woman to determine if she is attractive, in order [to decide whether] to marry her, whether she is a virgin or not, and moreover it is fitting to do so. But he may not look at her in a promiscuous way, and about this it is said (Job 31:1): "I made a covenant with my eyes, and how can I look upon a virgin?"
It is permitted for a man to look at his wife, even if she is menstrually impure and is an erva to him. Even though he has pleasure in looking at her, he will not come to sin, since she is permissible after a time. But he may not be playful or frivolous with her.
It is forbidden to be served by a woman at all, whether she is an adult or a minor, whether a slave or free, lest he come to have forbidden thoughts. What service were they speaking of? Washing his face, hands, and feet, even to pour water so he can wash his face, hands, and feet, even if she does not touch him; or making his bed in front of him; or pouring a drink. Rem"a: Some say that eating with her with a bowl is also forbidden with every erva, as with his menstrually impure wife. There are those who are lenient in all of this, that they only prohibited affectionate things with one's menstrually impure wife. Some say that all this is forbidden only when they are alone, but in a place like a bathhouse where many people are found, one may be washed by an idolatrous slave woman, and this is the custom. And some say that anything not done in a affectionate manner (בדרך חבה), where his intent is only for Heaven's sake, is permitted. Thus the custom is to be lenient in these things. Some say that one should not do affectionate things even with his wife, such as to inspect her head for lice, in front of others.)
One may not inquire after a woman's welfare at all, even through an intermediary, and it is forbidden to send regards to her even through her husband. But it is permissible to ask her husband about her welfare.
To hug or kiss one of the arayos whom people do not normally lust after, such as his adult sister or his aunt or similar, even though he derives no pleasure at all, is very reprehensible, forbidden, and the act of a fool. This is because there are no relatives for [the purposes of] licentiousness at all, whether adult or minor, except the father to his daughter and the mother to her son. How is this? A father is permitted to hug his daughter, kiss her, and sleep next to her with flesh touching, and so too a mother with her son, as long as they are minors. When they grow up, so that the son is an adult, and the daughter is an adult until "her breasts are formed and her hair grows" (Ezekiel 16:7), they must sleep clothed. If the daughter is embarrassed to stand before her father naked, or she is betrothed, and likewise if the mother is embarrassed to stand before her son naked – even if they are minors, when they reach the point of being embarrassed, they may not sleep together except clothed.

Siman 22



Siman 23



Siman 24

We do not suspect Jewish men of lying with another man or with beasts. Therefore, we do not prohibit them from being alone with them, and if one wants to distance themselves from men or beasts, it is a praiseworthy thing. For the great sages (of old) used to keep beasts at a distance in order that they would not be alone with them. But in these generations because such corrupt people exist one should (therefore) try not be alone with a man.

Siman 25



Siman 26

A woman is not considered to be married except by way of betrothal in which the kosher betrothal was done appropriately. However, if he were to lie with her by way of harlotry, without the name of betrothal, it is nothing (towards her status as being a married woman). Even if he lies with her with the intent of marriage, mutually agreed between him and her, she is not considered as his wife and even if she dedicated herself only for him, rather the opposite is true and he must be forced (by Beis Din) to send her away from his home. Rem"a: For certainly she would be considered an embarrassment for immersion in a mikveh and he will lie with her in ritual impurity (niddah); however, if she dedicates herself exclusively for him as his wife and she immerses for him, there are those who would say that this is allowed and she would be a Pilegesh as described in the Torah and there are those who say that this is forbidden and they should both get whiplashes from the Torah as they have transgressed the precept "don't be a harlot." A Kuti who marries a Kutis and even a Mumar who marries a Mumerres in their (non-Torah) customs and they convert (or want to follow Halacha) afterwards, we are not at all concerned that they had an appropriate betrothal and he is permitted to send her out her without a Get, even though he remained together with her many years, this relationship is not considered anything but simple harlotry (Rivash 6 and Terumat HaDeshen, Part I 209), see Halachah 149:6.
If he brings a wife to the Huppah without appropriate betrothal, they are not married, but some say that they are doubtfully betrothed.
A betrothed woman is considered as a man's wife in that if another lies with her, they will be guilty of adultery and she would need a divorce in order to marry another man.
The woman is betrothed in 3 ways; with money, a document or with intimate relations, as learned from the Torah, but our sages prohibited betrothal by having relations because of impropriety, and if they transgressed this and he betrothed her with relations, he receives rabbinically decreed whiplashes and she is still betrothed. Even if he betrothed her with money or with a document and they did not arrange the marriage agreement beforehand or he betrothed her in the market place, he receives rabbinically decreed whiplashes and she is still betrothed. Rem"a: There are those who say that we don't give whiplashes if he betrothed her with money or a document, even in the market and without any arrangement and in my life, I never saw someone given whiplashes for becoming betrothed without arrangement. 

Seder HaGet



Seder Halitzah