diff --git "a/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Kedushah/Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse/English/merged.json" "b/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Kedushah/Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse/English/merged.json"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Kedushah/Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse/English/merged.json"
@@ -0,0 +1,572 @@
+{
+ "title": "Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse",
+ "language": "en",
+ "versionTitle": "merged",
+ "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah,_Forbidden_Intercourse",
+ "text": [
+ [
+ "When a person voluntarily engages in sexual relations with one of the arayot mentioned in the Torah, he is liable for kerait, as [Leviticus 18:29] states: \"Whenever anyone performs any of these abominations, the souls will be cut off....\" [The plural is used, referring to] the man and the woman. If they transgressed unknowingly, they are liable to bring a fixed sin offering. There are some arayot with whom relations are punishable by execution in addition to kerait which is applicable in all cases.",
+ "With regard to the arayot that are punishable by execution by the court. If there were witnesses, they delivered a warning, and the transgressors did not cease their actions, they are executed through the means prescribed for them.",
+ "Even if a transgressor was a Torah scholar neither execution or lashes is administered unless a warning was given. For [the obligation for] a warning was instituted universally only to make a distinction between a person who transgresses inadvertently and one who transgresses intentionally.",
+ "Among the arayot punishable through execution by the court are those for [which the violators are] executed by stoning, those for which they are executed by burning, and those for which they are executed by strangulation.
The following transgressions are punishable by stoning: one who has relations with his mother, with his father's wife, his son's wife; she is called his daughter-in-law, one who sodomizes a male, a male who has relations with an animal, and a woman who has relations with an animal.",
+ "The following arayot are punishable by burning: a person who has relations with his wife's daughter during his wife's lifetime, with the daughter of her daughter, with the daughter of her son, with her mother, with the mother of her mother, with the mother of her father, with his own daughter, with the daughter of his daughter, or with the daughter of his son.",
+ "The only instance in which forbidden sexual relations are punishable by execution by strangulation is adultery, as [derived from Leviticus 20:10]: \"The adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.\" Whenever the Torah mentions \"putting to death\" without further description, the intent is strangulation.
If [the adulteress] is the daughter of a priest, she should be executed by burning and the adulterer by strangulation, as [ibid. 21:9] states: \"The daughter of a priest, when she begins to act promiscuously, she shall be burnt with fire.\" If the adulteress is a consecrated maiden, both she and the adulterer should be stoned, as [Deuteronomy 22:23-24] states: \"When a virgin maiden.... they shall be stoned with rocks....\" Whenever the Torah uses the phrase \"They shall surely be put to death, they are responsible for their own blood\" [Leviticus 20:11] - they are executed by stoning.",
+ "All of the other arayot are punishable by kerait alone and are not punishable by execution by the court. Therefore if there were witnesses and a warning was administered, the court punishes them with lashes, for all those who are obligated for kerait are lashed.",
+ "When a person enters into relations with women who are forbidden by merely a negative commandment, both he and she are lashed. If they do so unknowingly, they are not liable for punishment. When a person enters into relations with one of the shniyot, Rabbinic Law ordains that he be given \"stripes for rebellious conduct.\" When, however, a person enters into relations with a woman who is forbidden merely by a positive commandment, he need not be punished. If, however, the court [wishes to] administer stripes for rebellious conduct to him to distance him from sin, they have that option.",
+ "A person compelled [to engage in forbidden relations] is not liable at all, not for lashes nor for a sacrifice. Needless to say, there is no obligation for capital punishment, as [reflected by Deuteronomy 22:26]: \"And to the maiden, do not do anything.\"
To whom does the above apply? To the victim of rape. When, by contrast, a man engages in relations, there is no concept of being compelled against his will. For an erection is always a willful act.
When a woman is compelled into relations at the outset and afterwards, she consents, she is not liable. Once [a man] compels her to engage in relations, it is beyond her control whether to desire [or] not. For man's natural tendency and inclination is compelling her to desire.",
+ "A person who inserts the corona into [the woman's vaginal channel] is referred to as one who \"uncovers\" as [Leviticus 20:18] states: \"He uncovered her source.\" A person who inserts the entire organ is referred to as one who completes [intercourse]. With regard to all the forbidden relations [mentioned] by the Torah, one who \"uncovers\" and one who \"completes [intercourse] are [equally] liable for execution by the court, kerait, lashes, or stripes for rebellious conduct. Even though the man did not ejaculate and even if he withdrew and did not complete relations, [the man and the woman] both become liable. Whether a person engages in vaginal or anal intercourse, when he \"uncovers\" [the woman], they both become liable for execution, kerait, lashes, or stripes for rebellious conduct. Whether they were lying or standing, liability is established by the insertion of the corona.",
+ "[There is never any liability when] a man engages in forbidden relations without an erection, instead his organ was hanging loosely like the organ of the dead, e.g., one who was sick or a person with a congenital malady, i.e., he was born sexually inadequate. Even though he inserts his organ with his hand, he is not liable for kerait or lashes. Needless to say, he is not liable for execution. For this is not considered sexual intercourse. Nevertheless, [such an act] disqualifies a woman from partaking of terumah. And the court subjects both of them to stripes for rebellious conduct.",
+ "When a person enters into sexual relations with one of the arayot as a casual act, although he did not intend to do so, he is liable.Similar concepts apply with regard to one who enters into relations with women forbidden by a negative commandment alone or with one of the shniyot.
When, however, a man has relations with one of the arayot after she died, he is not liable at all. Needless to say, this applies with regard to those women with whom relations are forbidden by a negative commandment alone. When, by contrast, one has relations with a person who is trefe or who has relations with an animal which is trefe, he is liable. [The person or the animal] is [now] alive even though he will ultimately die from this illness. Even when the two signs which validate ritual slaughter were slit but [the woman or the animal] is making its last movements, if one enters into relations with [her or it] he is liable until she or it dies or is decapitated.",
+ "When an adult male enters into relations with any of the women forbidden in connection with the above transgressions who is three years and one day old or more, he is liable for execution, kerait, or lashes and she is not liable unless she is past majority. If she is younger than this, both participants are not liable, for the act is not considered as sexual relations.
Similarly, when an adult woman enters into sexual relations with a minor, if he is nine years and one day old, she is liable for execution, kerait, or lashes and he is not liable. If he is younger than nine years old, they are both free of liability.",
+ "When a man enters into relations with a male or has a male enter into relations with him, once the corona is inserted [into the anus] they should both be stoned if they are both adults. As [Leviticus 18:22] states: \"Do not lie with a man,\" [holding one liable for the act, whether] he is the active or passive partner.
If a minor of nine years and a day or more is involved, the man who enters into relations or has the minor enter into relations with him should be stoned and the minor is not liable. If the male [minor] was less than nine years old, they are both free of liability. It is, however, appropriate for the court to subject the adult to stripes for rebellious conduct for homosexual relations although his companion was less than nine years old.",
+ "One is liable for anal intercourse with an androgynus just as one is liable for relations with another male. One who engages in vaginal intercourse with [an androgynus] is not liable.
There is a doubt concerning the gender of a tumtum. Therefore a person who has relations with a tumtum or vaginal intercourse with an androgynus should be given stripes for rebellious conduct.
An androgynus may marry a woman.",
+ "When a person sodomizes an animal or has an animal insert its organ in him, both the person and the animal should be stoned to death, as [Leviticus 18:23] states: \"Do not lie down with any animal,\" prohibiting [such relations] whether he sodomizes the animal or has the animal enter him. All [living creatures] animals, beasts, and fowl should be stoned to death. The Torah did not make any distinction with regard to the age of an animal whether it is young or old. \"Any animal\" implies a prohibition on the day of its birth. Whether the person enters into vaginal or anal intercourse with the animal, when he inserts the corona or the animal inserts the corona within him, they are liable.",
+ "When a boy nine years old sodomizes an animal or has an animal engage in relations with him, the animal should be stoned, but he is not liable. If the boy was less than nine years old, the animal is not stoned. Similarly, when a girl three years old or more causes an animal or a beast to have relations with her, whether it is an older animal or a younger animal, once the corona of the animal is inserted into her vagina or anus, the animal is stoned to death and she is not liable. If she was past majority, they both should be stoned to death. If she was less than three years old, the animal should not be stoned.",
+ "When a person lies with an animal inadvertently or a woman causes an animal to have relations with her inadvertently, the animal is not stoned to death even though they are past majority. With regard to [relations with] all the arayot, when one is an adult and the other a minor, the minor is not liable and the adult is liable, as explained. If one is awake and one is sleeping, the one who is sleeping is not liable. If one [transgresses] intentionally and the other inadvertently, the one who [transgresses] intentionally is liable and the one who transgresses inadvertently must bring a sacrifice. If one acted under duress and one acted willingly, the one who acted under duress is not liable as stated above.",
+ "The witnesses are not required to see [the precise details] of couple's intimate relations, the man inserting [his organ]as one inserts a piston into a pipe. Instead, once they see them clinging together as is the way of all who engage in relations, they may be executed on the basis of this evidence. We do not say: Maybe he did not insert the corona, because we can assume that in this position, the corona was inserted.",
+ "When an established presumption that people are close relatives has been established, we judge accordingly even though there is no clear proof that they were relatives. We give lashes and execute by burning, stoning, and strangulation based on such a presumption.
What is implied? If it is an accepted presumption that a particular woman is a man's sister, daughter, or mother and he had relations with her in the presence of witnesses, he is given lashes or executed by burning or stoning even though there is no clear-cut evidence that the woman is his sister, mother, or daughter, only the accepted presumption.
An incident occurred with a woman who came to Jerusalem carrying an infant on her shoulders and she raised it, [establishing] the assumption that he was her son. [After he grew older,] he had relations with her and they brought her to the court who executed her by stoning.
A proof of this law can be drawn from the fact that the Torah speaks of the judgment of execution for one who curses his father and strikes his father How can we find clear proof that he is his father? Instead, we operate according to the existing presumption. So, too, with regard to other relatives, we operate according to the existing presumption.",
+ "[The following rules apply when] a man and a woman come from overseas, he says: \"This is my wife,\" and she says: \"This is my husband.\" If in [their new] city, he establishes the presumption that she is his wife for 30 days, we execute [an adulterer who has relations] with her. Within 30 days, however, we do not execute anyone on the presumption that she is a married woman.",
+ "When a woman is presumed to be a niddah among her neighbors, her husband is given lashes for [engaging in relations] with her in the niddah state.
[The following rule applies when] a person issues a warning [not to enter into seclusion with a specific man] to his wife and she enters into seclusion with him. If one witness comes and testifies that she was unfaithful, her husband was a priest, and he engaged in relations with her afterwards, he receives lashes because of her because he had relations with a zonah. Although the fundamental element of this testimony is established by one witness, [her conduct caused] her identity to be established as a zonah.",
+ "When a father says: \"My daughter is consecrated to this person,\" his word is accepted and she must marry him. [Nevertheless,] if she acts unfaithfully while [consecrated] to him, she is not stoned to death because of her father's statements unless there are witnesses [who testify] that she was consecrated in their presence.
Similarly, when a woman states: \"I have been consecrated,\" [if it is discovered that she engaged in relations with another man,] she is not executed on the basis of her own statements. Instead, there must be witnesses [that she was consecrated] or she must have established a common conception [that this was the case]."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The [following] four women: the wife of a man's father, the wife of his son, the wife of his brother, and the wife of the brother of his father, are considered an ervah for him forever, whether after consecration or after marriage, in the lifetime of their husbands or after their deaths, [even] if they were divorced - with the exception of the wife of one's brother who did not leave a son.
If a man engages in relations with one of these woman during the lifetime of their husbands, he is liable for two [sin-offerings]: for incestuous relations and adulterous relations, for both of these prohibitions take effect at the same time.",
+ "Therefore a person who engages in relations with his mother who is his father's wife is liable for two [sin-offerings], one because [the woman is] his mother and one because she is his father's wife. [This applies] both during his father's lifetime and after his father's death.
The wives of both a person's paternal brother and his maternal brother are considered an ervah for him. [This applies regardless if he and/or his brother were conceived] in marriage or in a promiscuous relationship. The wife of the maternal brother of a man's father is, however, forbidden [only] as a shniyah, as explained. Both a person's paternal sister and his maternal sister are considered an ervah for him. [This applies regardless if he and/or his sister were conceived] in marriage or in a promiscuous relationship, e.g., his mother or his father acted promiscuously with others and his sister was conceived promiscuously, as [implied by Leviticus 18:9]: \"one born at home or one born beyond [marriage].\"",
+ "The daughter of his father's wife who is his paternal sister is an ervah for him, [as ibid.:11] states: \"the nakedness of the daughter of your father's wife, your father's offspring.\" If, however, a man's father marries a woman and she has a daughter from another man, that daughter is permitted to him. She is not \"your father's offspring.\" Behold one is already liable for [relations] with her because she is a sister, why then [does the Torah mention]: \"the daughter of your father's wife\"? So that one should be liable for this prohibition as well.",
+ "Therefore a man who engages in relations with his sister who was born to his father's wife in marriage is liable for two [sin offerings]: one because of \"the nakedness of your sister\" and one because of \"the nakedness of the daughter of your father's wife.\" If, however, one's father raped or seduced a woman and conceived a daughter, one is liable only for having relations with one's sister. For the daughter of the woman who was raped is not the daughter of the wife of one's father.",
+ "The sister of his mother is considered an ervah for him. [This applies to both her paternal and maternal sister and applies regardless whether she [was conceived] in marriage or in a promiscuous relationship. Similarly, his father's sister - both his paternal and maternal sister, whether she [was conceived] in marriage or in a promiscuous relationship - is considered an ervah for him.",
+ "When a person has promiscuous relations with a woman and conceives a daughter with her, that daughter is considered an ervah for him. Although the Torah does not state: \"Do not reveal the nakedness of your daughter,\" the prohibition is of Scriptural origin. Since [the Torah] forbade [relations] with the daughter of one's daughter, it did not mention [the prohibition against] one's daughter. This is not from the words of our Sages. Therefore a person who has relations with a daughter born of his wife is liable for two [sin offerings], for [relations with] his daughter and for relations with a woman and her daughter.",
+ "When a person consecrates a woman, her close relatives - six women - become forbidden to him as an ervah forever. This applies whether he consummates [the bond through nisuin] or divorces her, in the lifetime of his wife and after her death. They are: a) her mother, b) her mother's mother, c) her father's mother, d) her daughter, e) her daughter's daughter, and f) her son's daughter. If he has relations with one of these women during the lifetime of his wife, both [he and she] are executed by burning.",
+ "If he has relations with one of these women after his wife's death, they are liable for kerait, but they are not executed by the court, as [derived from Leviticus 20:14]: \"In fire, he and they shall be burnt.\" [This implies that only] when both women - his wife and the woman with whom he had relations - are alive, he and the ervah are executed by burning. When both [women] are not alive, there is no execution by burning.",
+ "Similarly, the sister of his wife is considered an ervah for him until his wife dies. Both her maternal sister and her paternal sister, whether conceived in marriage or promiscuously, are considered as an ervah for him.",
+ "If a man transgressed and engaged in relations with one of these seven women, whether intentionally or inadvertently, although he and the woman are liable for execution by the court or kerait, he is not forbidden to engage in relations with his wife. The only exception is [when he engages in relations with] the sister of the woman he consecrated. In this instance, his wife is forbidden to him, as explained in Hilchot Gerushin.",
+ "When a man engages in promiscuous relations with a woman, the seven relatives mentioned above are not forbidden to him [according to Scriptural Law]. Nevertheless, our Sages prohibited anyone who had promiscuous relations with a woman from marrying one of these seven relatives during the promiscuous woman's lifetime. [The rationale is that] the promiscuous woman will come to visit her relatives. He will thus enter into solitude with her. [Since] he is familiar with her, we fear that they will transgress and thus he will engage in relations with an ervah.
Even if a man is merely suspected of relations with a woman, he should not marry one of her relatives until the woman with whom he was suspected of having relations died. If, however, he married the relative of the woman with whom he was suspected of having relations, he should not divorce her.",
+ "When a person was suspected of having relations with an ervah or a rumor to that effect was circulated, he should not dwell together with her in the same lane or appear in the same neighborhood. An incident occurred concerning a man who was rumored [to have engaged in relations] with his mother-in-law and our Sages had him beaten because he passed by the entrance to her home.",
+ "When a person has promiscuous relations with a woman and her daughter or a woman and her sister or the like, it is as if he had relations with two unrelated woman. One is considered an ervah because of the other only in the instance of marriage, not in an instance of promiscuity. Similarly, if a man's father, son, brother, or father's brother raped a woman or seduced her, she is permitted to him and he may marry her. [The prohibition involving these individuals] mentions \"the wife of\" and here there is no context of marriage.",
+ "When a man's father or son marries a woman, that man may marry her daughter or her mother as we explained. A person may marry the wife of his brother's son. A man may marry a woman and her sister's daughter or her brother's daughter at the same time. It is a mitzvah from the Sages for a man to marry his sister's daughter, as [alluded to by Isaiah 58:7]: \"Do not turn away from your own flesh.\" This law also applies to his brother's daughter."
+ ],
+ [
+ "When a person has relations with the wife of a minor, he is not liable. [This applies] even to a yevamah with whom a nine year old [brother] had relations. Similar [laws apply when] a person has relations with the wife of a deaf-mute, the wife of a mentally or emotionally unstable individual, the wife of a tumtum or an androgynus, a female deaf-mute or a woman who is mentally or emotionally unstable married to a mentally capable individual, or a woman whose consecration is of doubtful status or whose divorce is of doubtful status. In all of the above situations, one is not liable. If they willfully transgress, they are given stripes for rebellious conduct.",
+ "[The following rules apply if a man] engages in relations with a female minor, the wife of an adult male. If she was consecrated by her father, [the adulterer] is executed by strangulation. She is not liable for anything, [but] she is forbidden to her husband, as explained in Hilchot Sotah.
If she has the right to perform mi'un, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct and she is permitted to [remain married] to her husband, even if he is a priest.",
+ "When the daughter of a priest commits adultery while married, she is executed by burning, as [Leviticus 21:9] states: \"When the daughter of a man who is a priest will begin to commit adultery, [she will be burnt by fire].\" [This applies] whether she is married to a priest or an Israelite. [Indeed,] even if her husband was a mamzer or a nitin or another whom it is forbidden to marry because of a negative commandment, [she is given this punishment].
The man who engages in adultery with her is executed by strangulation. Similarly, the daughter of an Israelite who is married to a priest is [executed] by strangulation [if she commits adultery] as is the law with regard to any other married woman.",
+ "When a man has relations with a consecrated maiden, they are both executed by stoning. They are not liable to be stoned to death until the maiden is a virgin, consecrated, and in her father's home. If she came of age or she entered the chupah even if the marriage was not consummated, they are executed by strangulation. [The lesser punishment is given] even if the father gave her to the emissaries of the husband and she committed adultery on the way.",
+ "When a man has relations with a girl who is a minor and is consecrated while she is living in her father's house, he is executed by stoning and she is not liable. When a consecrated maiden who is the daughter of a priest commits adultery, she is stoned to death.",
+ "When ten men enter into relations with her one after the other while she is a virgin in her father's home, the first is executed by stoning and the remainder, by strangulation.
When does the above apply? When they had vaginal intercourse. If, however, they had anal intercourse, she is still a virgin and they are all executed by stoning.",
+ "When a consecrated maiden was a freed slave or a convert, even if she was freed or converted before she reached the age of three, [the adulterer] is executed by strangulation, as is the law with regard to all married women.",
+ "There is a new law that applies to a person who spreads a malicious report [about his wife]. What is this new [law]? That if the gossip is discovered to be true and witnesses come [and testify] that she committed adultery when she was a consecrated maiden, even if she committed adultery after she left her father's house and even if she committed adultery after she entered the marriage canopy before she had relations with her husband, she is stoned to death at the entrance to her father's house. Other consecrated maidens concerning whom a malicious report was not spread are executed by strangulation if they committed adultery after they left their father's home, as we explained.
Thus there are three types of execution for adultery with a married women: strangulation, burning to death, and stoning to death.",
+ "Where is a consecrated maiden who committed adultery stoned to death? If she committed adultery while in her father's house, even though the witnesses did not testify until she went to her father-in-law's house and married, she is stoned to death at the entrance to her father's house. If she committed adultery in her father-in-law's house before her father conveyed her [to her husband], she is stoned to death at the entrance to the gate of the city. [This applies] even if [the witnesses] testified concerning her after she returned to her father's house.",
+ "If witnesses come [and testify] after she comes of age or after her husband has relations with her, she is stoned to death in the place for stoning.[This applies] even if they testify that she committed adultery in her father's home when she was a maiden.",
+ "If [a woman] was conceived before her mother converted and born after her mother converted, she is stoned at the entrance to the gate of the city.
[The following rule applies to] every woman who is obligated to be stoned at the entrance to the gate of the city. If the city is predominantly populated by gentiles, we stone her at the entrance to the court.
[The following rule applies to] every woman who is obligated to be stoned at the entrance to her father's house, if she does not have a father or she has a father, but he does not have a house, she is stoned at the place for stoning. The \"entrance to her father's house\" was mentioned only as a mitzvah.",
+ "When a person engages in relations many times with one of the arayot, he is liable for kerait or execution by the court for every time he engages in relations. Although the court can only execute the person only once, the different times he engages in relations are considered as different transgressions.
Similarly, if a person is liable for several different transgressions for engaging in relations once, if he transgressed inadvertently, he must bring a sacrifice for every transgression he performed even though he engaged in relations only once, as will be explained in Hilchot Shegagot If he transgressed intentionally, it is considered as if he violated many transgressions. Similarly, there is a situation where a person engages in relations once and incurs liability for lashes many times as will be explained.",
+ "The term shifchah charufah employed by the Torah refers to [a woman] who is half a Canaanite maidservant and half a freed woman who has been consecrated by a Hebrew servant. [Concerning the infidelity of such a woman, Leviticus 19:20] states: \"They shall not die, because she was not freed.\" If she was freed entirely, one is liable for execution by the court, for she becomes a married woman in a complete sense, as explained in Hilchot Ishut.",
+ "[The laws regarding] relations with this maidservant are different than [those regarding] all other forbidden relations in the Torah. For she is lashed, as [ibid.] states: \"There shall be an inquiry.\" He is liable to bring a guilt offering, as [ibid.:21] states: \"And he shall bring his guilt offering.\" Whether he transgresses intentionally or inadvertently with a shifchah charufah, he must bring a guilt offering.
When he enters into relations with her many times, whether intentionally or unintentionally, he is required to bring only one sacrifice. She, however, is liable for lashes for every act of relations if she acted intentionally, as is the law with regard to other instances [where relations are forbidden] by merely a negative commandment.",
+ "When a person just inserts his corona into the female organ of the shifchah charufah, but does not insert the entire organ, he is not liable. [Liability is incurred only when] he inserts the entire organ.
He is only liable when she is above majority, had engaged in relations previously and acts intentionally and willfully. If, however, she is a minor, she had never engaged in relations, or she transgressed inadvertently, was raped, or was sleeping, he is not liable. Similarly, if he had anal intercourse with her, he is not liable, for with regard to a shifchah charufah an equation was not established between vaginal intercourse and anal intercourse, for [Leviticus 19:20] speaks of: \"ly[ing] while emitting seed.\" With regard to other [forbidden] relations, the Torah did not distinguish between one type of relations and the other, for [ibid. 18:22] speaks of \"the ways [in which a man] lies with a woman.\" Implied is that the Torah recognizes two ways of lying with a woman.",
+ "In every instance concerning a maidservant where we said there was no liability, he is not liable for a sacrifice and she is not liable for lashes. He, however, is given \"stripes for rebellious conduct\" according to Rabbinic Law if they were both adults who acted intentionally.",
+ "When a youth nine years old engages in relations with a shifchah charufah, she is given lashes and he is required to bring a sacrifice, provided that she is an adult, not a virgin, and acts willfully, as we explained. For a man is not liable to bring a sacrifice until she is liable for lashes, as [implied by] the verse: \"There shall be an inquiry.... And he shall bring his guilt offering.\""
+ ],
+ [
+ "[A woman in] the niddah state is like all of the other arayot. A person who inserts his corona into her vaginal or anal orifice is liable for kerait. [This applies] even if she is a minor who is three years old, as applies with regard to other arayot.
For a woman can become impure as a niddah even on the day she is born. And a girl who is ten days becomes impure because of zivah. This concept was communicated through the Oral Tradition. There is no difference between an adult and a minor with regard to the impurity associated with nidah and zivah.",
+ "[The prohibitions that apply] to one who has relations with a nidah apply throughout the seven days, even if blood was sighted only on the first day. [These same prohibitions] apply to one who has relations with a woman who gave birth to a male throughout the seven days [following birth], to one who has relations with a woman who gave birth to a female throughout the fourteen days [following birth], to one who has relations with a zavah through the time she bleeds and then counts [seven \"clean\" days]. This applies also to a Canaanite maidservant and one who has been freed. All [of these relations] are punishable by kerait.
[The association is derived as follows:] With regard to a nidah, [Leviticus 15:19] states: \"She will be in her niddah state for seven days.\" With regard to a zavah, [ibid.:25] states: \"All the days of the flow of her impurity will be like the days of her niddah state.\" With regard to a woman who gave birth to a male, [ibid. 12:2] states: \"She will become impure as in the days of her nidah affliction.\" And with regard to a woman who gave birth to a female, [ibid. 12:5] states: \"She will be impure as in her niddah state for two weeks.\"",
+ "When does the above - that the impurity is dependent on [the passage of] days - apply? When the woman immersed herself in the waters of a mikveh after these specifically mentioned days. If, however, a niddah, a zavah or a woman who gave birth did not immerse in a mikveh, a person is liable for kerait for having relations with one of them even several years afterwards. For the Torah made the matter dependent on [the passage of] days and immersion, as [Leviticus 15:18] states: \"And they shall immerse themselves [in the water]....\" This teaches a general principle with regard to any impure person: he is in a state of impurity until he [or she] immerses.",
+ "The prohibitions against relations with a niddah, a zavah, and a woman after childbirth do not apply with regard to relations with gentile women. Our Sages decreed that all gentiles, male and female, would be considered like zavim at all times, whether or not they experienced such discharges, with regard to matters of purity and impurity.",
+ "All blood manifest by a woman after childbirth during the 33 days associated with the birth of a male and the 66 days associated with the birth of a female is called blood of purity. It does not prevent a woman from [relations with] her husband. Instead, she immerses herself after seven days [of impurity] for a male and fourteen for a female. She may then engage in relations with her husband even though her blood flows.",
+ "All of those who must immerse themselves are required to immerse themselves during the day with the exception of a niddah and a woman after childbirth. For with regard to a niddah, [Leviticus 15:19] states: \"She will be in her niddah state for seven days.\" Her niddah state prevails for all of the seven days. She immerses on the evening of the eighth day. Similarly, a woman who gives birth to a male child immerses on the evening of the eighth day, and one who gives birth to a female immerses on the evening of the fifteenth day, for a woman who gives birth is comparable to one in the niddah state, as we explained.",
+ "If she delayed the matter for many days and did not immerse herself, when she immerses herself, she should immerse only at night. For if she immerses during the day, an error [may be] made and another niddah may come and immerse herself on the seventh day.",
+ "If a woman was sick or the place for immersion was far away and women could not reach there and return at night because of thieves, because of cold, or because they close the gates of the city at night, she may immerse during the day on the eighth - or subsequent - days.",
+ "Whenever a woman has a veset, her husband can assume that she is [ritually pure and] permitted until she tells him \"I am impure\" or she is established as a niddah in her neighborhood.
If a woman's husband went overseas and left her ritually pure, when he comes he does not have to ask her [concerning her state]. Even if he finds her asleep, he may enter into relations with her as long as it is not the time when she is expected to menstruate. He need not suspect that perhaps she is a niddah. If he left her a niddah, she is forbidden to him until she tells him: \"I am ritually pure.\"",
+ "When a woman tells her husband: \"I am ritually impure,\" and afterwards she tells him: \"I am ritually pure. Before I was just speaking facetiously with you,\" her word is not accepted. If she provides a rationale for her original statements, her word is accepted.
What is implied? Her husband asked her to engage in relations and his sister or his mother was together with her in the courtyard. She originally said she was impure. Afterwards, she said: \"I am pure. I told you that I am impure only because of your sister or your mother; lest they see us.\" [In this instance,] her statement is accepted. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.",
+ "When a man was in the midst of relations with a woman who had been ritually pure and she said: \"I became impure,\" he should not separate himself immediately while he is erect. For withdrawing is as pleasurable for him as entry. If he withdraws while he is still erect, he is liable for kerait, like one who enters into relations with a niddah. This law also applies with regard to other arayot.
What should he do? Implant his toenails in the ground and wait without moving until he loses his erection. Afterwards, he should withdraw.",
+ "It is forbidden for a person to engage in relations with his wife near the time she can expect menstruation to begin, lest she menstruate in the midst of relations. [This is alluded to by Leviticus 15:31]: \"And you shall warn the children of Israel concerning their impurity.\"
For how long [is it necessary to refrain from relations]? If [the woman] would ordinarily begin menstruating during the day, she is forbidden to enter into relations from the beginning of the day. If she would ordinarily begin menstruating during the night, she is forbidden to enter into relations from the beginning of the night.",
+ "If the time when menstruation could be expected to come passes and she did not begin menstruating, she is permitted to engage in relations after the time when menstruation was expected to begin passes.
What is implied? If she was accustomed to begin menstruating after six hours of the day passed. She is forbidden to engage in relations from the beginning of the day. If six hours pass without her beginning to menstruate, she is forbidden to engage in relations until the evening. Similarly, if she was accustomed to begin menstruating after six hours of the night and that time passed without her beginning to menstruate, she is forbidden to engage in relations until sunrise.",
+ "It is the habit of Jewish men and women to carry out a personal inspection after relations. What is implied? The man should clean himself with a cloth prepared for [this purpose] and the woman should clean herself with a cloth prepared for [this purpose]. [The purpose of these inspections is] to see whether the woman menstruated in the midst of relations. The man may allow the woman to check with his cloth. Since her word is accepted with regard to her [cloth], it is also accepted with regard to his.",
+ "The cloths used to clean oneself must be from worn-out, white linen. They are called eidim, \"witnesses,\" in this context. The cloth with which the man cleans himself is called his ed and the cloth with which the woman cleans himself is called her ed.",
+ "Modest women do not engage in relations until they carry out an inspection beforehand. A woman who does not have a [fixed] veset is forbidden to engage in relations until she carries out an inspection. Therefore, she engages in relation with two edim, one for before relations and one for afterwards. When, however, a woman has a [fixed] veset, she need not use an ed before relations except as a measure of modesty.
After relations, however, everyone needs two witnesses: one for him and one for her, even a pregnant woman, one who is nursing, an elderly woman, or a minor A virgin or a woman whose blood is pure does not require edim, because blood is flowing from her.",
+ "When a man engages in intercourse several times [in one night], [he and his wife] do not have to check their two edim after each time they engage in intercourse. Instead, he should clean himself with his ed, she should clean herself with her ed after each time they have relations that entire night. In the morning, they should check the edim. If blood is discovered on her ed or on his ed, she is impure.
If a women engaged in relations, cleaned herself, and then the ed was lost, she should not engage in relations again until she makes an internal inspection with another ed first. [We fear that] perhaps there was blood on the ed that was lost.",
+ "[The following rules apply if] she placed the ed under a pillow or a bolster and blood was discovered upon it. If [the stain] is extended, she is impure. For we can assume that [the stain] came from the cleaning. If it is rounded, she is pure. [We assume that the stain] came only from the blood of a louse which was killed under the pillow.",
+ "[When a woman] cleaned herself with an ed that has been checked, then touched it to her thigh, and on the next day discovered blood upon it, she is impure. We do not say: Maybe a louse was killed when she touched it to her thigh.
[The following rules apply if] she cleaned herself with an ed that was not checked and she did not know whether it had blood on it before she cleaned herself with it or not. If there was more than a gris of blood [on it], she is [considered] a niddah. If the stain was less than that, she is pure. [We assume that the stain] came from a louse.",
+ "When a woman suffers vaginal bleeding in the midst of relations, she is permitted to engage in relations again a second time once she becomes pure. If she suffers vaginal bleeding [in the midst of relations] a second time, she is permitted to engage in relations a third time. If she suffers vaginal bleeding [in the midst of relations] a third time, she is forbidden to ever enter into relations again with this husband.
When does the above apply? When there was no other factor that [the bleeding] could be attributed to. If, however, they entered into relations close to the time when she was expected to menstruate, we attribute [the bleeding] to her ordinary pattern. If she had a wound [in her vaginal area], we attribute [the bleeding] to the wound. If, however, the blood that comes from the wound is a different shade than the blood which she sees in the midst of relations, she may not attribute [the bleeding] to the wound.
We accept the word of a woman when she says: \"I have a wound in the uterus which bleeds.\" On this basis, she is permitted to her husband even though the uterus bleeds in the midst of relations.",
+ "When a woman bled in the midst of relations on three [successive] occasions and there was no outside factor to which to attribute [the bleeding], she is required to divorce. She may, however, marry a second husband. If she married a second time and bled in the midst of relations on three [successive] occasions, she is required to divorce, but she may marry a third man. If, however, she married a third time and bled in the midst of relations on three [successive] occasions, she is required to divorce and she may not marry again until she is healed from this sickness.",
+ "How does a woman check herself to see whether she has been healed from this sickness? She brings a lead tube with its edge doubled over inside of it. She inserts the tube into her vagina until the place it can reach. She then places a shaft within the tube with a cotton swab placed at its top. She pushes [the shaft] until the swab reaches the opening of the uterus and then takes out the swab. If blood is found on the top of swab, it can be assumed that the blood discovered in the midst of relations comes from the uterus. If there was no blood on the swab, it can be assumed that the blood discovered [in the midst of relations] comes from pressure on the sides of the vaginal channel. She is pure and may marry another man, as stated in Hilchot Ishut."
+ ],
+ [
+ "A woman becomes impure due to factors beyond her control, whether for niddah or for zivah.
What is implied? For example, she jumped from place to place; she saw animals, beasts, or fowl copulating, was aroused, and began bleeding. In these and in other analogous instances, regardless of the situation, since she experienced bleeding, she becomes impure.
She becomes impure from even the smallest amount of bleeding. Even a drop of blood the size of a mustard seed [makes her impure as if] much blood had drained from her.",
+ "All women become impure [when blood is discovered in] the outer chamber [of the vagina]. Even though the blood did not emerge outside [her body], but instead, was discharged from the womb without flowing further, since it emerged from the upper portion of the vaginal channel, she is impure, even though the blood is still within her flesh. [This is alluded to by Leviticus 15:19:] \"A discharge of blood within her flesh.\"
Until where does the upper portion of the vaginal channel extend? Until the place that the male organ reaches when inserted entirely during relations. The upper portion of the vaginal channel itself is like the uterus.",
+ "Our Sages spoke in metaphoric terms with regard to a woman. The uterus where a fetus is formed is called \"the source.\" It is the place where the blood that renders a woman a niddah or a zavah emanates from. It is called \"the room,\" for it is found deep within her body. The entire uterine channel, i.e., the lengthy place whose entrance contracts severely at the time of pregnancy so that the fetus will not fall, but opens very wide at birth is called \"the antechamber,\" i.e., it is like a gateway to the uterus.",
+ "When the male organ is inserted entirely during relations, it enters the \"antechamber\" but does not reach its end. Instead, it is slightly removed according to the size of the organs. Above the \"room\" and the \"antechamber\" - but located between the \"room\" and the \"antechamber\" - is the place where the woman's two ovaries and the ducts in which her ova become mature are located. This place is called \"the loft.\" There is an opening from the \"loft\" to the top of the \"antechamber.\" This opening is called the \"passageway.\" When the male organ is inserted entirely during relations it goes beyond the \"passageway.\"",
+ "Blood which comes from the \"room\" is always impure with the exception of \"the blood of purity\" which the Torah deemed pure and bleeding which occurs before birth, as will be explained. Blood from the \"loft\" is entirely pure. It is like the blood from a wound in the intestines, the liver, or a kidney and the like.
[The following laws apply when blood] is discovered in the \"antechamber.\" If it is discovered between the \"passageway\" [and the uterus], she is impure, for the assumption is that it came from \"the room.\" She is liable for entering the Temple and we burn terumah and sacrificial foods because of this. We do not say that perhaps it descended from the \"loft\" through the opening, for most of the blood found in such a place is from the \"room.\"
When blood is found in the \"antechamber\" between the opening [and the entrance to the vagina], she is impure, because of a doubt. Perhaps [the blood] came from the \"room\" or [perhaps it] flowed from the loft through the passageway. Therefore we do not burn terumah and sacrificial foods because of this, nor is she liable for entering the Temple.",
+ "Not every liquid that comes from the \"room\" renders a woman impure, only blood, as [ibid.] states: \"A discharge of blood.\" Therefore if a white or a green liquid flows from the uterus, even if it is viscous like blood, she is pure since it does not appear as blood.",
+ "There are five [colors of] blood that [render] a woman impure. They are: red, black, bright saffron, muddy water, and diluted wine. All other colors are pure.",
+ "What is meant by red? The color of blood that comes from the blood which flows initially when people let blood. This blood is placed in a cup, the stain is placed next to it, and [the two] are compared. The black is like dried ink.
What is meant by bright saffron? Fresh saffron should be brought together with the clod of earth from which it is growing. From the better stalks, one should take the middle stalk that is entirely a stem. In each one, there are three stalks and each stalk has three leaves. One should bring the stain next to the middle leaf on the middle stalk and compare it.
What is meant by \"like muddy water\"? We take earth from the valley of Sichnei or the like which is red and pour water over it until the water level is the thickness of a garlic peel above the earth. There is no required amount of water or earth that must be brought. One should stir them in the container and compare [the color to that of the stain] at that time while [the water] is murky. If [the water] becomes clear, one should stir it again and make it murky.",
+ "If the color of the stain matched the color of any of these four shades or was deeper than them, [the woman] is impure. If it is lighter than they are, she is pure.
What is implied? If a black stain was darker than dried ink, [the woman] is impure. If it was lighter than it, i.e., it was like a black olive, tar, or a raven, she is pure. Similar principles apply with regard to the other three colors.",
+ "What is meant by like diluted wine? Like one portion of fresh, undiluted wine like the wine of the Sharon in Eretz Yisrael mixed with two portions of water. If the appearance of the stain was darker or lighter than this, [the woman] is pure. [The stain must be] the exact color of this mixture.
A woman's word is accepted if she says: \"I had a stain of this-and-this color and I lost it.\" The wise man rules whether she is pure or impure [based on her statement].",
+ "How does a person bring the two close and compare? He takes the portion of the cloth that has the stain in his hand and looks at it and at the ink, the saffron leaf, the blood that was let [contained] in a cup, the muddy water, or the diluted wine [contained] in a cup. He compares them according to his perception and rules whether she is impure or pure.
He should not look at the cup from the outside. Instead, he should look at the liquid in the cup. The cup should be wide, weigh a maneh, and contain two luggin, so that light will enter it and it will not be shadowy.",
+ "A stain should be checked only on a white cloth and in sunlight. One makes a shadow with his hand over the stain while standing in the sun so that he will be able to see it as it is.
It is not necessary for every person checking a stain to do all the above whenever he checks [a stain]. Instead, a sage develops a sensitive eye [to the colors of stains]. When he sees it, he will immediately rule whether it is impure or pure. If he has doubts regarding the appearance of a particular stain, he should bring it close and compare it to ink, to blood that has been let, or to the other [impure] colors.",
+ "[The following rules apply when] a woman discharges a piece [of flesh from the vagina]. Even if it is red, she is impure [only] when it is accompanied by blood. If not, she is pure. Even if [when the piece of flesh] is cut open, it is filled with blood, she is ritually pure. For this is not the blood of niddah, but rather blood from the piece [of flesh].",
+ "When the woman discharges a piece [of flesh] which is torn and there is blood collected within it, she is impure.
[The following rules apply when a woman] discharges something like a shell, something like a hair, something like earth, or something like mosquitoes. If these entities have a red appearance, they should be placed in lukewarm water. If they dissolve, she is impure. For it was blood that congealed. And whenever [a woman] discovers dried blood, she is impure.
If the entities remained in lukewarm water for more than a day and then dissolved, there is a doubt whether the woman is impure. If they did not dissolve after an entire day, they are from a wound and she is pure.",
+ "[The following rules apply if a woman] discharges something resembling a locust, a fish, a teeming animal, or a crawling animal. If it is accompanied by blood, it is impure. If not, it is pure.",
+ "When a woman places a tube in her \"antechamber\" and expels blood through the tube, she is pure. For [Leviticus 15:19] speaks of \"A discharge of blood within her flesh.\" [Implied is that] the discharge must be within her flesh as is the ordinary way in which women menstruate. For it is not ordinary for a woman to discharge blood through a tube.",
+ "When a woman urinated and excreted blood together with the urine, she is pure. [This applies] whether she was standing or sitting while urinating. Even if she has physical sensations and her body shudders, she need not suspect [that the blood originated in the uterus]. Instead, the sensation is associated with her urination [and] urine does not originate in the uterus. Instead, this blood [stems from] a wound in the colon or in the kidney.",
+ "Hymeneal bleeding is pure. It is neither the blood of niddah or the blood of zivah, for it is not from the uterus. Instead, it is blood from a wound.
What are the laws applying to virgins [who suffer] hymeneal bleeding? If she married when she was a minor, whether she never menstruated or whether she menstruated while in her father's home, she is permitted to her husband until the wound heals. For any bleeding that she discovers stems from the wound. If she discovers other blood after the wound heals, she is considered as a niddah.",
+ "[The following rules apply when a woman] marries when she is a na'arah. If she never menstruated beforehand, she is permitted to her husband for four days, by day and by night, even though blood is flowing, provided the wound did not heal.
If she had already menstruated in her father's home and then married, her husband should not [continue] to engage in relations with her. After the first time, he should separate. The hymeneal bleeding is considered as if it is the beginning of menstruation.
When a girl who has reached majority, but has not menstruated, she is given the entire first night.",
+ "The [first] four nights that are granted to a na'arah who has not menstruated need not be consecutive. [Instead,] the couple may engage in relations the first night and wait even two or three months and engage in relations for a second night, provided the wound has not healed.",
+ "Similarly, with regard to a minor who is allowed to continue engaging in relations until the wound heals, even if it does not heal for an entire year, they may engage in relations either non-consecutively or day after day.",
+ "[The following rules apply when a girl] married while she was a minor and became a na'arah while married to her husband. [If] the blood is still flowing because of the wound, all of the times she engaged in relations while a minor are considered as one night and she is given license to complete the four days granted to her during the period of na'arut.
Even if the three days she is granted during the period of na'arut are all non-consecutive, [e.g.,] they engaged in relations one night every two months, this is permitted, provided the wound has not healed.",
+ "How do we know whether or not the wound has healed? If [the woman] would discover blood when she stands but not when she sits; if she would discover [blood] when she sits on the earth, but not when she sits on pillows or blankets, the wound has not healed. If, however, the bleeding ceases and she does not discover [blood], whether she stands or whether she sits on a pillow, the wound has healed. Similarly, even if her bleeding has not ceased, but she continues to discover blood even when she is sitting on pillows and blankets, we assume that this is not blood from the wound, but rather menstrual bleeding.",
+ "If she would discover blood in the midst of relations, [we assume] that it comes as a result of the wound. If she engaged in relations and did not discover blood and afterwards, discovered blood out of the context of relations, [we assume] that it is menstrual bleeding.",
+ "When a man engages in relations with a virgin and she does not bleed and then, he engages in relations with her again and she does bleed, [we assume] that this is menstrual bleeding, even if she is a minor. [The rationale is that] if it were hymeneal bleeding, it would have appeared the first time.
When a man has relations with a girl below the age of three and she bleeds, this is hymeneal bleeding."
+ ],
+ [
+ "The bleeding of niddah, the bleeding of zivah, the bleeding before childbirth, the pure blood that follows childbirth, are all one type of bleeding. They [all] come from the uterus, from the same source. The laws applying [to this bleeding], however, change according to the time [and circumstance], causing the woman who discovers the bleeding to be considered as pure, a niddah, or a zavah.",
+ "What is implied? When a woman menstruates for the first time or when she menstruates at the fixed time at which it has been established that she will menstruate, she is a niddah for seven full days. [This applies] whether she continues to bleed throughout the seven days or she only discovered one drop of blood. If she discovers blood on the eighth day, this is the blood of zivah, because it comes \"outside the time for niddah\" [Leviticus 15:25].",
+ "Any blood that is discovered between one fixed time that a woman can be expected to menstruate and the next fixed time that she can be expected to menstruate is the blood of zivah. It is a halachah transmitted to Moses on Sinai that there are no more than eleven days between one menstrual bleeding and an another.",
+ "All of the seven days beginning with the day on which a fixed time that a woman can be expected to menstruate was established are called \"the days of niddah.\" [This applies] whether the woman menstruates or not. Why are they called \"the days of niddah\"? Because they are fit [for a woman to be considered] a niddah? Any blood discovered during these days is considered as the blood of niddah.",
+ "The eleven days that follow these seven are called \"the days of zivah.\" [This applies] whether the woman discovers bleeding or not. Why are they called \"the days of zivah\"? Because they are fit [for a woman to be considered] a zivah? Any blood discovered during these days is considered as the blood of zivah. Take care with regard to these names: \"the days of niddah\" and \"the days of zivah.\"",
+ "Throughout her entire life, from the time she establishes a time when she can be expected to menstruate until she dies or until she transfers the time she can be expected to menstruate to another date, she should count seven days from the beginning of the day when she could be expected to menstruate and eleven days after them. Afterwards, [she counts] another seven days and another eleven days.
Take care of this reckoning so that you will know [a woman's status] if she discovers blood. Was it in the days of niddah or the days of zivah? For throughout a woman's entire life, she [follows the same pattern]: seven days of niddah and eleven days of zivah unless the pattern was interrupted by a birth, as will be explained.",
+ "When a woman discovers uterine bleeding during the days of zivah for only one day or for two consecutive days, she is called a minor zavah, and she is called one who watches a day for a day. If she discovered [uterine bleeding] for three consecutive days, she is a zavah in the complete sense of the term. She is called a major zavah or merely referred to as a zavah without any further description. [This is derived from Leviticus 15:25]: \"When a woman will have a flow of blood for many days....\" The minimum implied by the plural form, \"days,\" is two. \"Many\" indicates [at least] three.",
+ "There is no difference between a major zavah and a minor zavah except the counting of seven [\"spotless\" days] and the necessity to bring a sacrifice. For a major zavah must count seven \"spotless\" days [before immersing to regain ritual purity] and a minor zavah need only count one day. And a major zavah must bring a sacrifice when she purifies herself and a minor zavah need not. They are both impure and the prohibition against relations applies to both of them equally.",
+ "What is implied? If she discovered blood in the days of zivah - whether she discovered it in the beginning of the night or she discovered it at the end of the day - that entire day, she is impure. It is as if the bleeding did not cease from the time she discovered it until the sun sets. She should watch herself throughout the night. If there are no signs of bleeding at night, she should arise in the morning and immerse herself after sunrise. She should watch herself for the entire day. If there are no signs of bleeding, there is then a pure day to compensate for the impure day and she is permitted to her husband at night.",
+ "If she discovered [uterine] bleeding also on the second day, whether at night or whether during the day, after she immersed herself, that second day is also impure and she must watch herself for the entire third night. If there are no signs of bleeding at night, she should arise in the morning and immerse herself after sunrise. She should watch herself for the entire day. If there are no signs of bleeding, there is then a pure day to compensate for the two impure days and she is permitted to her husband at night.",
+ "If she discovered [uterine] bleeding on the third day, whether during the day or at night, she is a major zavah and she must count seven pure days when there is no uterine bleeding [at all], as [Leviticus 15:28] states: \"She must count seven days for herself.\" She immerses herself on the seventh day after sunrise and is permitted to her husband at night. On the eighth day, she brings her sacrifice, two turtle doves or two doves.",
+ "When a minor zavah immerses herself at night during the day she is watching or a major zavah immerses herself on the seventh night, it is as if she did not immerse herself. She is like a niddah who immerses herself within the seven days.",
+ "When a person has relations with a major zavah after she immersed herself on the seventh day of her counting [of \"spotless\" days] or with a minor zavah after she immersed herself on the day on which she must watch herself, he is not liable for kerait, because she immersed herself at the time she was fit to immerse herself when regaining ritual purity. This woman, however, possessed improper culture, for relations with her and things she touches are tenative.",
+ "What is meant by their being \"tentative\"? If the day on which she immersed herself is completed without her discovering any uterine bleeding, everything which she touched after she immersed herself is ritually pure and there is no liability for relations with her. If, however, she discovers blood on this day after immersing herself, she is considered as a zavah retroactively. Anything which she touched is retroactively considered as impure and she and the man who engaged in relations with her are obligated to bring a sacrifice. Therefore she is forbidden to her husband until the evening, lest she bring herself to a situation involving doubt.",
+ "When a zavah counts six \"spotless\" days and discovers uterine bleeding on the seventh day, even if it is close to sunset, all of the days counted previously are invalidated and she begins a new reckoning of seven \"spotless\" days after the impure day.",
+ "If [a woman] discharges semen during the days she is counting, she invalidates one day. She is like a zav who has a seminal emission who invalidates one day [in his counting].
If she discovered uterine bleeding on the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth days of her \"days of zivah,\" she is not considered a major zavah. Instead, from the state of a minor zavah, she becomes a niddah. For the twelfth day is the beginning of her days of niddah and a woman who discovers bleeding in her days of niddah does not become a zavah, as we explained.",
+ "What is the intent of the Torah's wording [Leviticus 15:25]: \"After the time for niddah\"? That if she discovered bleeding on the three days that follow her niddah [bleeding], she is a zavah, i.e., she discovered bleeding on the eighth day after the onset of the days of niddah, the ninth day, and the tenth day, i.e., the first three of the eleven days of zivah.
[The following laws apply if a woman] discovers bleeding on the eleventh day of zivah and she immersed herself in the evening on the night of the twelfth day and engaged in relations. Although she is impure and the man who engaged in relations with her becomes impure and the laws regarding the impurity of the places where they both sit and lie apply, the couple are not liable for kerait. [The rationale is that] the twelfth day is not joined with the eleventh day for her to be considered a zavah. Her immersion that night is effective in saving her from [being liable to bring] a sacrifice.",
+ "If she immerses herself on the twelfth day after sunrise, she is forbidden to her husband until the evening as is the law with regard to any minor zavah. If [her husband] transgresses and engages in relations with her, neither of them are liable at all. Even if she discovers blood on the twelfth day after they engaged in relations it is of no significance. For this is the blood of niddah and it is not associated with [the bleeding of] the previous day.",
+ "If she discovers bleeding at the conclusion of her seventh day of niddah during bein hashamashot, and then discovers bleeding on the ninth day and the tenth day, there is an unresolved doubt if she is considered a [major] zavah. For perhaps the [blood] discovered at first was on the eighth night and thus it is as if she discovered blood on three consecutive days at the beginning of her days of zivah.
Similarly, if she discovered bleeding on the ninth and tenth days of her days of zivah and discovered bleeding again at the conclusion of the eleventh day during bein hashamashot, there is an unresolved doubt if she is considered a [major] zavah. For perhaps the final discovery [of bleeding] was on the eleventh day and she will have discovered [bleeding] on three consecutive days during her days of zivah.",
+ "When a niddah inspects herself in the midst of her days of niddah and discovers that her bleeding has ceased, even if it ceased on the second day of her menstrual period, and either, inadvertently or intentionally, did not inspect herself again until many days after her [days of] niddah and discovers impurity, we do not say that she was impure for all those days and [hence,] she is a zavah. Instead, throughout the entire time that she did not inspect herself, we operate under the presumption that she is pure.
If she inspected herself and found impurity, even if she checked herself on the seventh of her days of niddah, if she did not inspect herself again [before] bein hashamashot to separate herself from the impurity of niddah, but instead waited [several] days and afterwards inspected herself and found that she was pure, there is an unresolved doubt if she is considered a [major] zavah.
If she discovered impurity, she is definitely a zavah. [The rationale is that since] at the beginning she discovered impurity and at the end, she discovered impurity, we operate under the presumption that she did not stop bleeding.
On the first day of menstruation, even though a woman [conducted an inspection and] found that she was pure, it is as if she discovered impurity. For on the first day of menstruation, we operate under the presumption that a woman's flow will continue.",
+ "When a zavah inspects herself on the first day of [the seven days] she must count and finds herself pure and then did not inspect herself until the seventh day and found that she was pure, she can be assumed to be pure. It is as if she inspected herself for all of the seven days and discovered herself to be pure.",
+ "Similarly, if she inspects herself on the first day of [the seven days] she must count and finds herself pure and [inspects herself] on the eighth day and found that she was pure, she can be assumed to be pure.
If she checked herself on the third day of zivah and discovered that the bleeding had ceased, but did not check herself on the first day of counting and then checked herself on the seventh day, she can be assumed to be pure.
The same laws apply to a zav with regard to all these inspections if he finds himself pure and it is considered as if he counted these days.",
+ "Whenever there is a doubt whether a woman is niddah or a zavah, she must count seven \"spotless\" days because of the doubt. She immerses herself on the night preceding the eighth day Afterwards, she is permitted to her husband. She must bring the sacrifice of a zavah, but it is not eaten as will be explained in the appropriate place."
+ ],
+ [
+ "When a pregnant woman begins to feel pain, the labor pains take hold of her, and there is a flow of blood before she gives birth, that bleeding called \"the blood of the throes.\"
What are the laws that govern it? If it comes during her days of niddah, it is considered as niddah bleeding and she is impure as a niddah. If it comes in her days of zivah, she is pure. [This is derived from Leviticus 15:19]: \"When blood flows within her flesh.\" According to the Oral Tradition , we learn that the bleeding must come from herself, and not because of a child.
[The above applies] provided she gives birth to a living child. If, however, she miscarries, [the laws of \"the blood of] the throes\" do not apply.
Even if the blood is flowing together with contractions and pain for fourteen days before she gives birth, this is considered as \"the blood of the throes\" and she is pure. If, however, the bleeding began fifteen days or more before birth, the bleeding is considered as \"the blood of zivah\" and the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah apply to her.",
+ "When does the above apply? When the contractions, throes, and pain did not cease, but instead, she continued having difficulty until she gave birth. If, however, she discovered bleeding for three days or more during her \"days of zivah\" amid pain and throes, but the pains cease and the throes ease after three days and she is able to remain comfortable for 24 hours or more, she is a zavah. For if the bleeding was coming as a result of the child, the pain and the throes would not cease [for that long]. If she gives birth afterwards, the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah apply to her.",
+ "When she discovers bleeding for one day without pain and then for two days with difficulty and then gives birth, [discovers bleeding] for two days without pain and then for one day with difficulty and gives birth, or [discovers bleeding] for one day with difficulty, then for one day without pain, and then for one day with difficulty and gives birth, the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah do not apply to her.
If, however, she discovers bleeding for one day with difficulty and then for two days without pain and then gives birth, [discovers bleeding] for two days with difficulty and then for one day without pain and gives birth, or [discovers bleeding] for one day without pain, then for one day with difficulty, and then for one day without pain and gives birth, the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah apply to her.
This is the general principle: When there are throes in proximity to birth, the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah do not apply to her. When there is ease in proximity to birth, the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah apply to her.",
+ "When the third day of her sighting blood is the day on which she gives birth, even if the entire day is characterized by ease, the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah do not apply to her. [The rationale is that] the day she gave birth is close to difficulty.
If she discovered bleeding for two days and miscarried on the third day, but did not identify what emerged in the miscarriage, her status is doubtful. There is a question if the laws of zivah or the laws of a woman who gave birth apply to her.",
+ "What are the laws that apply to a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah? She must abide seven spotless days. Afterwards, she immerses herself at night and is permitted to her husband. Only then do the laws of \"the blood of purity\" apply to her. She must bring an offering of a zavah and the offering of childbirth. Accordingly, if she gives birth to a male, even if her bleeding ceases on the day she gives birth, she should count seven \"spotless\" days and immerse herself. If she gives birth to a female and counts seven \"spotless\" days which conclude with the fourteen days [she is impure because of] birth or after them, she can immerse herself and she is permitted to her husband. If the days of her counting conclude within the fourteen days, she is forbidden to her husband until the fifteenth night.",
+ "What is implied? If she discovered bleeding for three days and then counted seven \"spotless\" days, there are [only] ten days and she remains forbidden to her husband until the fifteenth night. For the entire fourteen days, she is like a niddah.
Why do we not require a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah to count seven \"spotless\" days after the seven days [of impurity that follow] the birth of a male or the fourteen days [of impurity that follow] the birth of a female? Because the days following birth and the days of niddah in which blood is not sighted are counted as part of the seven \"spotless\" days, as will be explained.",
+ "When a woman who gives birth while in the state of zivah does not cease bleeding, [the laws of] \"the blood of purity\" do not apply to her. Instead, any uterine bleeding is considered as the bleeding of zivah. If, however, she counted seven \"spotless\" days, completed the fourteen days [following the birth of] a female, and then immersed herself, [the laws of] \"the blood of purity\" apply to her [should] she sight bleeding during the 40 days following the birth of a male and the 80 days following the birth of a female.",
+ "If she counted seven \"spotless\" days, but did not immerse herself immediately and afterwards discovered bleeding, she may [nevertheless] immerse herself. She is permitted to her husband immediately, for all of the days of purity are not fit neither for niddah, nor for zivah. Nevertheless, until she immerses herself, the blood itself is impure and renders others impure like the blood of niddah.",
+ "[The following laws apply when a woman] gives birth to a female and after the fourteen days of impurity, she becomes pregnant again. She then [begins to miscarry and] the blood of childbirth begins to flow with the 80 days [of blood of purity]. This is also considered as \"pure\" blood. Although generally, we do not consider bleeding which precedes miscarriage as bleeding which precedes childbirth, [an exception is made in this instance]. For any blood that she sights during the days of purity is pure until she [actually] miscarries. When she miscarries, she becomes impure because of the birth. If [the fetus] she miscarries was male, she is impure as if she gave birth to a male. If [the fetus] she miscarries was female, she is impure as if she gave birth to a female. She counts the days of impurity and then the days of purity from the second \"birth.\"
Even if she was pregnant with twins and miscarried one on one day and miscarried the other after several days passed, she counts days of impurity and days of purity from the second [miscarriage].",
+ "When the flow of a zavah ceases, she begins to count her seven \"spotless\" days, and then the blood of the throes of childbirth comes in the midst of the \"spotless\" days, it does not nullify her counting. [On the contrary,] the days of bleeding are counted as part of the seven days.
Similarly, if she gave birth in the midst of the seven \"spotless\" days, the birth does not nullify her counting. Indeed, the days of birth can be counted in the seven [\"spotless\"] days even though she is impure. [This is indicated by Leviticus 15:28]: \"If she has become pure from her zivah.\" Implied is that since she has become pure from her zivah - even though she is impure for other reasons, e.g., the impurity of childbirth, the impurity of niddah, or the impurity of tzara'at - she may count on them. These types of impurity and the like do not nullify her counting.",
+ "When a woman does not discover bleeding in her niddah days and the days following childbirth, they may be counted as part of her seven \"spotless\" days. If she does discover bleeding during these days, these days are not counted, nor do they nullify her previous reckoning. Instead, she completes her counting, adding to the days counted previously, when her bleeding ceases. For the only bleeding that nullifies a woman's counting is zivah bleeding. These types of bleeding invalidate only that very day.",
+ "After you have understood all the fundamental principles which we have explained, you will be able to comprehend our Sages' statement that a woman may discover uterine bleeding for 114 consecutive days without becoming a [major] zavah.
What is implied? [The first days are] the last two days before her days of niddah. [They are followed by] the seven days of niddah, two days [of zivah] which follow the days of niddah, 14 days of [pre-birth] difficulty, the 80 days associated with the birth of a female, the seven days of niddah, and two days [of zivah] which follow the days of niddah.
From this, one learns that any bleeding that a woman discovers after the completion of the days associated with childbirth marks the beginning of her days of niddah. We do not pay attention to the previously existing times when she would be expected to menstruate.
Accordingly, there is a doubt whether a woman who discovers bleeding bein hashamashot is a niddah. For perhaps it is considered as if she discovered the bleeding at night, when her days of niddah could begin.",
+ "We have already explained that when a woman continues her niddah bleeding for seven days, she is permitted to engage in relations on the night of the eighth day after she immerses herself. A minor zavah who watches herself for one pure day and immerses herself is permitted to engage in relations in the evening. A major zavah must count seven \"spotless\" days. Then she immerses herself and is permitted to engage in relations on the night of the eighth day. There are only eleven days between [one set of] the \"days of niddah\" and a second set. During these eleven days, [a woman who discovers uterine bleeding will be either a minor zavah or a major zavah.",
+ "When you will remember all of these fundamental points, you will understand our Sages' statement that a woman who has established a fixed [continuous] pattern in which she discovers bleeding on one day and does not discover it on the following day. At the outset, she may engage in relations on the night and day of the eighth day, i.e., the first day after her \"days of niddah.\" [On the whole,] she may engage in relations only four nights during eighteen days. She may not engage in relations during the days which are pure, because the days must be watched because of the [previous] impure day. Accordingly, if on the impure days, she always discovers bleeding at the beginning of the night, she may only engage in relations on the eighth day which is the first day after her \"days of niddah.\"",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for two impure days and then to experience two pure days, she may engage in relations on the eighth, the twelfth, the sixteenth, and the twentieth.",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for three impure days and then to experience three pure days, she may engage in relations on two of the three pure days that follow her \"days of niddah.\" For the first of them must be watched because of the two impure days that follow her \"days of niddah.\" Afterwards, she may never engage in relations again. For she will be established as a major zavah, but will never count seven \"spotless\" days [to purify herself].",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for four impure days and then to experience four pure days, she may engage in relations on one day after her [\"days of] niddah.\" Afterwards, she may never engage in relations again.",
+ "13If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for five impure days and then to experience five pure days, she may engage in relations on three days after her [\"days of] niddah.\" Afterwards, she may never engage in relations again.",
+ "13If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for six impure days and then to experience six pure days, she may engage in relations on five days after her [\"days of] niddah.\" Afterwards, she may never engage in relations again.",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for seven impure days and then to experience seven pure days, she may engage in relations during the first pure week that follows her [\"days of] niddah.\" That is followed by an impure week which establishes her as a zavah. The week which follows is required to count [seven \"spotless\" days] and it is forbidden to engage in relations during it. Thus in four weeks she is allowed to engage in relations for only one week. Throughout her entire life, she may engage in relations for eighteen days in eighteen weeks.
What is implied? During the fifth week, she is a zavah. The sixth week in which she is pure is required to count [seven \"spotless\" days]. During the seventh week, she is a zavah. During the eighth week, she must count. During the ninth week, when she discovers bleeding, five of these days are [during her] \"days of niddah\" and two are [during] the beginning of her \"days of zivah.\" [Hence,] she must watch one day of the tenth week and may engage in relations for six [days]. During the eleventh week when she discovers bleeding, two are the conclusion of the days of zivah and five are during \"the days of niddah.\" During the twelfth pure week, she may engage in relations for five days. During the thirteenth week, she is a zavah. During the fourteenth week, she must count. During the fifteenth week, she is a zavah. During the sixteenth week, she must count. During the seventeenth week, she is a zavah. During the eighteenth week, she must count.
She continues to count in this manner forever. Thus she will be able to engage in relations on eighteen days in eighteen weeks. If she did not have such a physical difficulty, and she would be a niddah for a week and be pure for eleven days, she would be able to engage in relations for eleven weeks, i.e., 77 days, out of the eighteen weeks.",
+ "When she discovers bleeding for one impure week and then is pure for a week, and thus can engage in relations for eighteen days, this is approximately one fourth of the days [on which she would ordinarily be allowed to engage in relations]. This is what our Sages [implied when] saying: \"She may engage in relations for a fourth of her days.\"",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for eight impure days and then to experience eight pure days, she may engage in relations for fifteen days amid 48 days.
What is implied? Of the first eight days, seven are her \"days of niddah\" and one is the first of the \"days of zivah\" that follow the \"days of niddah.\" She must watch one of the eight pure days and can engage in relations on seven of them. Afterwards, come seven impure days. Two of them are the final days of her \"days of zivah\" and six are in her days of niddah. Then come eight pure days. The first of them is the conclusion of her \"days of niddah.\" She may engage in relations on the remaining seven.
Then come eight impure days. Four of them are the final days of her \"days of zivah\" and four are in her \"days of niddah.\" Thus she is a major zavah and must count seven \"spotless\" days. Afterwards, come seven pure days. She counts for seven of them and may engage in relations for one day. Thus she may engage in relations for fifteen days in each 48.",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for nine impure days and then to experience nine pure days, she may engage in relations for eight days in every eighteen days forever.
What is implied? Of the nine impure [days]: Seven of them are her \"days of niddah\" and two are \"days of zivah\" that follow her \"days of niddah.\" She must watch one day of the nine pure days and may engage in relations on the remaining eight. This pattern continues forever.",
+ "If [a woman's established pattern] is to discover bleeding for ten impure days and then to experience ten pure days - and the same rules prevail for more than ten, indeed even 1000 days, if the same number of days are pure as impure - the number of days when she may engage in relations will equal the number of days [from when she began bleeding] as a zavah.
What is implied? If there are ten impure days, seven of them are days of niddah and three days of zivah. [Therefore on] her ten pure days, she must count seven and may engage in relations on three. Thus there will be three days when she may engage in relations and three days of zivah. Similarly, when she is impure for 100 days and pure for 100 days. The first seven are days of niddah and the following 93 [start on] her \"days of zivah.\" Hence, of her 100 pure days, seven must be counted and she may engage in relations on 93 of them. Similar principles apply with regard to 1000 days or any other number of days."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are women who have vesetot, established times [when they menstruate] and other women who do not have vesetot. Instead, they feel nothing until the blood is actually released and they do not have a fixed day on which they menstruate.
[The intent when speaking of] a woman who has a veset is that there is a specific day - [e.g.,] from the twentieth [day of the month] to the twentieth or from the twenty-fourth to the twenty-fourth, or more or less - [on which she begins to menstruate].",
+ "Before the onset of menstruation, she will demonstrate physical symptoms, [e.g.,] she yawns, sneezes, feels anxiety at the opening to her stomach and lower intestinal area, the hairs of her flesh will stand up, her flesh will become warm, or any similar physical symptoms. She will experience these - or at least one of these - symptoms at the fixed time when she [will menstruate] on the established day.",
+ "We have already explained that any woman who does not have a [fixed] veset is forbidden to engage in relations until she makes an internal examination first. If she has a [fixed] veset, she is forbidden to engage in relations through the entire time of the veset. If her veset is during the day, she is forbidden to engage in relations throughout the entire day. If her veset is during the night, she is forbidden to engage in relations throughout the entire night. She should begin counting her \"days of niddah\" and her \"days of zivah\" from the day of the veset at all times.",
+ "Therefore women must be careful with regard to vesetot until they know the day and the hour when a veset is established. If her pattern was to begin menstruation on the twentieth day and the twentieth day came and she did not menstruate and she did menstruate on the twenty-third, she is forbidden [to engage in relations on] the twentieth and twenty-third.
Similarly, if a second time she did not menstruate on the twentieth and [instead,] began to menstruate on the twenty-third day, both days remain forbidden. If for a third time, she did not menstruate on the twentieth and [instead,] began to menstruate on the twenty-third day, the twentieth day is purified and the veset is transferred to the twenty-third day. For a woman does not establish a veset until she establishes it three times, nor does she uproot a veset until she bypasses it three times.",
+ "When a veset is established because of outside factors, even if recurs several times, it is not a veset, because [menstruation] came as a result of an outside factor.
If a woman jumped and menstruated and [again] jumped and menstruated, she establishes a veset for the specific day without considering whether she jumped. What is implied? She jumped on Sunday and menstruated. After an interval of 20 days, she again jumped on Sunday and menstruated. Then after an interval of 19 days, she jumped on the Sabbath and did not menstruate, but menstruated after the Sabbath without jumping, she establishes [a fixed veset] for Sunday after a twenty day interval. For it is clear that the interval causes her to menstruate and not jumping, and the interval has been established as the onset of menstruation on three occasions. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.",
+ "When a woman begins menstruating on the fifteenth of one month, and menstruates on the sixteenth of the following month, the seventeenth of the month which follows that, and the eighteen of the month which follows that, she establishes a veset which advances.
If during the fourth month, she begins menstruating on the seventeenth, the veset is not established. Instead, [in the following month,] she suspects that she will menstruate on the day on which she menstruated during the previous month. If that day arrives and she does not menstruate, that day becomes pure and is no longer suspected. For only a date that has been established by three [consecutive onsets] need be uprooted by three consecutive occasions when menstruation does not occur.",
+ "If her pattern had been to begin menstruation on the fifteenth and she changed to the sixteenth, [relations] are forbidden on both. If, [in the following month,] she changed to the seventeenth, the sixteenth is released and the seventeenth becomes prohibited. The fifteenth remains prohibited. If, [in the following month,] she changed to the eighteenth, the eighteenth becomes prohibited and all the other dates are released.",
+ "If her pattern had been to begin menstruation on the twentieth day and she changed to the twenty-second, they are both forbidden. If, [in the following month,] the twentieth arrives and she does not menstruate, but she does menstruate on the twenty-second, they both remain forbidden. If, [in the following month,] the twentieth arrived and she began menstruating, she is considered to have returned to her fixed pattern. The twenty-second is released, because it was not established through three [onsets of menstruation].",
+ "A woman does not establish a veset in the midst of her \"days of niddah\" during which she has menstruated. Since she menstruates on one of these days, she cannot establish a veset in any of the seven. Similarly, a woman does not establish a veset in her eleven \"days of zivah.\" She may, however, establish a fixed veset in her \"days of niddah\" when she has not menstruated.
If she established a veset in her \"days of zivah,\" she must show concern over that veset. Whenever a veset is established in [a woman's] \"days of zivah,\" it is uprooted if it is bypassed even once. It does not have to be bypassed three times. [The rationale is that] it is an accepted presumption that a woman's [menstrual] blood is withdrawn on these days.",
+ "What is meant by \"she must show concern over that veset\"? If she sighted bleeding on this veset for even one day, she must wait as a niddah because of the doubt. [In the following month,] she is forbidden to engage in relations on that day even if she did not sight bleeding as on the other days of the vesetot. If she discovers bleeding for three successive days, she is a zavah.",
+ "When a woman frequently inspects herself at all times, her conduct is praiseworthy. [This applies] even if she has established a fixed veset. For bleeding may come at times other than her veset.
During the eleven days of zivah, we assume that she is pure. [Hence,] she need not inspect herself. After her days of zivah, however, she should inspect herself.",
+ "When a woman remains passive and does not inspect herself, either because of forces beyond her control or intentionally, she is assumed to be pure until she inspects herself and discovers [that she is] impure.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] a woman did not inspect herself at the time of her veset and inspected herself a few days afterwards and discovered that she was impure. Retroactively, she is considered impure from the time of her veset with regard to matters of ritual purity and impurity, as will be explained. Nevertheless, she does not render a man who engaged in relations with her impure retroactively and she may not count [the days of niddah] except from the time she discovered the bleeding. If [in the inspection], she discovered that she is pure, we operate under the assumption that she is pure.",
+ "Similarly, when a woman discovers bleeding due to a wound that she has in her uterus, she is pure, even if she discovers the bleeding at the time of her veset. The blood is also pure. [The rationale is that the obligation to show concern for] vesetot is Rabbinic in origin, as will be explained in Hilchot Mitamei Mishkav UMoshav.",
+ "A blind woman should conduct an internal examination herself and show [the ed] to her friends. A deaf-mute and a mentally or emotionally incapacitated woman must be inspected by intellectually capable women so that their vesetot can be established. [Afterwards,] they are permitted to their husbands.",
+ "Should a woman err and be unaware of the day when her \"days of niddah\" begins, if she menstruates, she must be concerned that she is a zavah. Therefore if she menstruated for one day or two days, she must nevertheless wait a full seven lest the blood have come in her \"days of niddah.\" And if she discovers bleeding for three days, she must count seven \"spotless\" days, lest she be in the midst of her \"days of zivah.\"",
+ "What must she do to redefine when her \"days of niddah\" begin, to know if she is definitely a zavah or that if there is a question concerning that, and to know when her \"days of zivah\" begin? Everything is dependent on [the number of days] during which she discovers [bleeding].
If she discovered bleeding for one day or for two days, she counts the remainder of the seven and begins counting the eleven days after these seven.",
+ "If she discovered bleeding for three days, there is a doubt whether she is a zavah. For perhaps one of these days preceded her \"days of niddah\" and two were at the beginning of her \"days of niddah.\" Similarly, if she discovered bleeding for four days, [there is a doubt whether she is a zavah]. For perhaps two of these days preceded her \"days of niddah\" and two were at the beginning of her \"days of niddah.\" She must observe the five as the remainder of the seven and [count] the eleven days after these five.",
+ "Similarly, if she discovered bleeding for nine days, there is a doubt whether she is a zavah. Perhaps two of the days preceded her days of niddah\" and seven are her \"days of niddah.\" She begins counting the eleven days after the ninth day [on which] the bleeding stopped. Similarly, if she discovered bleeding for eleven days, there is a doubt whether she is a zavah. Perhaps two of the days preceded her days of niddah,\" seven are her \"days of niddah,\" and two days followed her \"days of niddah.\" Thus there remain nine days within her \"days of zivah.\"",
+ "If she discovered bleeding for twelve days, she is definitely a zavah. For even if two of the days preceded her days of niddah\" and seven are her \"days of niddah,\" there are three days following her \"days of niddah. Thus there remain eight days within her \"days of zivah.\" The same laws apply if she discovered bleeding for thirteen days. There remain seven days within her \"days of zivah\" and they are the days on which she counts [seven \"spotless\" days].",
+ "Even if a women's menstruation continues for even 1000 days, as soon as the bleeding stops, she should count seven \"spotless\" days. After these seven days, a woman who erred begins anew her \"days of niddah.\"",
+ "Thus we learn: Whenever a woman errs, she never counts less than seven days from the time which her bleeding stops. Nor does she count more than seventeen. Afterwards, come her \"days of niddah.\"
What is implied? If she discovered bleeding for one day and then it stopped, she should count seventeen days. Six to complete her \"days of niddah\" and eleven as her \"days of zivah.\" If she discovers bleeding for thirteen days or more she counts seven \"spotless\" days after the bleeding ceases. Afterwards, her \"days of niddah\" begin as explained [above]."
+ ],
+ [
+ "According to Scriptural Law, a woman does not become impure as a niddah or a zavah until she experiences a physical sensation, menstruates, and discovers blood which emerges within her flesh as we explained. She becomes impure from the time she menstruates and onward only.
If she does not experience a physical sensation, but conducts an internal examination, and discovers bleeding within the vaginal channel, we operate under the presumption that it was accompanied by a physical sensation, as explained previously.",
+ "According to Rabbinic Law, whenever a woman discovers a bloodstain on her flesh or on her clothes, she is impure, as if she discovered bleeding within [the vaginal channel] on her flesh. [This applies] even if she did not experience a physical sensation [and] even if she conducted an internal examination and did not discover bleeding. This impurity is [because of our] doubt; perhaps the stain came from uterine bleeding.",
+ "Similarly, according to Rabbinic Law: Whenever a woman discovers bleeding at a time other than her veset and whenever she discovers a bloodstain, she is impure retroactively for 24 hours. If she conducted an internal examination within this time and discovered that she was pure, she is impure retroactively until the time of the inspection.
Although she is impure retroactively, she does not cause a man who engages in relations with her to become impure, as we explained. Nor may she begin counting her \"days of niddah\" or counting because of the stain except from the time she discovered the bleeding or the stain.
Whenever a woman discovers a stain, her reckoning [of her veset] is confused. For it is possible that the bleeding came from the uterus and her veset must be recalculated.",
+ "When a woman discovers bleeding at the time of her veset, she does not become impure retroactively. Instead, [the impurity begins] at the time [of discovery]. Similarly, a woman who is pregnant, nursing, a virgin, or elderly do not become impure retroactively.
What is meant by a pregnant woman? A woman whose pregnancy has become obvious, i.e., she is three months pregnant. What is meant by a woman who is nursing? A woman within 24 months of childbirth, even if her child died, she weaned him, or gave him to a nursemaid.",
+ "[The term] \"virgin\" refers to a girl who has never menstruated even through she experienced uterine bleeding because of marriage or because of birth.
The term \"elderly woman\" refers to a woman who did not menstruate for 90 days near her old age. When is she considered elderly? When she is called an old woman [by others] and she does not protest.
[The laws that apply when] a pregnant, nursing, or elderly woman [discovers] a stain are the same as when she discovers bleeding. She does not become impure retroactively. With regard to a virgin who has never menstruated and who is still a minor, a stain that is discovered is pure until she menstruates on three successive months.",
+ "What is the difference between a stain which is found on a woman's flesh and one found on her clothing? There is no minimum measure for a stain found on a woman's flesh. A stain on a garment, by contrast, does not render a woman impure unless it is the size of half a Cilikean bean (a gris) which is equivalent to a square large enough to contain nine lentils, i.e., three rows of three. If it is smaller than this, she is pure.
If [a stain] is composed of small spots, they are not considered as a single entity. If it is extended, it is considered as a single entity.",
+ "[When] a stain is discovered on an article that is not susceptible to ritual impurity, the woman is pure and she need not be concerned about it.
What is implied? If a woman sat on a utensil made of stone, earth, animal dung, on fish skin, on the outside of an earthenware utensil, or on a cloth that is smaller than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths and blood was discovered on the above, she is pure. Even if she inspected earth, then sat on it, and when she arose, a stain was discovered, she is pure. For our Sages did not decree that a woman would be impure when a stain was discovered on an article that is not susceptible to ritual impurity. Nor did they decree [that a stain discovered on an article susceptible to ritual impurity renders a woman] impure unless that article is white. If, however an article is colored, we are not concerned with a stain. For this reason, our Sages ordained that a woman should wear colored garments so that she be protected from problems arising due to stains.",
+ "[A woman] does not become impure because of a bloodstain found on every place on her body, only due to those found opposite her genital area.
What is implied? If a stain is found on her heel, she is impure. For perhaps she touched her genital area when she sat. Similarly, she is impure if a stain was found on her calves or on the inner side of her ankles, [the portions of her legs] that will touch each other when she stands with her feet and calves together. If it is found on the tip of her toe, she is impure. Perhaps [blood] dripped from the uterus to her foot when she walked.
Similarly, if blood is found in any place where her menstrual blood could have spattered when she walked, she is impure. Similarly, if blood is found on her hands, even on the backs of her fingers, she is impure. For the hands are active. If, however, blood is found on the outer or side portions of her calves and, needless to say, if it is found from her thighs upward, she is pure. For this is certainly blood that was spattered on her from another place.",
+ "When a bloodstain that is found on a woman's body is long like a strand or round, or made up of small drops, the length of the stain was across the width of her thigh, it looks like it came from below upward, since it is opposite her genital area, she is impure. We do not say: Had it dripped from her body, it would not be found in such a form. Instead, we are stringent with regard to all blood that is found in these places, even though there is a doubt concerning it.",
+ "A stain that is found below the belt on a woman's garment renders her impure. If it is above the belt, she is pure. If it is found on her sleeve, if it could reach her genital area, she is impure. If not, she is pure.",
+ "If she would remove her garment and cover herself with it at night, she is impure wherever blood is found. Similarly, if blood is found anywhere on her girdle, she is impure.",
+ "If a woman wears one tunic for three days or more during a time that is not part of her \"days of niddah\" and inspected it and discovered three stains or one stain that contains the measure of three stains, there is a doubt whether she is a [major] zavah. For it is possible that each day, she stained the garment.
Similarly, if she wore three garments that had been inspected for three days in her \"days of zivah\" and discovered a stain in each of them, there is a doubt whether she is a [major] zavah. [This applies] even if the stains are one opposite the other.",
+ "[The following rules apply if] she found one stain that did not contain the measure of three stains. If she inspected herself throughout bein hashamashot of the first day and found that she was pure, but did not inspect her clothes and on the third day, discovered this stain which is not the measure of three stains, she need not worry about being a zavah.
If she did not inspect herself throughout bein hashamashot, she must suspect that she is a zavah. [The rationale is that] she did not inspect her garment and continued wearing it for three days during her \"days of zivah.\"",
+ "If she discovered a stain on her garment on one day and then experienced bleeding for two successive days or experienced bleeding for two [successive] days and discovered a stain on the third day, there is a doubt whether she is a [major] zavah.",
+ "When a woman discovers a stain and then discovers bleeding, she associates the stain with the bleeding for a 24-hour period. [This applies] whether she inspected herself at the time she discovered the stain and found herself to be pure or whether she did not inspect herself. If, however, she discovers one stain after another stain within 24 hours, she does not associate one stain with the other unless she carried out an inspection in the interim. If, however, she carried out an inspection and found herself to be pure between [the discovery of the first] stain and the second, they should not be associated with regard to the counting of zivut.",
+ "What is implied? She discovered a stain on Friday during the first hour of the day and then she discovered menstrual bleeding at any time until the first hour of the day on the Sabbath, she does not count [her impurity] from [the time she discovered] the stain. Instead, she associates the stain with the bleeding. [This applies] even if she did not inspect herself [after discovering the stain] and did not know whether she was impure or not. Thus if she discovers bleeding on Sunday and on Monday, she is a [major] zavah.
If, however, she discovered bleeding during the second hour on the Sabbath, she is considered as if she was impure for two days: Friday because of the stain she discovered and the Sabbath because of the bleeding, because there are more than 24 hours between them. Hence, if she discovers bleeding on Sunday, she must suspect that she is a zavah.",
+ "[The following rules apply if] she did not experience bleeding on the Sabbath, but instead discovered a stain during the first hour on the Sabbath. If she inspected herself on Friday and discovered that she was pure, she only counts from [the time of] the later stain [that was discovered] on the Sabbath, because they both were discovered within the same 24 hour period. If she did not inspect herself and did not know whether or not she was in fact pure between the two, she begins counting from Friday. Thus if she discovers bleeding on Sunday, she must suspect that she is a zavah.",
+ "If she discovered the second stain during the second hour of the Sabbath day, she is considered as impure for two days, for the two are not within the same 24 hour period. [This applies] whether she inspected herself or did not inspect herself. [In such a situation,] if she discovers bleeding on Sunday after 24 hours have passed, she must suspect that she is a zavah.
[The following laws apply if] she discovered a third stain during the first hour on Sunday. If she inspected herself and discovered that she was pure, they are not considered as coming in succession and she need not suspect that she is a zavah. If she does not carry out such an inspection, she must suspect that she is a zavah.",
+ "[The following rules apply] whenever there is a stain that causes a woman to be considered impure and there is a factor to which she could attribute the stain, saying: \"The stain came because of this factor.\" If [the stain] is found on a garment, she is pure. For our Sages did not say that one should rule stringently regarding these matters, only leniently. If the stain is found on her flesh, she is impure because of the doubt and she may not attribute the stain to the external factor. If she has a greater reason to attribute a stain on her flesh [t an outside factor] than one on her clothes, she may attribute even a stain on her flesh [to the factor] and she is pure despite the doubt.",
+ "What is implied? If she slaughtered an animal, a beast, or a fowl, became occupied with stains, sat next to people who were, or passed through a marketplace of butchers and blood was found on her outer garment, she is pure. She may attribute the stain to these factors for it is [likely] to have come from them.",
+ "[The following rules apply if] the stain was found on her flesh alone. If the stain is at her belt or lower, she is impure. If she turned upside down and flipped, even [a stain] from her belt and above renders her impure. For if the blood had come from slaughtering or from the market, it would also have been found on her garments. Since it was found on her flesh and not on her garments, she is impure.",
+ "If she has a wound, even if it is covered by a scab, if it could be opened and discharge blood and blood was found on her flesh, she may attribute the stain to her wound. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.",
+ "When a stain is found on both her garments and her flesh, she may attribute it with all [the external factors] possible. And she may explain that [the stain was caused by] a louse, for perhaps when she sat down, a louse was killed and this blood came from the louse.
Until when [does the above apply]? [When the stain is no larger than] a gris. If, however, the stain is larger than a gris, she may not attribute it to a louse. [This applies] even if there is a crushed louse on the stain. Since the stain is larger than a gris, she may not attribute it to a louse.",
+ "Similarly, she may attribute the stain to her son or her husband.If they were occupied with blood, their hands were soiled, or they had a wound, she may attribute the stain to them saying that they touched her without her knowing it and the blood came from them.",
+ "We do not consider the possibility that blood was [transferred] from one place to another to attribute a stain to it. What is implied? If a woman had a wound on her shoulder and a stain was discovered on her calf, we do not say: Maybe she touched the wound with her hand and then touched this other portion of her body. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. We attribute neither stains on her body, nor those on her garment [to such wounds].",
+ "[The following laws apply when] two women were occupied with [slaughtering] one fowl and it contained only an amount of blood equal in size to a sela. If a stain the size of a sela is found on both of them, they are both impure.
If a woman was occupied with blood that could produce a stain no larger than a gris and a stain the size of two grisim was found on her, she may attribute a gris to the blood with which she was occupied with and a gris to a louse. If, however, the stain was larger than two grisim, she is impure.",
+ "If she was occupied with red [blood], she may not attribute a black [stain] to it. If she was occupied with a fowl that had many different colors of blood and one of them was found on her, she may attribute [the stain] to [the fowl].
If she was wearing three outer garments, if there is an external factor to which she could attribute [a stain], she may attribute even [a stain] on the bottom garment to it. If she [knows of] no external factor to attribute it to, she may not attribute it to any factor, even if it is found only on the upper one.
What is implied? If she passed through a butcher's market place, even if the stain is found only on the bottom garment, she may attribute it to the blood of the butcher's. If she did not pass through a butcher's market or the like, even if the stain is only on the upper garment, she is impure. If she is in doubt whether or not she passed through [such a place] or whether or not she was occupied [with an object that could produce a stain], she may not attribute it [to an external factor].",
+ "When a city has pigs [that roam freely] or [such animals] enter it at all times, [a woman] need not be concerned with stains that are found on her outer garment.",
+ "When a woman lent her garment to a niddah, whether a Jewess or a gentile woman, and then put it on before checking it, she can attribute a stain she finds upon it to the niddah who wore it.
[Similarly,] if she lent [a garment] to a minor zavah on a day that she is impure, one who is experiencing [the post-birth] blood of purity, or to [a woman who was] a virgin and is experiencing [hymeneal] bleeding [which is] pure, she may attribute the stain to them.
[A different ruling applies,] however, if she lent [a garment] to a minor zavah on the day she is watching or a major zavah during her seven \"spotless\" days, put it on before checking it and then discovered a stain. [In such an instance,] the halachic status of both is impaired., the lender and the borrower. For perhaps this one caused the stain or perhaps the other did.
If she lent [the garment] to a woman who is watching herself because of the discovery of a stain, she may not attribute the stain to her. [The rationale is that] we do not attribute one stain to another.",
+ "[The following law applies when a woman] inspected her outer garment and then inspected herself and discovered that she was pure and afterwards, lent that garment to a colleague. If the borrower wore the garment and then a stain was discovered upon it when she returned it, the borrower is impure. She cannot attribute the stain to the owner, because the owner inspected it before she lent it to her.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] a tall woman wears an outer garment belonging to a short woman and a stain is discovered upon it. If [the place where the stain is located] reaches her genital area, she is impure. If it does not, she is pure, because [it is probable] that the stain came from the short woman.",
+ "When three woman wore one garment in succession and afterwards, a stain was found upon it, [they are all impure]. Similarly, if they slept in one bed together and a blood [stain] was found under one, they are all impure.
If one of them inspected herself immediately and found herself impure, the [other] two are pure.",
+ "[The following principle applies when, in the above situation, the women] all inspected themselves and discovered that they were pure. A woman who is not likely to discover bleeding may attribute the stain to one who is likely to discover bleeding. Thus the one who is unlikely [to discover bleeding] will be pure and the one who is likely will be impure.
What is implied? If one of the woman is pregnant and another is not pregnant, the pregnant woman is pure and the one who is not pregnant is impure. If one was nursing and one was not nursing, the one who is nursing is pure. If one is an elderly woman, and one is not elderly, the elder woman is pure. If one has not experienced menstrual bleeding and one has, the one who has no experience is pure. If they are all pregnant, all elderly, all nursing, or all have not experienced menstrual bleeding, they are all impure.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] three women ascended from the foot of a bed, and went to sleep. If a blood[stain] was discovered under the middle one, all three are impure. If [a stain] was discovered under the innermost one, she and the woman to her side are impure and the outermost one is pure. If [the stain] was under the outermost, she and the woman to her side are impure and the innermost is pure. If, however, they did not ascend from the foot of the bed, and thus they have no order, if a blood[stain] is discovered under any one of them, they are all impure.",
+ "When does the above apply? When the woman all inspected themselves and found themselves to be pure. Thus none of them could attribute [the stain] to the other as we explained. If, however, one of them inspected herself and discovered that she was pure, the woman who is pure can attribute the stain to the one who did not check, and that woman is impure.",
+ "Whenever a stain is found on a garment and there is no external source to attribute it to, it, [nevertheless,] does not cause a woman to be considered impure until it is proven to be blood. If a doubt arises for [the experts] whether [a stain] was blood or [simply] red dye, they [wash the stain] with [the following] seven cleaning agents in order. If it is washed away or its color becomes weaker, it is a bloodstain and [the woman] is considered impure. If the stain remains the same color, it is a dye and [she] is pure.",
+ "These are the seven cleaning agents in the order [in which they should be used]: the saliva of a person who has not eaten, beans that have been chewed, urine that has become sour, lye, natron, cumin powder, and bleach. [The garment] must be rubbed three times with each cleansing agent and it must be passed back and forth while being rubbed.
If a person did not use these cleansing agents in the above order or used them all at once, his deeds are of no consequence. If he used the last substances before the first ones, the fact that he used the last ones - i.e., the first ones in the proper order - is significant. He may then use [merely] the last ones - which he used first - so that he will have used all seven in order.",
+ "What is meant by \"the saliva of a person who has not eaten\"? [Saliva taken from a person who did not eat from the beginning of the night and slept the second half of the night and gave this saliva before he ate the next morning. [Moreover,] he must not have spoken excessively for the first three hours of the day. If, however, a person arose and repeated his studies before three hours of the day passed, his saliva is not placed in this category. For speaking nullifies the power of the saliva and causes it to be like water.
What is meant by beans that have been chewed? Beans that have been chewed thoroughly until a large quantity of saliva has been mixed with them. What is meant by urine that has soured? Urine that is three days old or more.",
+ "[The following laws apply to] any woman who becomes impure because of a stain. If she discovers the stain during her \"days of niddah,\" she must consider herself a niddah because of the doubt. She must remain [impure] for seven days and immerses herself on the eighth night. Afterwards, she is permitted to her husband.
If she discovered [the stain] during her \"days of zivah,\" because of the doubt, she must consider herself as a minor zavah or a major zavah as clarified in this chapter. She must remain [impure] for one day if she is a minor zavah or count seven \"spotless\" days if there is a doubt whether she is a major zavah.
All this stems from Rabbinic decree as we explained. Therefore if a man engages in relations with such a woman in conscious violation, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct and he is not obligated to bring a sacrifice."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Every woman who gives birth is impure like a niddah, even if she did not suffer uterine bleeding. [This applies whether] a woman gives birth to a living child or one which is still born, and even is she miscarries [and discharges a fetus]. If [the fetus is] male, she remains impure [for seven days as is required after giving birth to] a male. If it is female, she remains impure [for fourteen days as is required after giving birth to] a female.
[The above applies,] provided the form [of the fetus] is complete. And the form of a fetus will never become complete in less than forty days. [This applies] to both a male and a female.",
+ "If a woman miscarries within forty days, she is not impure because of birth. [This applies] even on the fortieth day.
If a woman miscarried on the forty-first day after relations, there is a doubt whether she is considered as having miscarried. [Hence,] she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female and those applying to a niddah. If the human form could be barely detected in the fetus without it being clear and obvious, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. This is called a developed embryo.",
+ "What is meant by a developed embryo? At the beginning of the formation of the human body, it is the size of a lentil. His two eyes are like the two eyes of a fly, [slightly] separate from each other. His two nostrils are like two eyes of a fly that are close to each other. Its mouth is a hairsbreadth open and its hands and feet are not distinct.
If its form becomes more defined than this, but it still cannot be distinguished as either male or female, we do not check it in water, but in oil. For the oil will burnish it. One should bring a wood chip with a smooth edge and use it to probe the genital area [of the fetus] from above downward. If there is an obstruction, it can be determined as male. If the genital area appears like a split barley corn, it is a female and need not be checked. A woman is not granted the leniency of \"the blood of purity\" for such underdeveloped embryos; the fetus must have hair on its head.",
+ "When a woman discharges a white mass and when cut open a bone is found within, she is impure, because of birth. If she discharges an embryo filled with water, blood, worms, or flesh, since it is not developed, the woman need not suspect [that she is impure] because of birth.",
+ "When a child is born through Cesarean section, the mother is not impure because of birth. She [need] not [observe] the days of impurity, [nor is she granted] days of purity. [This is derived from Leviticus 12:2]: \"When a woman will conceive and give birth to a male....\" [The laws of that passage apply] only when she gives birth from the place she conceives.
When a woman has difficulties in giving birth and [ultimately,] gives birth through Cesarean section, the blood from the birth throes which emerges from the womb is considered as the blood of zivah or the blood of niddah. The blood that emerges from the operation is itself impure. If no blood emerged from the womb, the woman is pure. Although the blood that emerges from the operation is impure, the woman does not become impure unless she suffers bleeding from her vagina.",
+ "When a fetus is cut up inside a woman's womb, whether it emerged according to the order of the limbs, e.g., first a foot emerged, then a calf, and then a thigh, or it emerged in an abnormal order, the woman is not considered impure until the majority of the body emerges. If its entire head comes out intact, it is as if the majority [of the body] emerged. If it was not cut up and it emerged in the ordinary manner, it is considered as having been born when its forehead emerges, even though it was cut up afterwards.",
+ "If a fetus sticks out its hand [from the womb] and then returns it, its mother is impure due to birth as a result of Rabbinic decree. The woman does not receive \"days of purity\" until the entire fetus - or [at least] the majority - emerges as we stated.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] a woman miscarries and discharges something resembling an animal, beast, or fowl. If its face resembles that of a human, it is considered as a birth even though the remainder of the body resembles an animal, beast, or fowl. If it is male, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male. If it is female, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a female. If it cannot be determined whether it is male or female, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female.
If its face does not resemble that of a human, it is not considered as a fetus and its mother is not impure due to birth. [This applies] even though the remainder of the body resembles that of a human, its hands and feet resemble those of a human, and it is male or female.",
+ "What is meant by the human form of a face? That the forehead, eyebrows, eyes, cheeks, and the contour of the jaw share the human form. Even if the mouth, the ears, and the nose resemble that of an animal or a beast, [the fetus] is considered as a birth.",
+ "When a woman miscarries and discharges something resembling a snake, the mother is impure due to birth. [The rationale is that] the form of its eye is round like that of a human. When a woman miscarries and discharges a human form that has wings of flesh, the mother is impure due to birth.
[The following rules apply when a fetus] is created with one eye and one thigh. If they are on the side, it is considered as half a human and the mother is impure due to birth. If they are in the center, the mother is pure, because this is another creature.",
+ "[The following laws apply when a fetus] is created with its windpipe closed, its body lacking [form] from the navel downward, but instead is a mass of flesh, its skull being merely a mass of flesh, its face was amorphous and its features could not be distinguished, it has two backs and two backbones, the contours of the head of the fetus she discharged could not be distinguished, or the contours of its hand could not be distinguished, the mother is not impure due to birth.
If, however, she miscarried and discharged a hand or a foot that was cut off, we operate under the assumption that it came from a complete fetus and it is included in the sum of the majority of its limbs.",
+ "There are times when from the remainder of the blood from which a fetus is formed will coagulate and form a mass that resembles the tongue of an ox. It is wound around a portion of the fetus and is called a sandal. A sandal will never be formed without a fetus. If a similar mass is formed without a fetus, it is not called a sandal. Most fetuses will not have a sandal with them.
There are times when a pregnant woman will receive a blow on her stomach and the fetus will be damaged and will become like this sandal. There are time when the [resulting sandal] will retain its facial features and there are times when the fetus will dry up and change its appearance and blood from elsewhere will coagulate upon it to the extent that its facial features cannot be recognized.
Accordingly, when a woman miscarries and discharges a male fetus together with a sandal, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. For perhaps this sandal was a female fetus. [The Sages] ruled stringency and considered her impure due to a [female] fetus even though it did not possess any facial features. [The rationale is that] she is impure due to birth regardless because of the fetus [discharged] with it.",
+ "The thick membrane that is like a goatskin in which the fetus is formed and which surrounds the fetus and the sandal - if there is a sandal with it - is called the placenta. When the time comes for the fetus to emerge, it tears it and emerges. At the beginning of its creation, it resembles a thread of the woof that is hollow like a trumpet and thick like the craw of a chicken. A placenta must be at least a handbreadth in size.",
+ "When [a woman] miscarries and discharges a placenta, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. [The intent is] not that a placenta is a fetus, but there will not be a placenta without a fetus.
If she discharged a fetus and then discharged a placenta, we show concern about the placenta and it is considered as a fetus. We do not say: \"This is the placenta of the fetus that miscarried.\" For we associate the discharge of the placenta only with a viable birth.
Accordingly, if the woman gave birth to a viable child and then discharged a placenta - even after 23 days - we assume that [the placenta] came as a result of the child. We do not suspect that there was a second fetus. [Instead, we assume] that the child tore through the placenta and emerged.",
+ "[When a woman] discharges a placenta and afterwards bears a viable child, we suspect that the placenta came as the result of another fetus. We do not associate it with the child that was born afterwards, for it is not usual for the placenta to emerge before the fetus.
If a portion of the placenta emerges on Sunday and a portion emerges on Monday, we count [her days of impurity] from the first day and we count her days of purity only from the second day as a stringency.",
+ "If [a woman] miscarries and discharges something resembling an animal, beast, or fowl and a placenta is connected to it, we do not suspect that there is [another] fetus. If they are not connected to [the placenta], we treat it with severity as if there were two fetuses. For we say that maybe the fetus that was carried in this placenta became effaced, and maybe the placenta of this fetus that appears like an animal or beast became effaced.",
+ "In all instances when we are concerned that [the emergence of] a placenta [indicates that a fetus emerged previously], a woman is not given days of purity.
[The following laws apply to] every [woman] who miscarries and discharges something that does not resemble a human fetus or a fetus that is within 40 days of conception whose form has thus not been completed. If [the emergence of] the fetus was accompanied by bleeding, the woman is either a niddah or a zavah. If it emerged dry, without any bleeding, she is pure.",
+ "When a woman gives birth to twins - a boy and a girl - she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a female. If she gives birth to a tumtum or an androgynus, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. If she gives birth to twins, one that is male and one that is a tumtum or an androgynus, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. If one [of the twins] is female and one is a tumtum or an androgynus, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a female. For the gender of a tumtum and an androgynus is a matter of doubt: Maybe they are male or maybe female.",
+ "When a woman is known to be pregnant miscarries and it is not known what she miscarried, e.g., she passed a river and miscarried there, miscarried into a pit, or miscarried and a beast dragged away the fetus, we assume that she discharged a human fetus. Hence, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female. If, however, she was not known to be pregnant, miscarried, and did not know what she miscarried, she is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female and those applying to a niddah.",
+ "What are the laws that apply wherever we said: \"She is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female\"? She is forbidden to her husband for fourteen days like a woman who gives birth to a female. The status of the first seven is definite; that of the latter seven is doubtful.
We do not grant her any \"days of purity\" beyond the fortieth day [from the birth] as is the law with regard to one who gives birth to a male. If she discovers menstrual bleeding between the fortieth and eightieth days from birth, it is not \"pure blood.\" Instead, because of the doubt, we consider it as niddah bleeding, or zivah bleeding if it comes in the \"days of zivah,\" as we explained.
Similarly, if she discovers [uterine bleeding] on the eighty-first day alone, she is considered as a niddah because of the doubt. She must observe the seven days of niddah. [The rationale is that] perhaps she gave birth to a female and her \"days of niddah\" do not begin until after the conclusion [of the days of purity], as we explained.",
+ "What are the laws that apply wherever we said: \"She is governed by the laws that apply to the birth of a male and a female and those applying to a niddah\"? She is forbidden to her husband for fourteen days like a woman who gives birth to a female. If she discovers blood on the eighty-first day, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah.
Similarly, if she discovered uterine bleeding on the seventy-fourth day and the eighty-first day, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah. Similarly, if she discovered [uterine bleeding] on the forty-first day, there is a doubt whether she is a niddah even though she discovered bleeding on the thirty-fourth day. She is forbidden to her husband until the forty-eighth day, as is the law for a woman who gives birth to a male.
We do not grant her any \"pure days\" at all, like a niddah. [The following rules apply with regard to] any bleeding that she discovers from the day on which she miscarried until the eightieth day beginning from seven days after she miscarried. If it is discovered in her \"days of niddah, she is a niddah, because of the doubt. And if it is discovered in her \"days of zivah,\" she is a zavah, because of the doubt. For throughout the days after birth, [the previous patterns concerning] the expected times of menstruation do not apply.
Similarly, if she discovers uterine bleeding on the eighty-first day, her situation is still problematic and she must consider herself a niddah because of the doubt as explained [above]. [This applies] even if she discovers bleeding for only one day. When she establishes a pattern of menstruation after eighty days, her difficulties will cease and she will be either definitely a niddah or definitely a zavah. Similarly, from the time she miscarried for seven days, she will be definitely impure [like] a niddah if she miscarried in the midst of her days of niddah, as we explained."
+ ],
+ [
+ "All of what was said with regard to [the laws of] niddah, zivah, and childbirth applies with regard to Scriptural Law. [The Jews] would follow these laws when the Supreme Sanhedrin held sessions and it included great sages who were familiar with [the types of] blood. If a doubt arose [for the lesser judges] with regard to the discovery of blood or the days of niddah and zivah, they could ascend to the Supreme Sanhedrin and ask them. As the Torah promised concerning them [Deuteronomy 17:8]: \"If a matter of judgment is unknown to you concerning one type of blood or another, or one judgment and anotherו [you shall ascend to the place that God shall choose].\"
[\"Concerning one type of blood or another\"] means \"between the blood of niddah and the blood of zivah. In that era, Jewish women would be careful concerning this matter and would pay attention to their monthly patterns and would always count the \"days of niddah\" and the \"days of zivah.\"",
+ "It is very difficult to keep track of the counting of the dates. Many times doubts will arise. For even if a woman discovered bleeding on the day she was born, she must begin counting the \"days of niddah\" and the \"days of zivah,\" as we explained. Therefore a girl cannot become impure as a zavah until she is ten days old. For if she discovered bleeding on the day that she was born, she would be a niddah for seven days. [Then to be a zavah, she would have to discover bleeding] on the three days directly following the \"days of niddah.\" Thus [she would be] ten days [old].
Thus we learned that she begins counting the \"days of niddah\" and the \"days of zivah\" from the first time she discovers uterine bleeding throughout her entire life. [This applies] even if [the first time] she discovers bleeding is when she is a minor.",
+ "During the era of the Sages of the Gemara, many doubts arose with regard to the appearance of blood and the reckoning of the pattern of menstruation. For it was not within the potential of all women to calculate the \"days of niddah\" and the \"days of zivah.\" Therefore our Sages ruled stringently concerning this matter and decreed that a woman should consider all her days as \"days of zivah\" and consider any bleeding that she discovers as zivah bleeding because of the doubt.",
+ "In addition, Jewish women accepted a further stringency upon themselves. They accepted the custom that wherever Jews live, whenever a Jewish woman discovers [uterine] bleeding, even if she does not discover more than a drop the size of a mustard seed and the bleeding ceases immediately, she must count seven \"spotless\" days. [This stringency applies] even if she discovered the bleeding during her \"days of niddah.\"
Whether the bleeding continued for one day, two days, an entire seven days, or longer, when the bleeding ceases, she counts seven \"spotless\" days as is required of a major zavah and immerses on the night of the eighth day despite the fact that there is a doubt whether she is a zavah. Or she may immerse during the day on the eighth day in a pressing situation, as explained. Afterwards, she is permitted to her husband.",
+ "Similarly, every women who gives birth in the present age is considered as one who gives birth while a zavah and she must count seven \"spotless\" days, as we explained.
It is the commonly accepted custom in Babylon, in \"the cherished land,\" Spain, and the West, that if a woman discovers bleeding in the days after childbirth, she must count seven \"spotless\" days after the bleeding stopped. [This applies] even if she first counted seven \"spotless\" days and immersed [after giving birth].
We do not grant her any pure days at all. Instead, whenever a woman discovers bleeding whether it is bleeding associated with childbirth or \"pure blood,\" it is all impure. She must count seven \"spotless\" days after the bleeding ceases.",
+ "This law was instituted in the era of the Geonim. They decreed that there be no concept of \"pure\" blood. For the stringency that women accepted upon themselves in the era of the Sages of the Talmud applies only to a woman who discovers bleeding that would render them impure. [In this instance, they accepted the custom of] waiting seven days. Blood which she discovers during her \"days of purity\" after counting [seven \"spotless\" days], by contrast, is not a matter of concern [according to Scriptural Law]. For the days of purity are not subject [to concern] with regard to niddah or zivah as we explained.",
+ "We have heard that in France, even today, relations are allowed [despite] \"pure\" bleeding as was the law in the Talmudic era after [the woman] counts [seven \"spotless\" days] and immerses herself because of the impurity resulting from giving birth in the zivah state. This matter is dependent on local custom.",
+ "Similarly, [stringencies were adopted] with regard to the laws of hymeneal bleeding in the present age. Even if a minor is below the age when she could be expected to menstruate and never discovered uterine bleeding, [her husband] must separate after engaging in the relations which are a mitzvah.
Whenever she discovers hymeneal bleeding, she is impure. When the bleeding ceases, she must count seven \"spotless\" days [before immersing herself].",
+ "Moreover, whenever a girl is asked to marry and consents, she must count seven \"spotless\" days after she consents to marry. Afterwards, [she immerses and] becomes permitted to her husband. [The rationale is that] she might have desired a man and released a drop [of blood] without being aware of it. Whether she is a mature woman or a minor, she must wait seven \"spotless\" days after she consents to marry. Afterwards, she immerses and may engage in relations.",
+ "All of these matters are additional stringencies that have been practiced by Jewish women from the era of the Sages of the Talmud [onward]. One should never deviate from it. Therefore every women who consents when asked to marry should not marry until she counts [these days] and immerses herself. If she marries a Torah scholar, she may marry immediately and then count after marriage and immerse. [The rationale is that] a Torah scholar will know that she is forbidden and observe [the restriction]. He will not approach her until she immerses.",
+ "The laws applying to [the discovery of] stains in the present era [follow the principles] we explained. There is no innovation in this regard, nor are there any [new] customs. Instead, any stain which we ruled was pure, is considered pure. And when [a woman discovers] any of the stains which we ruled were impure - [even] if the stain was not of the size that would generate concern for zivut - she must count seven [\"spotless\"] days, after the day of the discovery of the stain. For the discovery of a stain is not identical with the discovery of bleeding.",
+ "All the statements we made concerning a woman who miscarried [and discharged a creature that does not resemble a human fetus] and [hence] is pure also apply in the present age.
Similarly, when a woman discovers a white or green blood-like secretion or if she discharges a red mass of flesh that is not accompanied by bleeding, she is pure even in the present age. For the stringency involves only one who discovers impure bleeding and the above are not considered as impure bleeding.",
+ "Similarly, if she had a wound from which blood was flowing or blood was released with her urine, she is pure. Innovations [in practice] were made only with regard to all women who discover impure bleeding as explained [above] and also that all different shades of blood are considered impure.",
+ "In certain places, the practice is that a woman must consider herself a niddah for seven days even though her bleeding lasted only one day. [Then] after these seven, she must count seven \"spotless\" days. This is not a [proper] custom. Instead, it is an error on the part of the one who ruled in this manner and is not worthy of being given any consideration. Instead, [the law is that if a woman experiences] one day of menstrual bleeding, she should count seven \"spotless\" days afterwards and immerse on the night [following] the eighth day, which is the second day after her [\"days of] niddah.\" She is [then] permitted to her husband.",
+ "Similarly, in certain places, the practice is - and support for this is found in the responsa of some of the Geonim - for a woman who gives birth to a male not to engage in relations until the conclusion of forty days and for one who gives birth to a female [to refrain] until after eighty days even though they discovered bleeding only during the [first] seven days. This is not a [proper] custom. Instead, these responsa are in error and indeed [the observance of this practice] in these places is of a heretical nature. They learned this interpretation from the Sadducees. It is a mitzvah to compel [these people] to remove [this improper custom] from their hearts and to return them to [the observance of] the words of the Sages who require only the counting of seven \"spotless\" days as explained.",
+ "A woman does not ascend from her state of ritual impurity and cease being considered as an ervah until she immerses herself in a mikveh that is halachicly acceptable while there are no substances intervening between her flesh and the water. In Hilchot Mikveot, we will explain what defines a mikveh as acceptable and what disqualifies it, the manner in which one should immerse, and the laws concerning intervening substances.
If, by contrast, she washes in a bath - even if all the water in the world passes over her - her state is the same after washing as before washing [and a man who engages in relations with her is liable] for kereit. For there is no way of ascending from a state of ritual impurity to one of purity except through immersing in the waters of a mikveh, a spring, or a sea which is like a spring, as will be explained in Hilchot Mikveot.",
+ "In the present age, although the seven \"spotless\" days [are observed only because of] doubt, if a woman immerses herself during them, it is as if she did not immerse herself. If she immerses herself on the seventh day, the immersion is valid even though it is forbidden to do so at the outset, lest one engage in relations on the seventh day after the immersion. [The rationale is that] she immersed in the appropriate time even were she to have definitely been a zavah.",
+ "It is forbidden to a person to embrace his wife during these seven \"spotless\" days. [This applies] even if she is clothed and he is clothed. He should not draw close to her, nor touch her, not even with his pinky. He may not eat together with her from the same plate. The general principle is he must conduct himself with her during the days she is counting as he does in her \"days of niddah.\" For [relations with her] are still punishable by kereit until she immerses herself, as we explained.",
+ "A niddah may perform any task which a wife would perform for her husband except washing his face, hands, and feet, pouring him a drink, and spreading out his bed in his presence. [These were forbidden as] decrees, lest they come to sin.
For this reason, she should not eat with him from the same plate, nor should he touch her flesh, lest this lead to sin. Similarly, she should not perform these three tasks for him during her seven \"spotless\" days. It is permitted for a woman to adorn herself during her \"days of niddah,\" so that she does not become unattractive to her husband."
+ ],
+ [
+ "When a Jew engages in relations with a woman from other nations, [taking her] as his spouse or a Jewess engages in relations with a non-Jew as his spouse, they are punished by lashes, according to Scriptural Law. As [Deuteronomy 7:3] states: \"You shall not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughter to his son, and do not take his daughter for your son.\"
This prohibition applies equally to [individuals from] the seven [Canaanite] nations and all other gentiles. This was explicitly stated in Ezra [Nechemiah 10:31]: \"That we will not give our daughters to the gentiles in the land and that we will not take their daughters for our sons.\"",
+ "The Scriptural prohibition applies only to marital relations. When, by contrast, one engages in relations with a gentile woman with a licentious intent, he is given \"stripes for rebellious conduct\" according to Rabbinic Law. [This is a] decree, lest this lead to marriage.
If [a Jew] designates [a gentile woman] for licentious relations, he is liable for relations with a niddah, a maid-servant, a gentile woman, and a licentious woman. If he did not designate her for himself, but instead, [engage in relations with her] spontaneously, he is only liable for relations with a gentile woman. All of these liabilities are Rabbinic in origin.",
+ "When does the above apply? When the man who engaged in relations was an Israelite. If, however, a priest engages in relations with a gentile woman, he is liable for lashes according to Scriptural Law, because of the prohibition against relations with a zonah. [This prohibition applies] both to a non-Jewish zonah and a Jewish one. He receives lashes for relations alone, for he cannot consecrate her.",
+ "Whenever a man has relations with a gentile woman in public, i.e., the relations are carried out in the presence of ten or more Jews, if a zealous person strikes him and kills him, he is considered praiseworthy and ardent. [This applies whether the relations were] in the context of marriage or licentious in nature. This matter is a halachah conveyed to Moshe at Sinai. Support for this can be derived from Pinchas' slaying of Zimri.",
+ "The zealous person can strike [the fornicators] only at the time of relations, as was the case with regard to Zimri, as [Numbers 25:8] states: \"[He pierced] the woman into her stomach.\" If, however, [the transgressor] withdraws, he should not be slain. Indeed, if [the zealous person] slays him, he may be executed [as a murderer].
If the zealous person comes to ask permission from the court to slay him, they do not instruct him [to], even if this takes place at the time [of relations]. Not only that, if the zealous person comes to kill the transgressor and he withdraws and kills the zealous person in order to save himself, the transgressor is not executed for killing him.
When a Jew has relations with the daughter of a resident alien, the zealot may not strike him. [The transgressor] should, however, be given stripes for rebellious conduct.",
+ "If the zealot did not strike him, nor did he receive stripes from the court, his punishment is explicitly stated in the words of the prophetic tradition. He is liable for karet, as [Malachi 2:11-12] states: \"Judah desecrated that which is sacred to God, [by] loving and engaging in relations with the daughter of a foreign god. May God cut off from a man who does this any progeny and descendant.\" [Implied is] that if he is an Israelite, he will not have progeny among the wise who will raise issues, nor a descendant among the scholars who will respond. If he is a priest, he will not have [a descendant] who \"presents an offering to the Lord of Hosts.\" Thus you have learned that a person who shares intimacy with a gentile woman is considered as if he married a false deity, as the verse states: \"engaging in relations with the daughter of a foreign god.\" And he is called one who \"desecrated that which is sacred to God.\"",
+ "Although this transgression is not punishable by execution by the court, it should not be regarded lightly, for it leads to a detriment that has no parallel among all the other forbidden sexual relations. For a child conceived from any other forbidden sexual union, is [the father's] son with regard to all matters and is considered a member of the Jewish people, even if he is a mamzer. A son conceived by a gentile woman, by contrast, is not considered his son. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 7:4:] \"For he shall sway your son away from following Me.\" She turns him away from being one of those who follow God.",
+ "This matter causes one to cling to the gentile nations from whom the Holy One, blessed be He, has separated us, and to turn away from following God and to betray Him.",
+ "When a gentile engages in relations with a Jewish woman, if she is married, he should be executed. If she is single, he is not executed.",
+ "If, by contrast, a Jewish male enters into relations with a gentile woman, when he does so intentionally, she should be executed. She is executed because she caused a Jew to be involved in an unseemly transgression, as [is the law with regard to] an animal. [This applies regardless of] whether the gentile women was a minor of three years of age, or an adult, whether she was single or married. And it applies even if [the Jew] was a minor of nine years old, [she is executed].
This [punishment] is explicitly mentioned in the Torah, as [Numbers 31:16-17] states: \"Behold they were [involved] with the children of Israel according to the advice of Balaamו. Execute any woman fit to know a man through lying with a male.\"",
+ "Servants that have been immersed for the sake of servitude and accepted the mitzvot in which servants are obligated, have departed from the category of gentiles, but have yet to enter the category of Jews. For this reason, a maidservant is forbidden to a free Jew. [This applies to] both one's own maid-servant and a maid-servant belonging to a colleague.
When a person enters into relations with a maid-servant, he should be given stripes for rebellious conduct as prescribed by the Rabbis. [It is obvious that a Scriptural prohibition is not involved,] for it is explicitly stated in the Torah that a master may give a Hebrew servant a Canaanite maid-servant [for the sake of relations] and that she is permitted to him, as [Exodus 21:4] states: \"If his master will give him a wife.\"",
+ "The Sages did not issue a decree with regard to this matter, nor did the Torah require that lashes be given for [relations with] a maid-servant unless she was designated for a [Jewish] man, as we explained.",
+ "This transgression should not be light in one's eyes, because it does not involve lashes according to Scriptural Law. For this [act] also causes the son to be turned away from following God. For a son born of a maid-servant is a servant and is not a [full] member of Israel. Thus he causes [Israel's] holy seed to be profaned and produce servants. Behold Onkelos the translator included relations with a servant and a maid-servant in [the prohibitions, Deuteronomy 23:18]: \"There shall not be a promiscuous man and there shall not be a promiscuous woman.\"",
+ "When a person engages in relations with a maid-servant, even in public, a zealous person may not strike him, not even at the time of the transgression. Similarly, if one marries a maid-servant, he does not receive lashes according to Scriptural Law. For from the time she immersed and accepted the mitzvot, she departed from the category of gentiles.",
+ "If [the identity of] a Jewish child becomes confused with that of the child of a maid-servant, the status of both [children] is doubtful. Each of them is considered as possibly a servant. [Hence] we compel the owner of the maid-servant to free them both. If [the owner died and] the son [whose identity was confused] is the [only] son of the servant's master, when they come of age, they should free each other. Then they will be permitted to marry within the Jewish people.",
+ "If the children whose identities were confused were female, they are both considered as possibly a maid-servant. If a person enters into relations with either of them, the offspring is considered as a servant because of the doubt.
Similarly, if the identity of a gentile child becomes confused with that of a Jewish child, we immerse both of them as converts and they are both considered as possibly a convert.",
+ "Whenever any of the gentiles convert and accept all of the mitzvot in the Torah or a servant is freed, they are considered as Jews with regard to all matters, as [Numbers 15:15] states: \"For the community: there will be one law [for you and the convert].\" A convert may marry within the Jewish community immediately, i.e., a male convert or freed servant may marry a native-born Jewess and an Israelite may marry a female convert or a freed maid-servant.
There are four nations from which [converts] are exceptions: Ammon, Moab, Egypt, and Edom. When a person from one of these nations converts, he is like an Israelite with regard to all matters with the exception of marriage within the Jewish community.",
+ "What are the laws that apply to them [in that context]? It is forbidden to marry an Ammonite and a Moabite forever. This applies to the males and not the females, as [Deuteronomy 23:4] states: \"An Ammonite and a Moabite shall not enter the congregation of God.\" It is a halachah transmitted to Moses at Sinai that it is a male Ammonite and a male Moabite who are forbidden to marry a native-born Israelite forever, [including] even their son's grandson forever. An Ammonite woman and a Moabite woman are, by contrast, permitted immediately as are [converts] from other nations.",
+ "An Egyptian and an Edomite convert - both a male and a female - are forbidden to marry among the Jewish people for the first and second generations. The third generation, however, is permitted, as [ibid.:9] states: \"Children who are born to them [may enter the congregation of God in the third generation].\"",
+ "When a female Egyptian converts while she is pregnant, her son is considered a second [generation Egyptian convert]. When a second [generation] Egyptian male [convert] marries a first [generation] Egyptian female [convert] or a first [generation] Egyptian male [convert] marries a second [generation] Egyptian female [convert], the child is considered a second generation [convert]. [This is derived from the phrase]: \"Children who are born to them.\" The verse made the matter dependent on birth.",
+ "When a male Ammonite convert marries a female Egyptian, the offspring are considered as Ammonites. When a male Egyptian convert marries a female Ammonite, the offspring are considered as Egyptians. This is the general principle: Among gentiles, the identity [of the offspring] is determined by the male. Once they convert, [the offspring] is given the identity that is of the lowest status.",
+ "A person from the seven [Canaanite] nations who converts is not forbidden to marry among the Jewish people according to Scriptural Law. It is known that of them, only the Gibeonites converted. Joshua decreed that they be forbidden to marry among the Jewish people, both males and females.
He instituted this prohibition only during the time a Sanctuary is standing, as [Joshua 9:23] states: \"[You shall be] wood-choppers and water-drawers for the house of my God.\" He made their ban dependent on the Sanctuary.",
+ "They are called Netinim, \"the designated ones,\" for they were designated for the service in the Sanctuary. David came and decreed that they should never be allowed to marry among the Jewish people, even at a time when the Sanctuary is no longer standing. This is explicitly stated in Ezra [8:20]: \"From the Netinim whom David and the officers designated for the service of the Levites.\" From this, we see that he did not make the matter dependent on the Sanctuary.",
+ "Why did David and his court pass this decree against them? Because he saw that they were characterized by brazenness and cruelty. For they asked to kill and hang the seven sons of Saul, God's chosen one, and they did not have mercy upon them.",
+ "When Sannecherib, King of Assyria, arose, he confused the identity of all the nations, mixing them together, and exiling them from their place. The Egyptians that live in the land of Egypt at present are of other nationalities. This also applies with regard to the Edomites in the field of Edom.
Since these four forbidden nations became intermingled with all the nations of the world [with] whom it is permitted [to marry once they convert], all [converts] are permitted. For when anyone of them separates himself [from them by] converting, we operate under the presumption that he became separate from the majority. Therefore in the present age, in all places, whenever a convert converts, whether he be an Edomite, an Egyptian, an Ammonite, a Moabite, a Kushite, or from any of the other nations, whether male or female, he or she is permitted to marry among the Jewish people immediately."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Israel entered the covenant [with God] with three acts: circumcision, immersion, and offering a sacrifice.",
+ "Circumcision took place in Egypt, [before the Paschal sacrifice, of which Exodus 12:48] says: \"No uncircumcised person shall partake of it.\" Moses our teacher circumcised [the people]. For with the exception of the tribe of Levi, the entire [people] neglected the covenant of circumcision in Egypt. Regarding this, [Deuteronomy 33:9 praises the Levites,] saying: \"They upheld Your covenant.\"",
+ "Immersion was performed in the desert before the Giving of the Torah, as [Exodus 19:10] states: \"Sanctify them today and tomorrow, and have them wash their garments.\" Sacrifices [were also offered then], as [ibid. 24:5] states: \"And he sent out the youth of the children of Israel and they brought burnt offerings.\" They offered them as agents of the entire Jewish people.",
+ "Similarly, for [all] future generations, when a gentile desires to enter into the covenant, take shelter under the wings of the Divine presence, and accept the yoke of the Torah, he must undergo circumcision, immersion, and the offering of a sacrifice. A woman [who converts] must undergo immersion and bring a sacrifice, as [Numbers 15:15] states: \"As it is for you, so shall it be for the convert.\" Just as you [entered the covenant] with circumcision, immersion, and the offering of a sacrifice; so, too, for future generations, a convert must undergo circumcision, immersion, and must bring a sacrifice.",
+ "What is the sacrifice that a convert [is required to bring]? A burnt offering of an animal or two turtle-doves or two fledging doves. Both of [the doves] must be brought as burnt offerings. In the present age, when there are no sacrifices, [a convert] must undergo circumcision and immersion. When the Temple is rebuilt, he must bring a sacrifice.",
+ "When a convert is circumcised, but does not immerse himself, or immerses himself, but was not circumcised, he is not considered a convert until he perform both of these activities. He must immerse himself in the presence of three men. Since a court is required, he may not immerse on the Sabbath or on festivals, or during the night. If, however, they had him immerse [at night], he is a convert.",
+ "We immerse a minor who seeks to convert based upon the guidance of the court. For it is an advantage for a person [to convert]. When a pregnant woman converts and immerses herself, her child does not require immersion.
When [a convert] immerses himself alone and converts alone - or even if he does this in the presence of two persons - his conversion is not valid. If he comes and says: \"I converted in the court of so-and-so and they had me immerse,\" his word is not accepted with regard to license to marry among the Jewish people unless he brings witnesses [who testify to the truth of his statements].",
+ "[The following rules apply if] he was married to a native-born Jewess or a convert and he already fathered children. If he says: \"I converted alone,\" his word is accepted with regard to the disqualification of his self, but not with regard to the disqualification of his children. He must immerse himself again in the presence of a court.",
+ "[The following laws apply with regard to] a female convert who we see conduct herself according to the ways of Israel at all times, for example, she immerses herself after being a niddah, she separates terumah from dough, or the like, and to a male convert who follows the paths of Israel, for example, he immerses himself after a seminal emission, and performs all the mitzvot. These are considered as righteous converts even though there are no witnesses to testify before whom they converted. Nevertheless, if they come to marry among the Jewish people, we do not allow them unless they bring witnesses or they immerse themselves in our presence. The rationale is that their identity was originally established as gentiles.",
+ "If, however, a person comes and says that he was a gentile, but that he was converted by a court, his word is accepted. [The rationale is that] the mouth that forbade him was the same that permitted him.
When does the above apply? In Eretz Yisrael in the Talmudic era. For [at that time,] all the people there could be assumed to be Jewish. In the Diaspora, however, he must bring proof of his conversion. [Only] afterwards may he marry a Jewess. I say that this is an additional stringency adopted to protect the purity of our lineage.",
+ "Just as we circumcise and immerse converts; so, too, we circumcise and immerse servants which are acquired from the gentiles for the sake of servitude.
When a person acquires a servant from the gentiles and the gentile takes the initiative and immerses with the intent of becoming a free man, he acquires his own person, provided he says while immersing: \"Behold I am immersing before you for the sake of conversion.\" If he immerses himself in the presence of his master, he does not have to make an explicit statement. Instead, since he immersed himself, he attains his freedom.
For this reason, [when having the servant immerse,] the master must push him into the water until he arises at which time he is in his servitude. He must tell him that he is having him immerse for the sake of servitude in the presence of the judges. A servant must also immerse only in the presence of three judges and during the day as a convert, for it is a partial conversion.",
+ "When a servant is freed, he must immerse himself a second time in the presence of three men during the day, for through this act, his conversion is completed and [his status] becomes that of a Jew. It is not necessary for him to accept the mitzvot and [for the judges] to inform him of the fundamentals of the faith, for they already informed him when he immersed himself for the sake of servitude.",
+ "Converts, servants, and freed servants must be immersed in a mikveh that is acceptable for a niddah to immerse in. All of the substances that [disqualify her immersion because] they intervene [between the water and her flesh] disqualify the immersions, of converts, servants, and freed servants.",
+ "One should not think that Samson who saved the Jewish people, and Solomon King of Israel, who is called \"the friend of God,\" married gentile woman who did not convert. Instead, the matter can be explained as follows: The proper way of performing the mitzvah is when a male or a female prospective convert comes, we inspect his motives for conversion. Perhaps he is coming for the sake of financial gain, in order to receive a position of authority, or he desires to enter our faith because of fear. For a man, we check whether he focused his attention on a Jewish woman. For a woman, we check whether she focused her attention on a Jewish youth.
If we find no ulterior motive, we inform them of the heaviness of the yoke of the Torah and the difficulty the common people have in observing it so that they will abandon [their desire]. If they accept [this introduction] and do not abandon their resolve and thus we see that they are motivated by love, we accept them, as [indicated by Ruth 1:18]: \"And she saw that she was exerting herself to continue with her and she ceased speaking with her.\"",
+ "For this reason, the court did not accept converts throughout the reign of David and Solomon. In David's time, [they feared] that they sought to convert because of fear and in Solomon's time, [they feared] that they were motivated by the sovereignty, prosperity, and eminence which Israel enjoyed. [They refrained from accepting such converts, because] a gentile who seeks to convert because of the vanities of this [material] world is not a righteous convert.
Nevertheless, there were many people who converted in the presence of ordinary people during the era of David and Solomon. The Supreme Sanhedrin would view them with skepticism. Since they immersed themselves, they would not reject them, but they would not draw them close until they saw what the outcome would be.",
+ "Solomon converted women and married them and similarly, Samson converted [women] and married [them]. It is well known that they converted only because of an ulterior motive and that their conversion was not under the guidance of the court. Hence the Tanach considered it as if they were gentiles and remained forbidden. Moreover, their conduct ultimately revealed their initial intent. For they would worship their false deities and build platforms for them. Therefore the Scriptures considered it as if [Solomon] built them, as [I Kings 11:7] states: \"And then, Solomon built a platform.\"",
+ "When a court did not check a [potential] converts background and did not inform him of the mitzvot and the punishment for [the failure to observe] the mitzvot and he circumcised himself and immersed in the presence of three ordinary people, he is a convert. Even if it is discovered that he converted for an ulterior motive, since he circumcised himself and converted, he has departed from the category of gentiles and we view him with skepticism until his righteousness is revealed.
Even if afterwards, [the convert] worships false deities, he is like an apostate Jew. [If he] consecrates [a woman,] the consecration is valid, and it is a mitzvah to return his lost object. For since he immersed himself he became a Jew. For this reason, Samson and Solomon maintained their wives even though their inner feelings were revealed.",
+ "For this reason, our Sages said: \"Converts are as difficult for the Jewish people to bear as a leprous blemish.\" For most converts convert for an ulterior motive and [later] cause Jews to stray. It is difficult to separate from them once they have converted. Look at what happened in the desert at the worship of the Golden Calf and Kivrot HaTa'avah. Similarly, most of [the complaints in the instances when] our people tried God were instigated by the mixed multitude."
+ ],
+ [
+ "What is the procedure when accepting a righteous convert? When one of the gentiles comes to convert, we inspect his background. If an ulterior motive for conversion is not found, we ask him: \"Why did you choose to convert? Don't you know that in the present era, the Jews are afflicted, crushed, subjugated, strained, and suffering comes upon them?\" If he answers: \"I know. Would it be that I be able to be part of them,\" we accept him immediately.",
+ "We inform him of the fundamentals of the faith, i.e., the unity of God and the prohibition against the worship of false deities. We elaborate on this matter. We inform him about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones. We do not elaborate on this matter. We inform him of the transgression of [not leaving] leket, shichachah, pe'ah, and the second tithe. And we inform him of the punishment given for [violating] the mitzvot.
What is implied? We tell him: \"Before you came to our faith, if you partook of fat, you were not liable for your soul to be cut off. If you desecrated the Sabbath, you were not liable to be stoned to death. Now, after you convert, if you partake of fat, you are liable for your soul to be cut off. If you desecrate the Sabbath, you are liable to be stoned to death.\"
We do not teach him all the particulars lest this cause him concern and turn him away from a good path to a bad path. For at the outset, we draw a person forth with soft and appealing words, as [Hoshea 11:4] states: \"With cords of man, I drew them forth,\" and then continues: \"with bonds of love.\"",
+ "Just as he is informed of the punishment [for disobeying] the commandments; so, too, he is informed about the reward for [their observance]. We tell him that by observing these mitzvot, he will merit the life of the World to Come. For there is no completely righteous man other than a master of wisdom who observes these mitzvot and knows them.",
+ "We tell him: \"Know that the World to Come is hidden away only for the righteous; they are the Jews. The fact that you see Israel suffering difficulty in this world [reflects] the good that is hidden away for them. For they cannot receive an abundance of good in this world as the gentiles do. For they hearts may become uplifted and they will err and lose the reward of the World to Come, as [Deuteronomy 32:15] states: \"Jeshuron became fat and rebelled.\"",
+ "The Holy One, blessed be He, does not bring upon them an abundance of retribution solely so that they will not perish. For all the other nations will perish and they will prevail. We elaborate on this concept to make them feel cherished. If [the prospective convert] retracts and does not want to accept [the mitzvot], he goes on his way. If he accepts [their observance], we do not have him wait, but instead circumcise him immediately. If he was circumcised, we draw the blood of circumcision from him. We wait until he heals entirely and then immerse him.",
+ "Three [judges] stand over him and inform him about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones a second time while he stands in the water. If the convert was female, women position her in the water until her neck while the judges are outside. They inform her about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones while she is sitting in the water. Then she immerses herself in their presence. Afterwards, they turn their faces away and depart so that they will not see her when she ascends from the water.",
+ "What is meant by a resident alien? A gentile who makes a commitment not to worship false deities and to observe the other [six] universal laws commanded to Noah's descendants. He does not circumcise himself or immerse. We accept this commitment and he is considered one of the pious gentiles.
Why is he called a resident? Because we are permitted to allow him to dwell among us in Eretz Yisrael, as explained in Hilchot Avodah Zarah.",
+ "We accept resident aliens only during the era when the Jubilee year is observed. In the present era, even if a gentile makes a commitment to observe the entire Torah with the exception of one minor point, he is not accepted.",
+ "When a servant is purchased from the gentiles, we do not say: \"Why did you choose to convert?\" Instead, we say to him: \"Do you desire to enter the category of Jewish servants and become one of the observant of them?\" If he agrees, he is informed about the fundamentals of the faith, about some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more severe ones, and the punishments and rewards [associated with them] as we notify a convert. [Then] we immerse him as we immerse a convert and inform him [of the mitzvot] while he is in the water.
If he does not desire to accept [the status of a servant], we are patient with him for twelve months. Afterwards, we sell him to a gentile. It is forbidden to maintain him for a longer period. If at the outset, he established a condition that he would not be circumcised or immersed, but instead would be a resident alien, it is permissible to maintain him in that status. A servant may be maintained in this status only during the era when the Jubilee is observed.",
+ "The only sexual relations forbidden to a gentile are: his mother, his father's wife, his maternal sister, a married woman, a male, and an animal, as will be explained in Hilchot Melachim UMilchomoteihem. Other relations forbidden the Jews are permitted to them.",
+ "When a gentile converts or a servant is freed, he is like a newborn baby. Any relatives whom he had as a gentile or a servant are no longer considered his relatives. If both he and they convert, he is not obligated for relations with any of them.",
+ "According to Scriptural Law, a convert may marry his mother or his maternal sister after they convert. Nevertheless, our Sages forbade this so that [the converts] will not say: \"We came from a more severe level of holiness to a less severe one. Yesterday, this [relationship] was forbidden and today, it is permitted.\"
Similarly, when a convert engages in relations with his mother or his sister when they have not converted, it is considered as if he had relations with a woman with whom he was not related.",
+ "What is the law that applies to converts with regard to relations with their relatives. As we explained, if one was married while a gentile to his mother or his sister and they converted, we separate them as explained [above]. If he was married to any one of the other forbidden relations and he and his wife converted, they are not forced to separate.
A convert is forbidden to marry his maternal relatives after they convert according to Rabbinic Law. He may, however, marry his paternal relatives. [This applies] even when he certainly knows that these persons are his paternal relatives, for example, twins, in which instance it is clear that the father of one is the father of the other. Nevertheless, our Sages did not enforce a decree with regard to one's paternal relatives.
Accordingly, a convert may marry the wife of his paternal brother, the wife of his father's brother, his father's wife, and his son's wife. [This applies] even if they married his brother, his father, his father's brother, or his son after they converted. Similarly, his mother's paternal sister, his paternal sister, and his daughter who converted are permitted to him. He may not, however, marry his maternal sister, his mother's maternal sister, nor a woman who married his maternal brother after he converted. If, however, a woman married his brother while he was a gentile, she is permitted to him.",
+ "When two twin brothers were not conceived in a state of holiness, but they were born in a state of holiness, each are liable [for relations with the other's wife] because of the prohibition against relations with a brother's wife.",
+ "When a man marries a female convert and her daughter who converted or two maternal sisters [who converted], he should remain married to one of them and divorce the other. If he married a female convert and she died, he is permitted to marry her mother or her daughter. For our Sages ordained their decree only during [the woman's] lifetime.
It is permissible for a man to marry two paternal sisters who converted, for our Sages did not ordain any decrees with regard to paternal relations, as explained.",
+ "[Our Sages] did not ordain any decrees with regard to shniot who convert. Therefore a convert may marry his maternal grandmother. Similarly, a person may marry a convert and the mother of her maternal grandmother or her and the daughter of her daughter's daughter. Similar laws apply with regard to the remainder of the shniot.",
+ "A servant is permitted to marry his mother while he is a servant. Needless to say, this applies with regard to his daughter, his sister, or the like. [Since] he has already departed from the category of gentiles, the intimate relations forbidden to the gentiles are not forbidden to him. And [since] he has not entered the category of the Jewish people, the intimate relations that are forbidden to the converts are not yet forbidden to him.",
+ "It appears to me that if a servant engages in homosexual or Sodomite relations, they should be executed. For these two prohibitions are universally applicable.",
+ "Servants who are freed are like converts. All of the relationships forbidden to converts are forbidden to them and all those permitted to converts are permitted to them.
A person may give his maid-servant to his own servant or to a servant belonging to his colleague. At the outset, he may give one maid-servant to two servants. Nor must they follow any restrictions. Instead, they are like animals. There is no difference whether a maid-servant is set aside for a servant or not, for there is no concept of marriage except within the Jewish people or among gentiles themselves, but not among servants themselves or between servants and the Jewish people."
+ ],
+ [
+ "What is meant by the Torah's prohibition against relations with a mamzer? [The term refers to a person conceived from] a forbidden sexual relationship. A niddah is an exception. A son conceived from such relationships is blemished, but is not a mamzer. When, however, a man enters into any other forbidden sexual relationships, whether through rape, or willingly, whether conscious of the prohibition or not, the offspring produced is a mamzer. Both male and female [mamzerim] are forbidden forever, as [Deuteronomy 23:3] states: \"[A mamzer shall not enter God's congregation.] Also the tenth generation...,\" i.e., [the prohibition is] everlasting.",
+ "When a mamzer marries a Jewish women or a Jewish man marries a female mamzer, once they enter into relations after consecration, they are punished by lashes. If the man consecrates the woman, but does not enter into relations, he does not receive lashes. If they enter into relations without consecration, they do not receive lashes because of relations with a mamzer. For the only instance where relations that involve a negative prohibition incur the punishment of lashes without the woman being consecrated is relations between a High Priest and a widow, as will be explained.
When a man remarries his divorcee after she married another person, the offspring are acceptable. For she is not considered an ervah.",
+ "When a gentile or a servant enter into relations with a Jewish woman, the child is acceptable. [This applies] whether the woman is unmarried or married, whether she was raped or engaged in relations willingly. When a gentile or a servant enter into relations with a female mamzer, the offspring is a mamzer. When a mamzer enters into relations with a female gentile, the offspring is a gentile. If [the child] converts, he is fit to marry within the Jewish people like other converts. If [a mamzer] enters into relations with a maid-servant, the offspring is a servant. If he is freed, the offspring is acceptable like other freed servants. He may marry a Jewish woman.",
+ "This is the general principle: When a child is born from a servant, a gentile, a maid-servant, or a female gentile, he is like his mother. We are not concerned with the father. For this reason, [the Sages] permitted a mamzer to marry a maid-servant to purify the lineage of his descendants. For he can free them and they will be free men. [Our Sages] did not ordain a decree forbidding a maid-servant to a mamzer, so that he can legitimize his sons.",
+ "When a person who is half a servant and half a freed man engages in relations with a married woman, a son born of that relationship has no way of legitimizing [his marriage relationships], because the dimension of him which is a mamzer and the dimension of him which is an acceptable Jew are intermingled. Therefore he is forbidden to engage in relations with a maid-servant. and his offspring share his status forever.",
+ "When a gentile engages in relations with a maid-servant who immersed herself, the offspring are servants. When a servant who immersed himself engages in relations with a female gentile, the offspring are gentile. He is given his mother's status. When, however, a gentile engages relations with a gentile maid-servant or a gentile servant engages relations with a gentile woman, the status of the offspring follows that of the father.",
+ "A mamzer may marry a female convert and a female mamzer may marry a male convert, the offspring of both relationships are mamzerim. For the status of the offspring follows that of the blemished one. [The license for such a marriage is derived from] the verse: \"[A mamzer shall not enter] God's congregation.\" The congregation of converts is not considered as \"God's congregation.\"",
+ "When a female convert marries a male convert and gives birth to a son, he is permitted to marry a female mamzer even though he was both conceived and born in holiness. This also applies to the son of his grandson [- or any other descendant -] until his connection with conversion is forgotten and it is not known that he [descends from] converts. Afterwards, he will be forbidden to marry a female mamzer. Converts and freed servants are bound by the same laws.",
+ "When a convert marries a native-born Jewess or a native-born Jew marries a convert, the son is a Jew in all contexts and is forbidden to marry a female mamzer.",
+ "There are three categories of mamzerim: one that is definitely a mamzer, a mamzer whose status is a matter of doubt, and a mamzer by Rabbinic decree. What is meant by one who is definitely a mamzer? The offspring of a relationship that is definitely incestuous or adulterous, as we explained.
A mamzer whose status is a matter of doubt is the offspring of a relationship that we are unsure whether it is adulterous or incestuous. For example, a man engaged in relations with a woman who was consecrated, but we are unsure if the consecration was effective, or who was divorced, but we are unsure whether the divorce was effective, or a similar situation.
A mamzer by Rabbinic decree: for example, a woman who heard that her husband died and remarried and then discovered that her husband was alive. Afterwards, her [first] husband engaged in relations with her while she was still married with her second husband, the offspring is a mamzer by Rabbinic decree.",
+ "When an unmarried woman becomes pregnant through a promiscuous relationship, we ask her: \"What is [the status of] this fetus\" or \"...this child\"? If she replies: \"It is the child of a man of acceptable lineage; I entered into relations with an Israelite,\" her word is accepted and the son is acceptable. [This applies] even if most of the inhabitants of the city in which she engaged in relations are of unacceptable lineage.",
+ "If the child's mother was not questioned until she died, or she was a deaf-mute, mute, or intellectually or emotionally unstable, we consider the child as a mamzer whose status is questionable. [This ruling applies even] if she said: \"I engaged in relations with so-and-so, the mamzer\" or \"...with so-and-so, the netin.\" Even if that person agrees with her statement, [the child's status is only doubtful. The rationale is:] Just as she engaged in relations with the person who admitted to her statement; so, too, she engaged in relations with others.
This [child] is called a shituki. He knows the identity of his mother, but does not definitely know the identity of his father.",
+ "Similarly, a child that is found in the marketplace - he is called an asufi - is considered as a mamzer whose status is questionable. for we do not know his [lineage].",
+ "[The following rules apply when] an unmarried woman engages in promiscuous relations says: \"This child is the son of so-and-so.\" If that person is of acceptable lineage, the son is considered acceptable. Nevertheless, her word is not accepted for the child to be considered as the man's son. It appears to me, however, that we give consideration to her words and because of the doubt, that child is forbidden to marry the relatives of the [named] person.
If the [named] person is a mamzer, we do not accept her word to definitely deem the offspring as a mamzer on this basis, as we explained. Instead, we consider the child as a mamzer whose status is questionable.",
+ "[Different laws apply with regard to] a father who [makes statements with regard to] a child who is presumed to be his son. If he says: \"This son of mine is a mamzer,\" his word is accepted. If the son himself has children, his word is not accepted. For the Torah accepted his word with regard to his son alone. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 21:17:] \"He will recognize the firstborn, the son of the hated.\" [Implied is that] he makes his identity known to others.",
+ "Just as a father's word is accepted when he says: \"This son of mine is my firstborn,\" so, too, his word is accepted if he says: \"This son of mine is a mamzer,\" or \"...the son of a divorced woman\" or \"...the son of a woman who performed chalitzah.\" Similarly, if his wife was pregnant, his word is accepted if he says: \"This fetus is not my child. It is a mamzer.\" The child is definitely deemed as a mamzer.
If a person says that he himself is a mamzer, his word is accepted with regard to the prohibition against him marrying a native-born Jewess. He is, however, forbidden to marry a female mamzer until it is definitely known that he is a mamzer. The same laws apply to his son. If he has grandchildren, his word is not accepted with regard to the disqualification of his grandchildren. He can disqualify only himself.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] a woman who was consecrated becomes pregnant in her father's home. The offspring is assumed to be a mamzer. He is forbidden to marry both a native-born Jewess and a female mamzer.
If his mother was questioned and said: \"I became pregnant from the man who consecrated me,\" her word is accepted and the child is considered acceptable. If, however, that man contravenes her and says: \"I never engaged in relations with her,\" the child is considered a mamzer. For even if the child was assumed to be his son, his word is accepted if he says: \"My son is a mamzer.\"
[Even in the latter situation,] the woman is not assumed to be a zonah. Instead, her word is accepted if she says: \"I engaged in relations with the man who consecrated me.\" [Since] she is not a zonah, if she married a priest, she need not be divorced and offspring which she bears him are acceptable [as priests].",
+ "If people at large gossip about her while she is consecrated, [saying that] she was promiscuous with the man to whom she was consecrated and with others, the child is a mamzer whose status is questionable. [This applies] even if the man to whom she was consecrated was intimate with her in her father's home. For just as she acted loosely with the man to whom she was consecrated, she could have acted loosely with others. If she was questioned and said: \"This fetus was conceived by the man to whom I am consecrated,\" the child is acceptable as explained [above].",
+ "When a married woman is pregnant and says: \"This fetus is not my husband's,\" her word is not accepted to render the child illegitimate. [Instead,] we assume that the child is acceptable. For the Torah accepted only the word of the father. If the father says that it is not his son or he is overseas, we assume that the son is a mamzer.
If the woman said: \"I was impregnated by a gentile,\" or \"...by a servant,\" the child is acceptable. For the husband cannot deny her words. A fetus will not remain in its mother's womb for more than twelve months.",
+ "Although there is a rumor circulating to the fact that a woman has committed adultery and everyone is gossiping about her, we do not suspect that her children are mamzerim. [The rationale is that] the person who most frequently has relations with her is her husband. It is permitted to marry her daughter, even as an initial and preferred option. With regard to her own status, we suspect that she is a zonah. If her conduct was very lewd, we also suspect the lineage of her children.",
+ "According to Scriptural Law, a person suspected of being a mamzer is permitted to marry among the Jewish people. [Deuteronomy 23:3] states: \"A mamzer shall not enter God's congregation.\" [Implied is that] one who is definitively a mamzer may not marry among the Jewish people, not one whose status is questionable. Nevertheless, our Sages raised the level [of purity required] with regard to lineage and forbade those of questionable status from marrying among the Jewish people.
Accordingly, a male and a female who are definitely mamzerim may marry. A mamzer whose status is a matter of doubt, a shituki, or an asufi are forbidden to marry native-born Jewesses.",
+ "[A man of the latter status] is forbidden to marry a female mamzer. Even a female mamzer whose status is questionable is forbidden to him. For perhaps one of them is not a mamzer, but the other is definitely a mamzer. A mamzer by Rabbinic decree may marry a female mamzer by Rabbinic decree. Similarly, in any other instances [where a person is forbidden to marry] because of a doubt, one person of this status may not marry another.",
+ "What is implied? Shitukim, asufim, and those whose status as mamzerim is indefinite are forbidden to marry each other. If they married, the union may not be maintained. Instead, they must divorce with a formal bill of divorce. The offspring of such relationships are [mamzerim of] indefinite status like their parents.
Individuals of indefinite status like this have no option except to marry converts. The status of their offspring follows their blemish.",
+ "What is implied? When a shituki or an asufi marries a female convert or a freed maid-servant, a convert, or a freed servant marries a female shituki or asufi, the offspring are shitukim or asufim.",
+ "When an asufi is found in a city inhabited by gentiles, whether the majority are gentiles or the majority are Jews, the child is considered as a gentile of indefinite status with regard to his lineage. If he consecrates a woman, she needs a bill of divorce because of the doubt. If someone kills him, he is not executed for doing so.",
+ "If the court had him immersed for the sake of conversion or he immersed on his own initiative after he attained majority, his status is the same as any asufi that is found in Jewish cities.
If the majority of the inhabitants of the city are gentile, it is permitted to feed him meat from animals that were not ritually slaughtered. If the majority were Jewish, we return his lost articles as is the law with regard to Jews. If the populations are equally balanced, it is a mitzvah to maintain his life and we remove an avalanche from him on the Sabbath. With regard to damages, we follow the same principle that applies in all cases of doubt in financial law: When a person who seeks to expropriate [money] from a colleague, the burden of proof is upon him.",
+ "It appears to me that whenever there is a gentile woman or a maid-servant who is fit to give birth in a city, since an asufi that is discovered there is considered to possibly have the status of a gentile or a servant, if he marries a female convert as we stated, there is a doubt whether his wife is a married woman. One who enters into relations with her is not liable, because we do not execute individuals when there is a doubt involved.
Similarly, it appears to me that when a shituki marries a woman who could be forbidden to him as an ervah, there is a doubt whether she is a married woman, for consecration is not effective with regard to the ariot.",
+ "What is meant by \"a woman who could be forbidden to him as an ervah\"? Any woman whose father or brother was alive when his mother became pregnant or any woman who was divorced or widowed. For it is possible that she is his father's wife or the wife of his father's brother.",
+ "What is the source on which I rely to say that a shituki or an asufi are not forbidden to marry any woman who could be forbidden to him as an ervah? For an acceptable child whose mother was questioned is not forbidden to marry any woman who could be forbidden to him as an ervah. And it is written in the Torah [Leviticus 19:29]: \"Do not desecrate your daughter to have her act promiscuously.\" [Commenting on this verse,] our Sages state: If this would happen, a father will marry his daughter and a brother will marry his sister.
If the law was that anyone who does not definitely know the identity of his father would be forbidden to marry any woman who could be forbidden to him as an ervah, this situation could not arise and the earth would never become filled with incestuous relations. From this, we learn that we do not forbid ariot and consider them as relatives because of the doubt unless we definitely know that she is forbidden to him as an ervah. For were we to say this, all of the orphans in the world who did not know their fathers would be forbidden to marry in all situations lest they encounter a forbidden relationship.",
+ "When a child was abandoned on the road and afterwards, one came and said: \"He is my son and I abandoned him,\" his word is accepted. Similarly, the mother's word is accepted. If the child was taken in from the marketplace and afterwards, his father and mother came and said: \"This is our son,\" their word is not accepted. [The rationale is that] he has already been categorized as an asufi.
In the years of famine, their word is accepted. It is because of the famine that they abandoned him, for they desire that others sustain them. Therefore they remained silent until the child was gathered in.",
+ "If the child was found circumcised, bundled, salted, blue eye-paint was applied to his eyes, an amulet was placed around his neck, it was placed under a interwoven tree that a wild beast could not enter and was close to the city, or it was found in a synagogue near the public domain or at the side of the public domain, the laws pertaining to an asufi do not apply. Since [the parents] are protecting the child so that it does not die, we can assume that it is acceptable.
If, however, it is abandoned in the midst of the road or far away from a city, even under a tree, or in a synagogue, or it is found hanging in a place accessible by a wild beast, it is considered as an asufi.",
+ "A mid-wife's word is accepted if she states: \"This child is a priest,\" \"...a Levite,\" \"...a netin,\" or \"...a mamzer,\" because the child's lineage has not been established and is not known.
When does the above apply? When her faithfulness has been established and an objection is not raised against her. If, however, an objection was raised against her and one person said: \"She is testifying falsely,\" her word is not accepted. The child is considered as acceptable, but is not considered as [a priest or Levite].",
+ "It is a clear matter that a shituki is forbidden to marry a shituki and an asufi is forbidden to marry an asufi, because their status is doubtful. Nevertheless, even mamzerim of a definite status and netinim may intermarry. The offspring is a mamzer. A shituki or an asufi are permitted to marry netinim and other converts. The offspring is considered as [a mamzer] of doubtful status."
+ ],
+ [
+ "A man with maimed testicles or a severed member who married a native-born Jewess and engaged in sexual relations is punished by lashes, as [Deuteronomy 23:2] states: \"A person with maimed testicles or a severed member may not enter the congregation of God.\"
Such a man may marry a female convert or a freed maid-servant. Even a priest with maimed testicles may marry a female convert or a freed maid-servant, because the holiness [of the priesthood] does not rest upon him. He is permitted to marry even a female netin or a woman whose status is in doubt.",
+ "Since a man with a maimed organ is forbidden to marry among the Jewish people, [our Sages] did not decree against his marrying a female netin or a woman whose status is in doubt. A man with maimed testicles or a severed member is, however, forbidden to [marry] a female mamzer whose status is definite, because this prohibition is of Scriptural origin.",
+ "What is meant by maimed testicles? Anyone whose testicles have been wounded. What is meant by a severed member? Anyone whose shaft has been cut off.
There are three organs to which wounds can disqualify a male: the shaft, the testicles, and the tract in which the semen develops. If one of these three was wounded or crushed, the man is disqualifed.",
+ "What is implied? If the shaft is wounded, crushed, or cut off from the corona or above the corona, he is disqualified. If a portion at the top of the corona is cut off, but even a hairsbreadth [of the corona] remains which surrounds the entire shaft, he is acceptable. If the shaft was cut like a pen is sharpened or like a funnel above the corona, he is acceptable.",
+ "If the shaft is perforated below the corona, he is acceptable. [The following rules apply if] the corona itself is perforated. If when the person ejaculates, semen emerges from the hole, he is unacceptable. If the hole becomes closed, he returns to acceptable status. If the shaft is perforated below the corona when the portion above is in the midst of corona, he is disqualified. For the entire corona must be intact [for the person to be acceptable].",
+ "If the seminal tract becomes obstructed and the semen emerges from the urinary tract, he is unacceptable.",
+ "If both or one of the testicles were severed, wounded, or crushed or one was lacking or pierced by a hole, he is unacceptable. If both or one of the seminal tracts are severed, crushed, or wounded, he is unacceptable.",
+ "If one of the seminal tracts was perforated into the urinary tract and the person urinates from two sources - the seminal tract and the urinary tract - he is acceptable.",
+ "Whenever we have used the term \"unacceptable\" in this context, the implication is that [the malady] was not caused by the hand of heaven, e.g., [his testicles] were severed by a man or a dog, he was struck by a sharp end, or the like. If, however, he was born with maimed testicles or a severed member, or without testicles, he became ill because of a bodily ailment and these organs ceased to function, or an ulcer arose in them that caused them to waste away or be severed, he is permitted to marry among the Jewish people. For all of these blemishes are caused by the hand of heaven.",
+ "It is forbidden to destroy a male's reproductive organs. This applies to humans and also to animals, beasts, and fowl, both from a kosher species and from a non-kosher species, in Eretz Yisrael and in the Diaspora. Although [Leviticus 22:24] states: \"And you shall not do this in your land,\" According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this [prohibition] is applicable in every place. The verse teaches that one should not act in this manner among the Jewish people, not with their own bodies, nor with the bodies of others.
Whoever castrates [a person or an animal] should be lashed according to Scriptural Law everywhere. Even a person who castrates a person who has been castrated should be lashed.",
+ "What is implied? One came and severed a person's member, another cut off or pulled away his testicles and a third cut his seminal tract; all receive lashes. Similarly, if one crushed a person's member, another pulled it away, and a third cut it off, all receive lashes. [This applies] although the last person castrated a person - or an animal, beast, or fowl - who had already been castrated.
A person who castrates a female - whether a human or other species - is not liable.",
+ "It is forbidden to have a man or a male of another species drink a potion that causes him to lose his sexual potency. Lashes are not given, however. A woman is permitted to drink a potion to cause her to lose her sexual potency so that she will not conceive.
If a person bound a man and set a dog or other animal upon him until his sexual organs were maimed or he made him sit in water or snow until his sexual organs lost their potency, he is not given lashes unless he castrates him by hand. It is, however, fitting to subject him to stripes for rebellious conduct.",
+ "It is forbidden to tell a gentile to castrate one of our animals. If the gentile took the animal and castrated it on his own initiative, it is permitted. If a Jew acts deceitfully in this context, he should be punished and required to sell the animal to another Jew. He may [sell it] to his son who is past majority, but not to his son who is below majority, nor may he give it to him."
+ ],
+ [
+ "There are three women who are forbidden to all priests [by Scriptural Law]: a divorcee, a zonah, and a challalah. There are four [forbidden to] a High Priest. These three and a widow.
Bound by [the prohibitions applying to a High Priest] are one anointed with the oil of anointment or one who assumed his position by wearing the additional garments, one serving in that capacity, a High Priest who was appointed and then removed from the office, and a priest anointed to lead a war. All of these are commanded [to marry] a virgin and are forbidden to marry a widow.",
+ "Any priest who marries one of these three women - whether a High Priest or an ordinary priest - and engages in relations is punished by lashes. If he enters into promiscuous relations with her, he does not receive lashes for [violating the prohibitions against] a zonah, a divorcee, and a challalah. [This is derived from the fact that Leviticus 21:7 states the prohibition using the term:] \"They shall not take.\" [Implied is that the prohibition does not apply] unless he takes - marries - [the woman] and enters into relations with her.",
+ "When, by contrast, a High Priest enters into relations with a widow, he receives lashes even though he did not consecrate her. [This is derived from ibid.:15 which states]: \"And he shall not desecrate....\" As soon as he engages in relations with her, he desecrates her and disqualifies her from the priesthood. A zonah, challalah, and divorcee, by contrast, are disqualified from the priesthood before one enters into relations with them. Therefore a High Priest alone receives lashes for merely entering into relations with a widow even though she was not consecrated. For he desecrates her and he is warned against desecrating people of acceptable lineage, [other] women and his offspring.",
+ "When a High Priest consecrates a widow and enters into relations with her, he receives two sets of lashes: one because of the prohibition: \"He shall not take a widow,\" and one because of the prohibition: \"He shall not desecrate.\" Whether a High Priest or an ordinary priest marries one of these four, but does not engage in relations, he does not receive lashes.",
+ "Whenever [the priest] receives lashes, the woman [with whom he engages in relations] is given lashes. Whenever he does not receive lashes, she does not receive lashes. For there is no difference between a man and a woman with regard to punishments with the exception of a designated maidservant as explained.",
+ "Any priest - whether a High Priest or an ordinary priest - who enters into relations with a gentile woman receives lashes for relations with a zonah. [There is a difference between her and a Jewish woman,] because she cannot be consecrated. He is forbidden to enter into relations with any zonah, whether a Jewess or a gentile.",
+ "A woman who has undergone the rite of chalitzah (a chalutzah) is forbidden to a priest according to the Rabbinic tradition, for she resembles a divorcee. [If he engages in relations with such a woman,] he is given \"stripes for rebellious conduct.\"
When a priest marries a woman whose status as a chalutzah is doubtful, he is not compelled to divorce her. She is acceptable and her child is acceptable. For our Sages did not decree against a woman whose status as a chalutzah is doubtful, only against one who is definitely in that category. When it is questionable if a woman is a divorcee, a widow, a zonah, or a challalah, [a priest who marries her] is given \"stripes for rebellious conduct\" and required to divorce her with a get.",
+ "There is a major general principle that applies with regard to all of the Torah's prohibitions. One prohibition does not take effect when another prohibition is in effect unless:
a) both of the prohibitions take effect at the same time;
b) the latter prohibition forbids additional entities besides [the entity that was originally] prohibited;
c) when the scope of the [latter] prohibition encompasses other entities together with [the entity that was originally] prohibited.",
+ "Accordingly, When a woman was a widow and then she became a divorcee, and then she became a challalah, and then she became a zonah, should a High Priest engage in relations with her afterwards, he receives four sets of lashes for engaging in relations once. For a widow is forbidden to a High Priest, but permitted to an ordinary priest.",
+ "When she becomes a divorcee, she becomes forbidden by an additional prohibition [for] she is also forbidden to an ordinary priest. Therefore, [even for the High Priest,] another prohibition aside from that against relations with a widow is added to her. She is, nevertheless, still permitted to partake of terumah. If she becomes a challalah, another prohibition is added to her, for she is forbidden to partake of terumah. She is, nevertheless, still permitted to marry an Israelite.
If she becomes a zonah, another prohibition is added to her, since there is a type of promiscuous relations that would cause her to be forbidden to an Israelite, e.g., a married woman engaged in adultery voluntarily.
The same principle applies to an ordinary priest who engaged in relations with a divorcee who became a challalah and then a zonah. He receives three sets of lashes for engaging in relations once. If this order is altered, she only receives one set of lashes.",
+ "When a woman is widowed from several men or divorced from several men, [a High Priest or a priest] receive only one set of lashes for each time they engage in relations. A woman is forbidden as a widow whether she was widowed after [only] consecration or after marriage.",
+ "When the brother of a High Priest dies, even if the deceased had [merely] consecrated his wife, [the High Priest] should not perform the rite of yibbum. Instead, he should perform chalitzah.
If a woman became his yevamah while he was an ordinary priest and he was then appointed as the High Priest, he should not perform yibbum once he has been appointed. [This applies] even if he already gave his word [that he would marry] her while he was an ordinary priest. If, however, he consecrated a widow and was then appointed as a High Priest, he should marry her.
If she was consecrated, but the status of the consecration was questionable and then the person who consecrated her died, she is considered a widow of questionable status.",
+ "It is a positive commandment for a High Priest to marry a virgin maiden. When she reaches the age of maturity, she becomes forbidden to him, as [Leviticus 21:13] states: \"He shall marry a virgin woman.\" \"Woman\" implies that she is not a minor. \"Virgin\" implies that she has not reached maturity. What is implied? She has departed from the category of a minor, but has not fully reached maturity, i.e., a maiden. He may never be married to two women at the same time. [This is derived from the singular form of the term] \"woman,\" i.e., one, but not two.",
+ "A High Priest may not marry a woman who has lost her virginity even if she never engaged in relations. If she engaged in anal intercourse, it is as if she engaged in vaginal intercourse. If she engaged in [anal] intercourse with an animal, she is permitted.",
+ "A High Priest who married a woman who had engaged in relations previously is not punished by lashes. He must, however, divorce her with a get. If he married a woman past the age of maturity or one who lost her virginity for reasons other than relations, he may remain married to her.
If he consecrated a woman who had previously engaged in relations and then he was appointed as the High Priest, he may marry her after his appointment.",
+ "If he raped or seduced a virgin maiden, he may not marry her. [This applies] even if he raped or seduced her while he was an ordinary priest and was appointed as the High Priest before he married her. If he married her, he must divorce her.",
+ "If he consecrates a girl while she was a minor and she reaches full maturity while [consecrated] to him before he marries her, he should not marry her. [The rationale is that] her body underwent a change. If he married her, he need not divorce her.",
+ "[The prohibition against marrying a divorcee applies] whether she was divorced after consecration or after marriage. If, however, a girl is released from marriage through the rite of mi'un, she is permitted to a priest, as we explained in Hilchot Gerushin. [This applies even if] her husband first divorced her with a get, then remarried her, and then she was released through mi'un.
Any woman who is not fit to perform the rite of chalitzah, but nevertheless performs it is not disqualified from [marrying] a priest.",
+ "[The following rules apply if] a rumor begins to circulate: \"So-and-so, the priest wrote...\" or \"...gave a get for his wife,\" and she lives with him and serves him. She is not forced to be divorced from her husband. If she married another priest, she should be forced to be divorced.",
+ "If a rumor circulated in a city that a woman was consecrated and then divorced after consecration, her [status] becomes suspect, as explained in Hilchot Gerushin. If, however, a rumor is circulated that she is a chalutzah, her [status] does not become suspect.",
+ "If a rumor is circulated that a virgin has engaged in relation, her [status] does not become suspect and she may marry a High Priest. If a rumor is circulated that she is a maid-servant, her [status] does not become suspect and she may marry a priest.
If a rumor circulates in a city that she is acting promiscuously, her [status] does not become suspect. Even if her husband separated from her because she violated [the practices of modesty required by] the Jewish faith or because [of the testimony] of witnesses [concerning] unseemly conduct, but he died before giving her a get, she is permitted [to marry] a priest. For a woman like the above should not be forbidden [to a priest] unless there is definite testimony [that she acted promiscuously] or she admits [doing so] herself."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Based on the Oral Tradition, we learned that the term zonah used by the Torah refers to one who is not a nativeborn Jewess, a Jewish woman who engaged in relations with a man she was forbidden to marry, violating a prohibition that is universally applicable, or a woman who engaged in relations with a challal even though she is permitted to marry him.
Accordingly, a woman who engages in relations with an animal, even though she is liable for execution by stoning is not deemed as a zonah, nor is she disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, for she did not engage in relations with a man. [Similarly, when] a man engages in relations with a woman in the niddah state even though she is liable for kerait, she is not deemed as a zonah, nor is she disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, for she is not forbidden to marry him.",
+ "Whenever a person has relations with an unmarried woman, even if she is a harlot who wantonly makes herself available to everyone, although she is liable for lashes, she is not deemed as a zonah, nor is she disqualified from [marrying] into the priesthood. For she is not forbidden to marry [the people with whom she engaged in relations].
[When, by contrast, a woman] engages in relations with a man with whom relations are forbidden by a negative commandment that is universally applicable - the transgression is not specific to priests - or with whom they are forbidden by a positive commandment, she is forbidden to marry him, she is a zonah. Needless to say, [this applies if she engages in relations with a man] who is forbidden to her as an ervah, a gentile, or a servant.",
+ "Similarly, a female convert or a freed [maid-servant] - even if she was converted or freed when she was less than three years old - since she is not a native-born Jewess, she is deemed a zonah and is forbidden to [marry] a priest.
On this basis, [our Sages said: A woman who has relations with] a gentile, a netin, a mamzer, an Ammonite or Moabite convert, a first- or second-generation Egyptian or Edomite convert, a man with maimed testicles or a severed member, or a challal who has relations with a [nativeborn] Jewess causes her to be considered as a zonah and to be forbidden to [marry into] the priesthood. If she was a priest's daughter, she is disqualified from [partaking of] terumah. Similarly, a yevamah who engaged relations with a man other than her yevam becomes a zonah.
An aylonit is permitted to [marry] a priest. She is not a zonah.",
+ "When a man engages in relations with one of the shniot or the like, e.g., a man who engages in relations with a relative of the woman with whom he performed chalitzah or with the woman with whom he performed chalitzah, he does not cause her to be deemed a zonah. For she is not forbidden to him according to Scriptural Law, as we explained in Hilchot Yibbum.",
+ "We thus learned that a woman's being deemed as a zonah is not dependent on her engaging in forbidden relations, for when a man engages in relations with a niddah or a harlot or when a woman engages in relations with an animal, the woman has engaged in forbidden relations and yet she is not deemed a zonah. When, by contrast, [a woman] marries a challal, she engages in relations that are permitted, as will be explained, and yet she is deemed a zonah. Thus the matter is dependent on the spiritual blemish alone. According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the spiritual blemish comes only from a man who is forbidden to her or a challal, as we explained.",
+ "Whenever a woman engages in relations that cause her to be deemed a zonah, she becomes disqualified as soon as the man's organ enters her whether she engages in relations against her will or willingly, whether in conscious violation or inadvertently, whether through vaginal or anal intercourse. [This applies] provided she is at least three years old and the man with whom she engages in relations is nine years old or more. Therefore when a married woman engages in adultery, whether against her will or willingly, she is disqualified from [marrying into] the priesthood.",
+ "When the wife of a priest is raped, [if her husband engages in relations with her afterwards,] he is punished by lashes because of her defilement. [This is derived from Deuteronomy 24:4]: \"Her first husband who sent her away cannot return and take her as a wife after she has been defiled.\" All [women] were governed by the general principle: If they engaged in [adulterous] relations, they are forbidden to their husbands. The Torah singles out an exception: the wife of an Israelite who was raped. She is permitted to her husband, as [implied by Numbers 5:13]: \"And she was not seized.\" The wife of a priest remains forbidden, because she is a zonah.",
+ "When the wife of an Israelite is raped, although she is permitted to her husband, she is forbidden to [marry into] the prietshood.
When the wife of a priest tells her husband: \"I was raped or inadvertently, I engaged in relations with another man,\" or one witness testifies against her that she committed adultery whether willingly or unwillingly, she is not forbidden to him. [The rationale is that we suspect] that perhaps she set her eyes on another [man]. If he considers her as trustworthy, or he considers the witness as trustworthy and he accepts his word, he should divorce her so that there is no doubt regarding the matter.",
+ "Although the wife of a priest who tells her husband: \"I was raped,\" is permitted to her husband as explained, she is forbidden to any other priest after her husband dies. For she has acknowledged that she is a zonah and caused herself to be forbidden, making herself a prohibited entity.",
+ "When a priest consecrates a woman, whether a minor or past majority, and afterwards engages in relations with her and claims that she had engaged in relations previously, she is forbidden to him because of the doubt involved: perhaps she engaged in relations before she was consecrated or perhaps it was afterwards. When, by contrast, an Israelite makes such a claim, there are two doubts involved: Maybe [the forbidden relations] preceded the consecration or maybe they came afterwards. Even if we say that they came afterwards, maybe she was raped or maybe she participated willingly. For a raped woman is permitted to an Israelite, as we explained.",
+ "Therefore if a girl's father consecrated her to an Israelite when she was less than three years old and [when they married, the Israelite] claimed that he discovered that she had engaged in relations previously, she is forbidden to him because of the doubt. For there is only one doubt involved: Maybe the relations were against her will or maybe she engaged willingly. When there is a doubt concerning a Scriptural prohibition involved, [we rule] stringently.",
+ "Any woman who was given [a sotah] warning by her husband, entered into privacy [with the man she was warned against], but did not drink the sotah waters is forbidden to [marry] a priest, because there is an unresolved question whether or not she is a zonah. [This applies] whether she did not wish to drink [the waters], her husband did not wish to compel her to drink the waters, there was testimony that prevented her from drinking, the warning was delivered by the court, or she was one of the woman who is not fit to drink. Whatever the reason that she did not drink, she is forbidden to [marry into] the priesthood because of the doubt [that has been created].",
+ "[The following rules apply if we] saw that an unmarried woman engaged in relations with a man who then departed. She is asked: \"Who is the man with whom you engaged in relations?\" If she says, \"He is an acceptable man,\" her word is accepted. Moreover, even if we see that she is pregnant and we ask her: \"From whom did you conceive?\" and she says, \"From an acceptable man,\" her word is accepted and she is permitted [to marry] a priest.",
+ "When does the above apply? When the place where she engaged in relations was on a thoroughfare or in a carriage in the fields where everyone passes by, and most of the passersby are acceptable and most of the inhabitants of the city from which these passersby departed are acceptable. [The rationale for this stringency is that] our Sages elevated the standards required with regard to lineage and required two majorities.
If, by contrast, most of the people passing by would disqualify her, e.g., they were gentiles, mamzerim, or the like, even if most of the inhabitants of the city from which they came were acceptable, we are suspect regarding her [status]. Perhaps she engaged in relations with a person who would disqualify her. Hence, the initial and preferred option is for her not to marry a priest. If she marries one, she need not divorce. [This ruling also applies] if most of the inhabitants of the locale were unacceptable even though most of the passersby were acceptable.",
+ "If we saw that she engaged in relations in a city or she became pregnant in a city, [more stringent rules apply]. Even if there was only one gentile, challal, servant, or the like dwelling in the city, the initial and preferred option is that she not marry a priest. [The rationale is that] whenever entities are in their permanent locale, [probability is not taken into consideration. Instead, all doubts] are considered as equally balanced. If she already married [a priest], she need not be divorced because she says: \"I engaged in relations with an acceptable man.\"",
+ "When a woman is dumb, deaf, she says: \"I don't know the identity of the man with whom I engaged in relations,\" or she was a minor that cannot differentiate between a man who is acceptable and one who is not, she is considered as a zonah of questionable status. [After the fact,] if she married a priest, she must be divorced unless there is a twofold majority of men with whom she could have engaged in relations that are acceptable.",
+ "When a woman taken captive is redeemed and she is three years old or more, she is forbidden to [marry] a priest, because there is a question whether she is a zonah. Perhaps a gentile engaged in relations with her.
If there is a witness that a gentile did not enter into seclusion with her, she is acceptable to the priesthood. Even a servant, a maid-servant, or a relative is acceptable with regard to this testimony. [Moreover,] when two women who were taken captive give testimony on behalf of each other, their word is accepted. [The rationale is] that all the prohibitions involving questionable situations are of Rabbinic origin. Therefore they ruled leniently with regard to a woman taken captive.",
+ "Similarly, a minor who states [that a woman was not touched by her captors] in the course of conversation. An incident occurred with regard to a child who was captured together with his mother. In the course of conversation, he said: \"My mother and I were captured by the gentiles. When I went out to draw water from the well, I was thinking about my mother. [When I went] to gather wood, I was thinking about my mother.\" Our Sages [permitted] her to marry a priest because of his words.",
+ "A husband's word is not accepted if he testifies that his wife who was taken captive was not defiled. Similarly, her maid-servant may not testify on her behalf. A maid-servant belonging to her husband, however, may testify on her behalf. And statements made by her maid-servant in the midst of conversation are accepted.",
+ "When a priest testifies that a woman who had been taken captive is pure, he may not marry her. [We suspect that] he focused his attention on her. If he redeemed her and testified on her behalf, he may marry her, for if he did not know that she was pure, he would not have paid money on her behalf.",
+ "When a woman says: \"I was taken captive, but I am pure,\" her word is accepted. [The rationale is] that the mouth that forbid her granted her license. [This applies] even if there is one witness who testifies that she was taken captive. If, however, there are two witnesses who testify that she was taken captive, her word is not accepted unless one person testifies that she is pure.
If there were two witnesses who testified that she was taken captive, one witness who testifies that she was defiled and another who contradicts his statements and testifies that she is pure and that a gentile did not enter into seclusion with her until she was redeemed, she is permitted. [This applies] even if the one who testifies that she is pure is a woman or a maid-servant.",
+ "When a woman stated: \"I was taken captive, but I am pure,\" and a court granted her license to marry [a priest], she may marry [one] as an initial and preferred option. Her license is not revoked [even if] afterwards two witnesses come and testify that she was taken captive. Even if her captor enters afterwards and we see that she is a captive under his dominion, her license [to marry a priest] is not revoked. We provide her with protection until she is redeemed.",
+ "If two witnesses came and stated that [a woman] was defiled, even if she had married and even if she bore children [to her husband, the priest], she must be divorced. If one witness came and testified [that she was defiled], his testimony is of no consequence.
If the woman says, \"I was taken captive, but I am pure, and I have witnesses that I am pure,\" we do not say: \"Let us wait until the witnesses come.\" Instead, we grant her license [to marry into the priesthood] immediately. Moreover, even if a rumor is circulated that there are witnesses that she was defiled, we grant her license [to marry into the priesthood] until the witnesses come. [The rationale is that] we are lenient with regard to a woman taken captive.",
+ "When a father states: \"I consecrated my daughter and I had her divorced,\" [as long as] she is a minor,\" his word is accepted. \"I consecrated my daughter and I had her divorced while she was a minor,\" when she is past majority, his word is not accepted with regard to her being considered as a divorcee.
[When he says,] \"She was held captive and I redeemed her,\" his word is not accepted whether she is a minor or past majority. For the Torah deems him trustworthy only with regard to having her forbidden because of marriage, for it is written [Deuteronomy 22:16]: \"I gave my daughter to this man,\" but not to have her disqualified as a zonah.",
+ "When the wife of a priest is forbidden to him because she was taken captive, [we grant a leniency]. Since [the prohibition was instituted because] of a doubt, she is permitted to dwell together with him in the same courtyard, provided his children and the members of his household will always be there to watch him.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] a city was held under siege and conquered. If the gentiles surrounded the city from all sides so that it was impossible for [even] one woman to escape without being seen and placed under their dominion, all of the women in [the city] are forbidden [to marry into] the priesthood. They are considered as if they were held captive for perhaps they were raped by gentiles. [The only exception] are those less than three years old as explained.",
+ "If it was possible for one of the woman to escape without being detected or there was one hiding place in the city - even if it could hold only one woman - it saves all [the women from being deemed forbidden].",
+ "How does it save [the women from being deemed forbidden]? The word of every woman who claims \"I am pure\" is accepted. Since she could have said: \"I escaped when the city was conquered,\" or \"I was in a hiding place and I was saved,\" her word is accepted if she says: \"I did not escape, nor did I hide, but I was not defiled.\"",
+ "When does the above apply? With regard to a battalion from that country who settle in the city and are not afraid. Therefore we fear that they raped the women. With regard to a battalion from another country, which swept through the city, pillaged and passed on, the women are not forbidden. [The rationale is that] they do not have time to rape, because they are busy gathering spoil and fleeing. If, however, they took the women captive and they were under their dominion, they are forbidden [to the priesthood] even though Jews pursue [the battalion] and rescued [the women] from them.",
+ "When a woman was imprisoned because of financial matters, she is permitted [to marry into the priesthood]. When she is imprisoned with regard to matters involving capital punishment, she is forbidden to the priesthood. Therefore if her husband is a priest, she is forbidden to him.
When does the above apply? When the Jews have power over the gentiles and they are afraid of them. When, by contrast, the gentiles are in power, even when a woman is imprisoned because of financial matters, she is forbidden since she was taken under the dominion of the gentiles unless there is a witness who testifies on her behalf as is the law regarding a woman taken captive, as explained above."
+ ],
+ [
+ "What is meant by a challalah? [A woman] born from [relations] forbidden to the priesthood. Similarly, any woman who is forbidden to the priesthood who engaged in relations with a priest becomes a challalah. A priest who commits a transgression himself, however, is not deemed a challal.",
+ "[The above applies] whether she engaged in relations by coercion or inadvertently or whether it was vaginal or anal intercourse, as soon as the male organ enters her, she becomes a challalah. [This applies] provided the priest is nine years of age or older and the woman forbidden him is three years of age or older.",
+ "What is implied? When a priest who is nine years old engages in relations with a divorcee or with a zonah or a High Priest enters into relations with such women or with a widow, or marries a non-virgin and enters into relations with her, these women become challalot for all time. If they conceive a child from such relations, whether from relations with the priest who caused them to be deemed a challalah or whether with another priest, the offspring are challalim.
When, however, a priest consecrates a woman who is forbidden to the priesthood and she is widowed or divorced from the consecration, she does not become a challalah. If she marries, even if she does not engage in relations, she becomes a challalah even if it is discovered that she is a virgin.",
+ "When a High Priest marries a woman past majority or one who lost her signs of virginity through means other than intercourse, she does not become a challalah. Similarly, if he enters into relations with a non-virgin outside the context of marriage, she does not become a challalah.",
+ "When a priest engages in relations with one of the women forbidden as an ervah with the exception of a woman in the niddah state or with one of the woman who is forbidden because of a negative commandment that is universally applicable, he causes her to be deemed a zonah, as explained. If he - or another priest - engage in relations with her a second time, she becomes a challalah and her offspring from [a priest] are challalim.
Accordingly, if a priest engages in relations with a woman who is obligated to undergo yibbum and she conceived from their first relations, the offspring is acceptable to marry into the priesthood. [The rationale is that] the prohibition [against relations with such a woman] is not restricted to the priesthood. She becomes a zonah as we explained. If he engaged in relations with her a second time and she conceived and gave birth, she becomes a challalah and her offspring are challalim, for [these relations] are forbidden exclusively to the priesthood.",
+ "Similarly, when a priest engages in relations with a convert or a freed maid-servant, he causes her to become a challalah and his offspring from her are challalim. When a priest engages in relations with a woman in the niddah state, the offspring are acceptable and are not challalim. For the prohibition [against relations with] a woman in the niddah state is universally applicable and is not exclusive to the priesthood.",
+ "When a priest marries a divorcee who is pregnant - whether with his child or that of another man - and she gives birth after she became a challalah, the child is acceptable, for it was not conceived from forbidden seed.",
+ "We have already explained, that a woman who has undergone chalitzah is forbidden to a priest by Rabbinic decree. Therefore, when a priest engages in relations with such a woman, she becomes a challalah and her offspring, challalim. All of this is based on Rabbinic decree. When, by contrast, a priest engages in relations with one of the shniot, she is acceptable and his descendants from her are acceptable, for these prohibitions are universally applicable and are not exclusive to the priesthood.",
+ "When a priest engages in relations with a woman whose status as a zonah is questionable, e.g., a woman concerning whose status as a convert or as a freed maid-servant is questionable, when he engages in relations with a woman whose status as a divorcee is questionable, or a High Priest engages in relations with a woman whose status as a widow is questionable, the woman is deemed as a challalah of questionable status and her offspring are considered challalim of questionable status.",
+ "Thus there are three categories of challalim: a challal according to Scriptural Law, a challal according to Rabbinic decree, a person whose status as a challal is a matter of question.
Anyone whose status as a challal is a matter of question must observe the severities incumbent on the priesthood and those incumbent on ordinary Israelites. He may not partake of terumah. He may not become impure due to contact with the dead and he must marry a woman fit to marry a priest. If he partakes of terumah, becomes impure, or marries a divorcee, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct. The same laws apply to a challal by Rabbinic decree.
When, however, a person is definitely a challal according to Scriptural Law, he is like [any other] non-priest. He may marry a divorcee and become impure due to contact with a corpse. [This is derived from Leviticus 21:1 which] states: \"Speak to the priests, the descendants of Aaron.\" [Implied is that the prohibition that follows does not apply] even to the descendants of Aaron unless they are priests.",
+ "A male priest who is forbidden to marry a zonah and a challalah is forbidden to marry a female convert and freed maid-servant for they are equivalent to zonot as we explained. A woman of the priestly family, however, is permitted to marry a challal, a convert, or a freed servant. For women of acceptable lineage were not forbidden against marrying men of unacceptable lineage. [This is derived from the phrase \"the descendants\" [- literally, the sons -] of Aaron,\" i.e., sons and not daughters. Thus a convert is permitted to marry a female mamzer and also, the daughter of a priest.",
+ "When converts and/or freed servants marry among themselves and give birth to a daughter - even after several generations - this daughter is forbidden to marry a priest, for the seed of a native-born Jew has not intermingled with them. If one married such a woman, she need not be divorced since she was both conceived and born in holiness. When, however, a convert or a freed servant marries a native-born Jewess or a native-born Jew marries a female convert or a freed slave, their daughter is acceptable to marry into the priesthood at the outset.",
+ "When an Ammonite convert or a second generation Egyptian convert marry a native-born Jewess, the intimate relations they share involve a transgression and the women become zonot as we explained. Nevertheless, their daughters may marry into the priesthood as an initial and preferred option.",
+ "When a challal marries an acceptable woman, his descendants from her are challalim. This also applies to the son of his son's son and indeed, even for 1000 generations. For the male son of a challal is a challal for all time. If the offspring is female, she is forbidden to marry into the priesthood, because she is a challalah.
When, however, an Israelite marries a challalah, the offspring are acceptable. Therefore if one of the offspring is female, she may marry into the priesthood at the outset.",
+ "Priests, Levites, and Israelites are permitted to marry among each other. The status of the child is determined by that of the father. [Similarly,] Levites, Israelites, and challalim are permitted to marry among each other and the status of the child is determined by that of the father. [This is derived from Numbers 1:18]: \"And they established the lineage of their families, according to their father's household.\" [Implied is that] the household of one's father is one's family and not the household of one's mother.",
+ "Levites, Israelites, challalim, converts, and freed servants are permitted to marry among each other. When a convert or a freed servant marries the daughter of a Levite, the daughter of an Israelite, or a challalah, the offspring is an Israelite. When an Israelite, a Levite, or a challal marry a female convert or a freed maid-servant, the status of the child is determined by that of the father.",
+ "We operate under the presumption that all families are of acceptable lineage and it is permitted to marry their descendants as an initial and preferred option. Nevertheless, if you see two families continuously quarreling with each other, you see one family that is always involved with strife and controversy, or you see a person who frequently quarrels with people at large and is very insolent, we suspect [their lineage]. It is fitting to distance oneself from such people for these are disqualifying characteristics.
Similarly, a person who always slurs the lineage of others, casting aspersions on the ancestry of families or individuals, claiming that they are mamzerim, we are suspicious that he himself is a mamzer. Similarly, if he calls others servants, we suspect that he is a servant. For whoever denigrates others, denigrates them with a blemish that he himself possesses.
Similarly, whenever a person is characterized by insolence and cruelty, hating people and not showing kindness to them, we seriously suspect that he is a Gibeonite. For the distinguishing signs of the holy nation of Israel is that they are meek, merciful, and kind. With regard to the Gibeonites, [II Samuel 21:2] states: \"The Gibeonites are not of the Jewish people.\" For they acted extremely brazenly and would not be appeased. They did not show mercy to the sons of [King] Saul, nor did they show kindness to the Jews to forgive the descendants of their king, while [the Jews] had shown them kindness and allowed them to live.",
+ "When [the purity of] a family's [lineage] has been disputed, i.e., two individuals testify that a mamzer or a challal has intermingled with that family or there are servants among them, the matter is questionable. If the family are priests, one should not marry a woman from them until he investigates the lineage of four - actually eight- of her maternal ancestors: her mother, her maternal grandmother, the mother of her maternal grandfather, the maternal grandmother of her maternal grandfather. Similarly, he must investigate the lineage of her paternal grandmother, the mother of her paternal grandmother, the mother of her paternal grandfather, and the mother of the mother of her paternal grandfather.",
+ "If the family whose lineage was disputed were Levites or Israelites, it is necessary to check [the lineage of] another pair of women. Thus one must check ten maternal ancestors. [The rationale is that unacceptable people] intermarry among Levites and Israelites more frequently than among priests.",
+ "Why is it necessary to check the lineage only of the woman's maternal [ancestors]? Because whenever men argue with each other, one will malign the other with a blemish that exists in his lineage. Thus if he was unacceptable, the matter would have been made known. Women, by contrast, do not malign [each other] with regard to blemishes in their lineage.",
+ "Why must a man make an investigation when he desires to marry a woman from a family concerning whom the presumption of acceptable lineage has been impaired and yet a woman who desires to marry into this family is not required to make an investigation? Because woman of acceptable lineage were not warned against marrying [men of] unacceptable lineage.",
+ "Whenever a person is called a mamzer, a netin a challal, or a servant and he remains silent, we suspect [the lineage of] him and his family and do not marry women from this [family] unless an investigation was made as we explained.",
+ "When there is a suspicion that a person concerning whom there is a question whether he is a challal married into a family, every widow from that family is forbidden to a priest at the outset. [After the fact,] if she married [a priest], she need not be divorced because there are two questions involved: Maybe this is the widow of that challal or maybe it is not? Even if you say that she was his widow, maybe he was a challal or maybe he was not?
If, however, a person who was definitely a challal married into a family, every woman from that family is forbidden to a priest until he conducts an investigation. If he marries [such a woman without an investigation], she must be divorced. The same laws apply if a person regarding whom there is a question whether he is a mamzer or a person who is definitely mamzer became intermingled in the family. For the same prohibition applies to the priesthood with regard to the wife of a challal and the wife of a mamzer, as we explained."
+ ],
+ [
+ "[The status of] all of the priests of the present era is accepted on the basis of a prevailing assumption. They may only eat sacred food that is eaten [within] the boundaries [of Eretz Yisrael], provided it is terumah mandated by virtue of Rabbinic decree [alone]. [Even] terumah mandated by Scriptural Law and challah mandated by Scriptural Law, by contrast, may be eaten only by a priest whose lineage is established.",
+ "What is meant by a priest whose lineage is established? Anyone concerning whom two witnesses testify that he is a priest, the son of so-and-so the priest, and the descendant of so-and-so the priest, extending back until we reach a person whose lineage need not be checked, i.e., a priest who served at the altar. [Such a person's lineage need not be verified, because] were the High Court not to have made investigations about him, they would not have allowed him to perform service [in the Temple].
Accordingly, we do not investigate the lineage of anyone who served at the altar or who served on the Sanhedrin. For only priests, Levites, and Israelites of acceptable lineage are appointed to the Sanhedrin.",
+ "In the present era, even in Eretz Yisrael, challah does not have the status of a Scriptural commandment. [This is derived from Numbers 15:18:] \"When you come into the land....\" [Implied is when] all of you enter and not when only a portion enter. When Ezra ascended [to Eretz Yisrael], the entire people did not ascend.
Similarly, in the present era, terumah is a Rabbinic commandment. Therefore it is eaten by the priests of our era [whose lineage is established merely] by presumption.",
+ "When two witnesses testify that they saw a person partaking of terumah mandated by Scriptural Law, his lineage is established. We do not elevate a person [to the level that his priestly] lineage is [considered as] established based on the fact that he delivers the Priestly Blessing [to the people], reads the Torah first, or is given terumah in the granaries, or because of the testimony of one witness.",
+ "When a priest whose lineage was established says: \"This son of mine is a priest,\" we do not consider [the son as a priest whose] lineage is established on the basis of his statement unless he brings witnesses who testify that the child is his son.",
+ "[The following laws apply when] a priest whose lineage has been established departs to another country together with his wife whom we know to be of acceptable lineage. If he comes together with her and children who relate to them as parents and says: \"This is the woman who departed together with me and these are her children,\" he does not have to bring witnesses to testify about the woman or the children.
[If he says:] \"She died and these are her children,\" he must bring witnesses who testify that these are his children. He need not bring witnesses that his wife was of acceptable lineage, for her status as being acceptable was already established when she departed from us.",
+ "When a priest whose lineage was established goes out to another country and comes together with his wife and his sons, saying: \"I married this woman and these are her sons,\" he must bring proof that the woman is acceptable. He does not have to bring witnesses that these are her sons, provided the children relate to her as a mother.
If he comes together with two wives and brings proof regarding one, he is required to bring proof about the sons, even though the children are young and relate to her as a mother. For perhaps they are the sons of the other women, but relate to the woman whose lineage is established as a mother.",
+ "If he comes together with sons and says: \"I married a woman and she died. These are her sons,\" he must bring witnesses that the woman was acceptable and that these are her sons.\" These laws also apply with regard to an Israelite of established lineage and a Levite of established lineage. Afterwards, we can testify with regard to this son so that he will be fit for the Sanhedrin.",
+ "We do not elevate a person's lineage [based on mention in] a document to the priesthood. What is implied? If it is stated in a document: \"So-and-so, the priest, borrowed from so-and-so this-and-this amount,\" and witnesses sign below, we do not operate under the assumption that this priest is of acceptable lineage. For perhaps, they signed only with regard to the loan.
With regard to what does the above apply? With regard to considering the person as a priest of acceptable lineage. [Different principles apply] with regard to the presumption that he is a priest like the other priests of the present age and license to partake of terumah and challah mandated by Rabbinic decree and to be given other sacred articles [granted priests within] the boundaries [of Eretz Yisrael]. [These privileges are granted on the basis of] mention in a legal document, the testimony of one witness, or the fact that a person recites the priestly blessing or reads the Torah first.",
+ "Similarly, whenever a priest says: \"My son is a priest,\" his word is accepted with regard to feeding him terumah and having him accepted as a priest. He need not bring proof regarding his sons or his wife.",
+ "When two people come to a particular city, one says: \"I and my colleague are priests,\" and the other says, \"I and my colleague are priests,\" their word is accepted and they are both considered as priests even though it appears that they are in collusion.
Similarly, if one witness says: \"I saw this person recite the Priestly Blessing,\" \"...eat terumah, \"...received terumah in the granary,\" or \"...read first from the Torah and a Levi read after him,\" he is considered a priest on the basis of this statement. Similarly, if one testified that a person read second from the Torah after a priest, he is considered as a Levite.",
+ "If one delivers testimony in court saying that he saw a person and his brothers divide terumah left to them by their father the priest, we do not consider him a priest because of this testimony. Perhaps he is a challal and took his portion of the inheritance of terumah in order to sell it.",
+ "In the present era, when a person comes and says: \"I am a priest,\" his word is not accepted and we do not consider him a priest on the basis of his own statements. He should not read from the Torah first, recite the Priestly Blessing, or partake of sacred food that is eaten [within] the boundaries [of Eretz Yisrael] unless there is one witness who corroborates his statements.
He does, however, cause himself to be forbidden [to marry] a divorcee, a zonah, and a challalah; nor may he become impure because of contact with a corpse. If he marries such a woman or becomes impure, he receives lashes. A woman [who may not marry into the priesthood] who engages in relations with him is deemed a challalah of questionable status.",
+ "If the person makes these statements in the course of conversation, his word is accepted.
What is implied? An incident once took place with regard to a person who was speaking in the midst of conversation, saying: \"I remember that when I was an infant and was being carried on my shoulders by father, they took me out of school, removed my outer garment, and had me immerse in the mikveh to partake of terumah in the evening. My colleagues separated themselves from me and called me: 'Yochanan, who eats challot.' Our holy teacher had him considered a priest on the basis of these statements.",
+ "An adult's word is accepted if he says: \"I remember when I was a child and I saw so-and-so immerse himself in a mikveh and partake of terumah in the evening.\" He is considered a priest on the basis of this statement.
In the present era, when a person comes and says: \"I am a priest,\" and a witness testifies on his behalf, saying: \"I know that his father is a priest,\" we do not consider him as a priest on the basis of this testimony. [We fear that] perhaps he is a challal. Instead, [the witness] must testify that the person himself is a priest. If, however, the father's identity as a priest is an established fact or two witnesses come and testify that the person's father is a priest, because of his father, we assume [that he is a priest].",
+ "When the identity of a person's father as a priest has been established, but there is a rumor that he is the son of a divorcee or the son of a woman who performed chalitzah, we entertain suspicions and do not treat him as a priest. If one witness comes and testifies that he is acceptable, we treat him as a priest because of his statements. If two witnesses come afterwards and testify that he is a challal, we remove him from the priesthood.
If another witness comes and testifies that he is acceptable, we treat him as a priest, because the last witness is joined together with the first. Thus there are two witnesses testifying that he is acceptable and two testifying that he is unacceptable. Both pairs of witness and the rumor are voided, for two witnesses have the same legal power as 100. And the person remains a priest based on the status of his father.",
+ "[The following law applies] when a woman [remarried] without waiting three months after [the death of] her [first] husband and gave birth. If it is not known whether the child was conceived by the first - and born after nine months - or conceived by the second - and born after seven - and one of them was a priest and the other, an Israelite, the child is a priest of questionable status.
Similarly, if a son of a priest became intermingled with a child of an Israelite and they grow to maturity, they are both considered priests of questionable status. They must observe the stringencies incumbent on Israelites and the stringencies incumbent on priests: They may only marry women fit to marry into the priesthood. They may not become impure through contact with the dead, nor may they partake of terumah. If they marry a divorcee, they are forced to divorce and they do not receive lashes.",
+ "[The following rules apply] if the sons of two priests become intermingled or the wife of a priest married a second priest without waiting three months after the death of her first husband and it is not known whether the child was conceived by the first - and born after nine months - or conceived by the second - and born after seven. The stringencies that would apply as if he was the son of both men must be observed: He must observe the rites of aninut because of [both of] them and they [both] observe the rights of aninut because of him. He may not become impure because of them, nor may they become impure because of him. He may serve in the priestly watch of both of them, but does not receive a portion. If they are both from the same priestly watch and the same beit av, he receives one portion.",
+ "When does the above apply? When the relationships with both [priests] involve marriage. If, however, one is a licentious relationship, our Sages decreed that [the son's] priestly privileges are suppressed entirely, because he does not have definitive knowledge of the identity of his father. [This is supported by Numbers 25:13]: \"He and his descendants who follow him will possess [the covenant of priesthood].\" [Implied is that] his descendants will be able to trace their identity to him.",
+ "What is implied? There were ten priests. One of them departed and engaged in relations [with a woman without revealing his identity]. The son is definitely a priest. Nevertheless, since he does not know his father's identity and cannot trace his lineage to him, his priestly privileges are suppressed entirely. He may not serve [in the Temple], partake [of sacrificial foods], or receive an allotment [from the sacrifices]. If, however, he becomes impure because of contact with a corpse or he marries a divorcee, he receives lashes, for there is no question of leniency."
+ ],
+ [
+ "Whoever shares physical intimacy with one of the ariyot without actually becoming involved in sexual relations or embraces and kisses [one of them] out of desire and derives pleasure from the physical contact should be lashed according to Scriptural Law. [This is derived from Leviticus 18:30 which] states: \"To refrain from performing any of these abominable practices,\" and [ibid.:6 which] states: \"Do not draw close to reveal nakedness.\" Implied is that we are forbidden to draw close to acts that lead to revealing nakedness.",
+ "A person who engages in any of the abovementioned practices is considered likely to engage in forbidden sexual relations.
It is forbidden for a person to make motions with his hands or feet or wink with his eyes to one of the ariyot, to share mirth with her or to act frivolously with her. It is even forbidden to smell her perfume or gaze at her beauty. A person who performs any of these actions intentionally should be given stripes for rebellious conduct.
A person who looks at even a small finger of a woman with the intent of deriving pleasure is considered as if he looked at her genitalia. It is even forbidden to hear the voice of a woman forbidden as an ervah or to look at her hair.",
+ "These matters are [also] forbidden with regard to women with whom relations are forbidden on the basis of [merely] a negative commandment.
It is permitted to look at the face of an unmarried woman and examine [her features] whether she is a virgin or has engaged in relations previously to see whether she is attractive in his eyes so that he may marry her. There is no prohibition in doing this. On the contrary, it is proper to do this. One should not, however, look in a licentious manner. Behold [Job 31:1] states: \"I established a covenant with my eyes; I would not gaze at a maiden.\"",
+ "It is permitted for a person to gaze at his wife when she is in the niddah state although she is an ervah [at that time]. Although his heart derives satisfaction from seeing her, since she will be permitted to him afterwards, he will not suffer a lapse. He should not, however, share mirth with her or act frivolously with her lest this lead to sin.",
+ "It is forbidden for a man to have any woman - whether a minor or an adult, whether a servant or a freed woman - perform personal tasks for him, lest he come to lewd thoughts.
Which tasks are referred to? Washing his face, his hands, or his feet, spreading his bed in his presence, and pouring him a cup. For these tasks are performed for a man only by his wife.
[A man] should not send greetings to a woman at all, not even via a messenger.",
+ "When a man embraces or kisses any of the women forbidden to him as ariyot despite the fact that his heart does not disturb him concerning the matter, e.g., his adult sister, his mother's sister, or the like, it is very shameful. It is forbidden and it is foolish conduct. [This applies] even if he has no desire or pleasure at all. For one should not show closeness to a woman forbidden as an ervah at all, whether an adult or a minor, except a woman to her son and a father to his daughter.",
+ "What is implied? A father is permitted to embrace his daughter, kiss her, and sleep with her with their bodies touching and a mother may do the same with her son as long as they are young. When they grow and become mature with the girl's body becoming developed, they should each sleep in clothing.
If the daughter is embarrassed to stand before her father naked or she married, and similarly, if the mother was embarrassed to stand before her son naked, even if [the children] are minors, when one reaches the point when one is ashamed [of being naked] in their presence, they should sleep together only when clothed.",
+ "Lesbian relations are forbidden. This is \"the conduct of Egypt\" which we were warned against, as [Leviticus 18:3] states: \"Do not follow the conduct of Egypt.\" Our Sages said: What would they do? A man would marry a man, a woman would marry a woman, and a woman would marry two men.
Although this conduct is forbidden, lashes are not given for it, for it is not a specific prohibition and there is no intercourse at all. Therefore such women are not forbidden to marry into the priesthood as zonot, nor does a woman become prohibited to her husband because of this, for this is not considered harlotry. It is, however, appropriate to give them stripes for rebellious conduct because they performed a transgression. A man should take precautions with his wife with regard to this matter and should prevent women who are known to engage in such practices from visiting her and her from visiting them.",
+ "A man's wife is permitted to him. Therefore a man may do whatever he desires with his wife. He may engage in relations whenever he desires, kiss any organ he desires, engage in vaginal or anal intercourse or engage in physical intimacy without relations, provided he does not release seed in vain.
Nevertheless, it is pious conduct for a person not to act frivolously concerning such matters and to sanctify himself at the time of relations, as explained in Hilchot Deot. He should not depart from the ordinary pattern of the world. For this act was [given to us] solely for the sake of procreation.",
+ "A man is forbidden to engage in relations by candlelight. If, on the Sabbath, he did not have another room and there is a light burning, he should not engage in relations at all.
Similarly, it is forbidden for a Jew to engage in relations during the day, for this is brazen conduct. If he is a Torah scholar, who will not be drawn after this, he may create darkness with his garment and engage in relations. One should not, however, adopt this measure unless there is a great need. It is the course of holy conduct to engage in relations in the middle of the night",
+ "Our Sages do not derive satisfaction from a person who engages in sexual relations excessively and frequents his wife like a rooster. This reflects a very blemished [character]; it is the way underdeveloped people conduct themselves. Instead, everyone who minimizes his sexual conduct is praiseworthy, provided he does not neglect his conjugal duties without the consent of his wife. The sole reason while originally it was ordained that a person who had a seminal emission should not read from the Torah until they immerse themselves was to minimize sexual conduct.",
+ "Similarly, our Sages forbade a person from engaging in relations with his wife while his heart is focused on another woman. He should not engage in relations while intoxicated, nor while quarreling, nor out of hatred. He should not engage in relations with her against her will when she is afraid of him. Nor when one of them is placed under a ban of ostracism. He should not engage in relations [with his wife] after he made the decision to divorce her. If he does so, the children will not be of proper character. There will be those who are brazen and others who are rebellious and sinful.",
+ "Similarly, our Sages said that whenever an audacious woman demands relations verbally, a man seduces a woman for the sake of marriage, he had the intent of having relations with his wife Rachel and instead, engages in relations with his wife Leah, or a woman does not wait three months after the death of her husband and gives birth to a son whose identity is questionable, all of the children born in these situations will be rebellious and sinful who will be purified by the sufferings of exile.",
+ "It is forbidden for a man to engage in relations with his wife in the marketplaces, streets, gardens, or orchards. Instead, [a couple should be physically intimate] only in a home, so that they will not appear as licentious relations and will not habituate themselves to licentious relations. When a man engages in relations with his wife in such places, he should be given stripes for rebellious conduct. Similarly, when a man consecrates a woman via sexual relations, consecrates her in the market place or consecrates her without there being an engagement beforehand, he is given stripes for rebellious conduct.",
+ "A visitor is forbidden to engage in relations until he returns home. Our Sages forbade a man from dwelling in his father-in-law's home, for this is brazen conduct. Nor should he enter a bathhouse with him.",
+ "A person should not enter a bathhouse with his father, his sister's husband, nor with his student. If he needs his student [to assist him], it is permitted. There are places where people followed the custom that two brothers would not enter a bathhouse at the same time.",
+ "Jewish women should not walk in the marketplace with uncovered hair. [This applies to] both unmarried and married women. Similarly, a woman should not walk in the street with her son following her. [This is] a decree, [enacted so that] her son not be abducted and she follow after him to bring him back and she be molested by wicked people who took hold of him as a caprice.",
+ "It is forbidden to release sperm wastefully. Therefore a person should not enter his wife and ejaculate outside of her. A man should not marry a minor who is not fit to give birth.
Those who, however, release sperm with their hands, beyond the fact that they commit a great transgression, a person who does this will abide under a ban of ostracism. Concerning them, it is said: \"Your hands are filled with blood.\" It is as if they killed a person.",
+ "It is forbidden for a person to intentionally cause himself to have an erection or to bring himself to [sexual] thoughts. If a [sexual] thought comes to his mind, he should divert his heart from profligate and destructive matters to the words of Torah which are \"a beloved hind, arousing favor.\" For this reason, it is forbidden for a person to sleep on his back with his face upward, Instead, he should turn to the side slightly so that he will not develop an erection.",
+ "One should not look at animals, beasts, and fowls at the time the males and females are coupling. It is, however, permitted for a breeder of livestock to insert a male animal's organ in a female's. Since he is working in his profession, he will not be motivated to [sexual] thoughts.",
+ "Similarly, it is forbidden for a man to look at woman while they do laundry. It is even forbidden to look at the colored garments of a woman one knows, lest one be motivated to [sexual] thoughts.",
+ "When a person encounters a woman in the street, it is forbidden for him to walk behind her. Instead, he should hurry and [position himself so that] she is at his side or behind him. Whoever walks behind a woman in the marketplace is one of the frivolous of the common people.
It is forbidden to pass the entrance of a harlot without distancing oneself four cubits, as [Proverbs 5:8] states: \"Do not come close to the entrance of her home.\"",
+ "It is forbidden for an unmarried man to extend his hand to his testicles, lest he be stimulated to [sexual] thoughts. Indeed, he should not extend his hand below his navel, lest he be stimulated to [sexual] thoughts. If he urinates, he should not hold the shaft of his organ while urinating. If he is married, this is permitted. Whether he is married or not, he should not extend his hand to his organ at all, except when he has to urinate.",
+ "One of the pious men of the early eras and the wise men of stature prided himself in that he never looked at his male organ. Another said with pride that he had never contemplated his wife's physical form. For their hearts would be diverted from profligate matters to the words of truth which take hold of the hearts of the holy.",
+ "Among our Sages' commands is that a person should marry off his sons and daughters close to the time they reach physical maturity. For were he to leave them [unmarried], they may be motivated to promiscuity or sexual thoughts. Concerning this was applied the verse [Job 5:24]: \"Scrutinize your dwelling and you shall not sin.\"
It is forbidden to marry a woman to a minor, for this is comparable to promiscuity.",
+ "A man is not permitted to abide without a wife. He should not marry a barren woman or an elderly woman who is not fit to bear children.
A woman is permitted not to marry at all or to marry a eunuch. A young man should not marry an elderly woman, nor an elderly man, a young woman, for such conduct leads to promiscuity.",
+ "Similarly, a person who divorced his wife after they were married should not live in the same courtyard as she, lest this lead to promiscuity. If he was a priest, he should not dwell in the same lane as she. A small village is considered as a lane.
If he owes her a debt, she should appoint an agent to demand payment from him. When a divorcee and her ex-husband come [to court] for a judgment, we place them under a ban of ostracism or subject them to stripes for rebellious conduct.
If, however, a woman was divorced [merely] after consecration, she may summon him to court and dwell near him. If they shared extensive familiarity, this is forbidden even if [they were divorced merely] after consecration.
Who is forced to move? She is forced to move because of him. If the courtyard belongs to her, he is forced to move because of her.",
+ "A person should not marry a woman with the intent to divorce her, [as alluded to by Proverbs 3:29]: \"Do not devise evil against your loved one, one who dwells securely with you.\" If he notifies her at the outset that he is marrying her only for a limited time, it is permitted.",
+ "A person should not marry one woman in one country and another woman in another country, lest this situation continue for a long time and [ultimately,] a brother may marry his sister, the sister of his mother, or the sister of his father and the like without knowing. If [the man with two wives] is a person of stature whose name is known and whose descendants are well known and celebrated, it is permitted.",
+ "A man should not marry a woman from a family of lepers, nor from a family of epileptics, i.e., that it has been established on three occasions that the descendants of this family have this malady.",
+ "When a woman was married to two husbands and they both died, she should not marry a third [man]. If she did marry, she need not be divorced. Indeed, even if he merely consecrated her, he may consummate the marriage.
An unlearned Israelite should not marry the daughter of a priest. For this is comparable to the desecration of Aaron's seed. If they marry, our Sages said that their marriage will not be propitious. Instead, they will die without children, either he or she will die in the near future, or there will be strife between them. When, by contrast, a Torah scholar marries the daughter of a priest, this is attractive and praiseworthy, [joining] the Torah and the priesthood as one.",
+ "A person should not marry the daughter of an unlearned person. For if he dies or is exiled, his children will grow up unlearned, since their mother is not knowledgeable regarding the crown of Torah. Nor should he give his daughter to an unlearned person in marriage. For anyone who gives his daughter to an unlearned person is like one who bound her and placed her before a lion. He will strike her and engage in relations and has no shame.
A person should sell everything that he has [so that] he can marry the daughter of a Torah scholar. For if he dies or is exiled, his children will grow up as Torah scholars. And he should marry his daughter to a Torah scholar for there is no shameful conduct or strife in the home of a Torah scholar."
+ ],
+ [
+ "It is forbidden to enter into privacy with any of the woman forbidden as ariot, even if she is elderly or a young girl, for this leads to forbidden relations. [The only] exceptions are a woman and her son, a father and his daughter, and a husband with his wife who is in the niddah state.
When a bridegroom's wife menstruates before he engages in relations with her, it is forbidden for him to enter into privacy with her. Instead, she should sleep among [other] women and he should sleep among [other] men. If they engaged in relations once and afterwards, she became impure, he is permitted to enter into privacy with her.",
+ "Jewish men were not suspected of engaging in relations with men or with animals. Hence, there is no prohibition against entering into privacy with them. If, however, a person distances himself from entering into privacy even with a male or an animal, it is praiseworthy. Sages of great stature would distance themselves from animals so that they would not be alone with them.
The prohibition against entering into privacy with woman forbidden as ariot has been transmitted by the Oral Tradition.",
+ "When the incident concerning Amnon and Tamar occurred, David and his court decreed a prohibition against entering into privacy with an unmarried woman. Although an unmarried woman is not an ervah, such an act is considered as entering into privacy with an ervah. Shammai and Hillel decreed a prohibition against entering into privacy with gentiles.
Thus when anyone enters into privacy with a woman, whether Jew or gentile, with whom such an act is forbidden, both the man and the woman are given stripes for rebellious conduct and an announcement is made concerning them. An exception is made with regard to a married woman. Although it is forbidden to enter into privacy with her, if one does enter into privacy with her, corporal punishment is not administered lest a rumor be initiated that she committed adultery. Thus a rumor might spread that her children are mamzerim.",
+ "Whenever a man is forbidden to enter into privacy with a woman, this act is permitted if he is accompanied by his wife, for his wife will guard him [against transgression]. A Jewish woman should not enter into privacy with a gentile man even if his wife is with him. For a gentile's wife will not guard him [against transgression] and they have no shame.",
+ "Similarly, a Jewish child should not be entrusted to a gentile with the intent that he teach him to read or teach him a craft, for all gentiles are suspect to engage in homosexual relations. Similarly, we do not house an animal in an inn belonging to gentiles, not even a male in an inn with males and a female in an inn with females.",
+ "We do not entrust an animal, beast, or fowl to a gentile shepherd, not even a male animal to a male shepherd and a female animal to a female shepherd, because they are all suspect to sodomize animals. We have already explained that [gentiles] are forbidden to engage in homosexuality or sodomy. And [Leviticus 19:14] states: \"Do not place a stumbling block before the blind.\"",
+ "Why do we not entrust a female animal to a female gentile? For [all gentiles] are assumed to be promiscuous and when a gentile man will come to sleep with this gentile woman, it is possible that he will not find her and instead, sodomize the animal. Or even if he does find her, he may sodomize the animal.",
+ "One woman should not enter into privacy even with many men unless the wife of one of them is present. Similarly, one man should not enter into privacy even with many women, But when there are many women together with many men, we do not show concern for the prohibition against entering into privacy.
If the men were outside and the women were inside or if the men were inside and the women were outside, and one woman - or one man - separated themselves and joined the group of the other sex, the prohibition against entering into privacy applies.
Even a man whose business and profession [brings him into contact] with women is forbidden to enter into privacy with them. What should he do? He should involve himself with them while accompanied by his wife or turn to another profession.",
+ "It is permitted to enter into privacy with two yevamot, two wives of the same man, a woman and her mother-in-law, or a woman and her husband's daughter, a woman and her husband's daughter, or a woman and her mother-in-law's daughter. [The rationale is that] these women hate each other and will not conceal the other's [misdeeds]. Similarly, it is permitted to enter into privacy with a woman who is accompanied by a young child old enough to understand what sexual relations are, but who would not engage in relations herself. [The rationale is that the woman] would not act promiscuously in the presence of this child, for she will reveal her secret.",
+ "It is permitted to enter into privacy with a female child less than three years old and a male child less than nine years old. For [our Sages] only issued decrees concerning entering into privacy with a woman fit to engage in relations and a male fit to engage in relations.",
+ "An androgynus may not enter into privacy with women. If he does, he is not given physical punishment, because his status is doubtful. A man may enter into privacy with an androgynus or a tumtum.",
+ "When a married woman's husband is in the [same] city, she need not be concerned about [the prohibition against] entering into privacy with another man, because she will be impressed by the fear of her husband. If a man is overly familiar with her, e.g., they grew up together or she is his relative, she should not enter into privacy with him even if her husband is in the same city.
Whenever a man enters into a room with a woman, but there is a door open to the public thoroughfare, we are not concerned about [the prohibition against] entering into privacy.",
+ "An unmarried man should not teach young children, because the mothers come to the school because of their sons and thus he will be tempted by women. Similarly, a woman should not teach young boys, because their fathers come because of their sons and thus they will enter into privacy with her. A teacher does not have to have his wife together with him in school, It is sufficient that she be at home, while he teaches in his place.",
+ "Our Sages ordained that women speak to each other while in a lavatory, so that a man will not enter there and thus be alone with them.",
+ "We do not appoint even a faithful and observant person to be a guard of a courtyard where women live. [This applies] even if he stands outside, for there is no guardian against promiscuity.
It is forbidden for a person to appoint a supervisor over his home so that he does not lead his wife to sin.",
+ "It is forbidden for a Torah scholar to dwell in a courtyard where a widow lives even though he does not enter into privacy with her lest suspicions arise unless his wife is with him. Similarly, a widow should not raise a dog because of the suspicions that might arise. Nor should a woman purchase male servants - even minors - because of the suspicions that may arise.",
+ "We do not relate the hidden matters concerning forbidden sexual conduct to three students. [The rationale is that] one will be absorbed in questioning the teacher, the other two will be debating the matter back and forth and will not be free to listen. Since a person's mind is aroused by sexual matters, if a doubt arises concerning something he heard, he may [in error] rule leniently. Therefore, we teach only to two. In this manner, the one listening will focus his attention and recall what he will hear from the teacher.",
+ "There is nothing in the entire Torah that is more difficult for the majority of people to separate themselves from than sexual misconduct and forbidden relationships. Our Sages said: When the Jews were commanded regarding forbidden sexual relations, they wept and accepted this mitzvah with complaints and moaning, as implied by the phrase: \"Crying among their families,\" [which is interpreted as meaning]: \"Crying about family matters.\"",
+ "Our Sages said: A person's soul desires and craves theft and forbidden sexual relations. You will never find a community that does not have some people who are promiscuous regarding forbidden relationships and prohibited sexual conduct. Moreover, our Sages said: Most people trespass with regard to theft; a minority with regard to forbidden sexual conduct, and all with regard to the shade of undesirable gossip.",
+ "Therefore it is proper for a person to subjugate his natural inclination with regard to this matter and train himself in extra holiness, pure thought, and proper character traits so that he will be guarded against them.
He should be very careful with regard to entering into privacy with a woman, for this is a great cause [of transgression]. Our great Sages would tell their students: \"Watch me because of my daughter,\" \"Watch me because of my daughter-in-law,\" so that they would teach their students not to be embarrassed about such matters and distance themselves from entering into privacy with women.",
+ "Similarly, a person should distance himself from levity, intoxication, and flirtation, for they are great precipitators and steps [leading] to forbidden relations.
A man should not live without a wife, for this practice leads to great purity. And [our Sages gave] even greater [advice], saying: \"A person should always turn himself and his thoughts to the words of the Torah and expand his knowledge in wisdom, for the thoughts of forbidden relations grow strong solely in a heart which is empty of wisdom.\" And in [Solomon's words of] wisdom [Proverbs 5:19], it is written: \"It is a beloved hind, arousing favor. Her breasts will satisfy you at all times. You shall be obsessed with her love.\""
+ ]
+ ],
+ "versions": [
+ [
+ "Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007",
+ "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI"
+ ]
+ ],
+ "heTitle": "משנה תורה, הלכות איסורי ביאה",
+ "categories": [
+ "Halakhah",
+ "Mishneh Torah",
+ "Sefer Kedushah"
+ ],
+ "sectionNames": [
+ "Chapter",
+ "Halakhah"
+ ]
+}
\ No newline at end of file