## Kiddushin Daf 36a

###### Kiddushin 36a:1
[Kiddushin 36a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:1)

אַחַת הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**are one** prohibition.


###### Kiddushin 36a:2
[Kiddushin 36a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:2)

אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּאִיסִי, דְּגָמַר ״קׇרְחָה״ ״קׇרְחָה״ מִבְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן, מָה לְהַלָּן נָשִׁים פְּטוּרוֹת – אַף כָּאן נָשִׁים פְּטוּרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said** that **this is the reason of Isi** for exempting women from the prohibition against baldness: **As he learns** the prohibition against causing **baldness** in grief over someone who is dead through a verbal analogy **from** the prohibition against causing **baldness** stated with regard to **the sons of Aaron.** The verse states with regard to priests: “They shall not make baldness upon their head” (Leviticus 21:5). **Just as there,** with regard to priests, **women are exempt,** as the expression “the sons of Aaron” serves to exclude the daughters of Aaron, **so too here, women are exempt.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:3
[Kiddushin 36a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:3)

וְאִי סְבִירָא לַן דְּכִי כְּתִיב קְרָא, בְּכוּלֵּי עִנְיָינָא הוּא דִּכְתִיב, נִשְׁתּוֹק קְרָא מִינֵּיהּ וְתֵיתֵי בְּקַל וָחוֹמֶר, וַאֲנָא אָמֵינָא: וּמָה כֹּהֲנִים שֶׁרִיבָּה בָּהֶם הַכָּתוּב מִצְוֹת יְתֵירוֹת – ״בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן״ – וְלֹא בְּנוֹת אַהֲרֹן, יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But if we maintain that when** the Merciful One **writes:** “The sons of Aaron” (Leviticus 21:1), it **is written with regard to the entire matter** of that chapter, including the prohibition against causing baldness, **let the verse be silent about** this prohibition concerning all Jews. **And** this *halakha* **could be derived through an *a fortiori*** inference, as **I** could **say** the following: **If** in the case of **priests, for whom the verse includes additional mitzvot,** the prohibition against causing baldness applies only to **the sons of Aaron and not the daughters of Aaron,** is it **not all the more so** the case with regard to **Israelites,** who have fewer mitzvot, that only the men should be obligated and not the women?


###### Kiddushin 36a:4
[Kiddushin 36a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:4)

אִי לָאו גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: הִפְסִיק הָעִנְיָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, the verbal analogy is necessary. As, **were it not for** the **verbal analogy I would say** that the *halakhot* of ritual impurity **concluded** discussion of **that matter,** and the prohibition against causing baldness applies to all the descendants of Aaron, including women.


###### Kiddushin 36a:5
[Kiddushin 36a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:5)

הַשְׁתָּא נָמֵי נֵימָא הִפְסִיק הָעִנְיָן, וְאִי מִשּׁוּם גְּזֵרָה שָׁוָה – מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״לֹא יִקְרְחוּ״, יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ קָרַח אַרְבַּע וְחָמֵשׁ קְרָחוֹת לֹא יְהֵא חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״קׇרְחָה״ – לְחַיֵּיב עַל כׇּל אַחַת וְאַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If so, **now too, let us say** that the *halakhot* of ritual impurity **concluded** discussion of **that matter,** and it is prohibited for the daughters of Aaron as well to cause baldness. **And if** you maintain that the reason the prohibition stated with regard to priests does not apply to women is **due to** the **verbal analogy** employing the term “make baldness,” which serves to connect the *halakha* stated with regard to priests with the *halakha* stated with regard to all Jews, this verbal analogy **is necessary for that which is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“They shall not make baldness [*yikreḥu*** *korḥa*]” (Leviticus 21:5). If the verse had stated only “*yikreḥu*,” one **might** have thought that **even** if **one made four or five** patches of **baldness he would be obligated** for **only one** violation, as there is only one prohibition against making a bald spot. Therefore **the verse also states “*korḥa*,” to render him liable for each and every one** of the bald spots.


###### Kiddushin 36a:6
[Kiddushin 36a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:6)

״בְּרֹאשָׁם״ מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא תִתְגֹּדְדוּ וְלֹא תָשִׂימוּ קׇרְחָה בֵּין עֵינֵיכֶם לָמֵת״, יָכוֹל לֹא יְהֵא חַיָּיב אֶלָּא עַל בֵּין הָעֵינַיִם, מִנַּיִן לְרַבּוֹת כָּל הָרֹאשׁ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״בְּרֹאשָׁם״ – לְחַיֵּיב עַל הָרֹאשׁ כְּבֵין הָעֵינַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **What** is the meaning when **the verse states: “Upon their head”** (Leviticus 21:5), with regard to the prohibition against a priest causing baldness? **Because it is stated: “You shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead”** (Deuteronomy 14:1), one **might** have thought that **he is obligated only for** removing the hair **between the eyes. From where** is it derived **to include the entire head** in this prohibition? When **the verse states “upon their head,”** it serves **to render** a priest **liable** for removing hair **on** his entire **head like** the spot **between the eyes.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:7
[Kiddushin 36a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:7)

וְאֵין לִי אֶלָּא כֹּהֲנִים, שֶׁרִיבָּה בָּהֶם הַכָּתוּב מִצְוֹת יְתֵירוֹת, יִשְׂרָאֵל מְנָלַן? – נֶאֱמַר כָּאן: ״קׇרְחָה״ וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן: ״קׇרְחָה״, מָה כָּאן חַיָּיב עַל כׇּל קׇרְחָה וְקׇרְחָה, וְחַיָּיב עַל הָרֹאשׁ כְּבֵין הָעֵינַיִם – אַף לְהַלָּן חַיָּיב עַל כׇּל קׇרְחָה וְקׇרְחָה, וְחַיָּיב עַל הָרֹאשׁ כְּבֵין הָעֵינַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **And I have** derived **only** that this *halakha* applies to **priests, for whom the verse includes additional mitzvot; from where do we** derive that it applies to every **Israelite,** i.e., all Jews are liable for each and every bald spot and for the entire head? **It is stated here,** with regard to priests, **“baldness,” and it is stated there,** with regard to non-priests, **“baldness.” Just as here,** with regard to priests, **one is obligated for each and every bald spot, and one is obligated for the entire head like** the spot **between the eyes, so too there,** with regard to all Jews, **one is obligated for each and every bald spot, and one is obligated for the entire head like** the spot **between the eyes.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:8
[Kiddushin 36a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:8)

וּמָה לְהַלָּן עַל מֵת, אַף כָּאן עַל מֵת. אִם כֵּן נִכְתּוֹב קְרָא ״קֹרַח״, מַאי ״קׇרְחָה״ – שָׁמְעַתְּ מִינַּהּ תַּרְתֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **And** conversely, **just as there,** in the case of Israelites, it is referring specifically to causing baldness **over** someone who is **dead, so too here,** with regard to priests, it is prohibited to cause baldness only **over** someone who is **dead,** not in other circumstances. This *baraita* shows that the verbal analogy is required for the *halakhot* of bald spots. How, then, can it teach the exemption of women? The Gemara answers: **If** it is **so** that it may be used only for one purpose, **let the verse be written** merely **bald [*keraḥ*]. What** is meant by the term **“baldness [*korḥa*]”? Conclude two** conclusions **from it,** both the verbal analogy that exempts women and the *halakha* that each bald spot constitutes a separate violation.


###### Kiddushin 36a:9
[Kiddushin 36a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:9)

רָבָא אָמַר: הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּאִיסִי, דְּיָלֵיף ״בֵּין עֵינֵיכֶם״ מִתְּפִילִּין, מָה לְהַלָּן נָשִׁים פְּטוּרוֹת, אַף כָּאן נָשִׁים פְּטוּרוֹת. וְרָבָא מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר כְּאַבַּיֵּי? ״קֹרַח״ ״קׇרְחָה״ לָא מַשְׁמַע לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said** that **this is Isi’s reason, as he derives** the verbal analogy of **“between your eyes”** with regard to baldness **from phylacteries,** concerning which it says: “And they shall be for frontlets between your eyes” (Deuteronomy 11:18): **Just as there,** with regard to phylacteries, **women are exempt, so too here,** in the case of baldness, **women are exempt.** The Gemara asks: **And what is the reason** that **Rava did not state** the same reason **as Abaye?** The Gemara answers: Rava **does not learn** anything from the distinction between ***keraḥ*** and ***korḥa*,** as he maintains that no *halakha* can be derived from this slight difference in language.


###### Kiddushin 36a:10
[Kiddushin 36a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:10)

וְאַבָּיֵי מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר כְּרָבָא? אָמַר לָךְ: תְּפִילִּין גּוּפַיְיהוּ מֵהָכָא גָּמַר לַהּ: מָה לְהַלָּן מְקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשִׂים קׇרְחָה, בְּגוֹבַהּה שֶׁל רֹאשׁ, אַף כָּאן מְקוֹם הַנָּחָה בְּגוֹבַהּ הָרֹאשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further asks: **And what is the reason** that **Abaye did not state** the same reason **as Rava?** The Gemara answers that Abaye could have **said to you: Phylacteries themselves are derived from here,** i.e., the meaning of the phrase “between your eyes” stated with regard to phylacteries is understood from the case of baldness: **Just as there,** with regard to a bald spot, “between your eyes” is referring to **a place where baldness is formed,** a spot where there is hair, which is **on the upper part of the head** but not actually between the eyes, **so too, the place** where phylacteries are **donned is on the upper part of the head.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:11
[Kiddushin 36a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:11)

וּבֵין לְאַבָּיֵי וּבֵין לְרָבָא, הַאי ״בָּנִים אַתֶּם״, מַאי דָּרְשִׁי בֵּיהּ? הַאי מִיבְּעֵי לְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״בָּנִים אַתֶּם לַה׳ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם״, בִּזְמַן שֶׁאַתֶּם נוֹהֲגִים מִנְהַג בָּנִים – אַתֶּם קְרוּיִם בָּנִים, אֵין אַתֶּם נוֹהֲגִים מִנְהַג בָּנִים – אֵין אַתֶּם קְרוּיִם בָּנִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And both Abaye and Rava, what do they derive from this** verse: **“You are the sons** to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 14:1)? According to the first explanation of Isi’s opinion, the exclusion of women is derived from this phrase, whereas they derive that *halakha* from a different source. The Gemara answers: **This** verse **is necessary for that which is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse: **“You are the sons to the Lord your God,”** indicates that **when you act like sons** and cleave to the Holy One, Blessed be He, **you are called sons,** but when **you do not act like sons you are not called sons.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:12
[Kiddushin 36a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:12)

רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: בֵּין כָּךְ וּבֵין כָּךְ אַתֶּם קְרוּיִם בָּנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בָּנִים סְכָלִים הֵמָּה״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״בָּנִים לֹא אֵמֻן בָּם״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״זֶרַע מְרֵעִים בָּנִים מַשְׁחִיתִים״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְהָיָה בִּמְקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יֵאָמֵר לָהֶם לֹא עַמִּי אַתֶּם יֵאָמֵר לָהֶם בְּנֵי אֵל חָי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Meir says: Either way you are** still **called sons, as it is stated: “They are foolish sons”** (Jeremiah 4:22). **And it** also **states: “Sons in whom there is no faithfulness”** (Deuteronomy 32:20). **And it states: “A seed of evildoers, sons who deal corruptly”** (Isaiah 1:4). **And it states: “And it shall come to pass that, instead of what was said to them: You are not My people, it shall be said to them: Sons of the living God”** (Hosea 2:1).


###### Kiddushin 36a:13
[Kiddushin 36a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:13)

מַאי ״וְאוֹמֵר״? וְכִי תֵּימָא: סְכָלֵי הוּא דְּמִקְּרוּ בְּנֵי, כִּי לֵית בְּהוּ הֵימָנוּתַיְיהוּ לָא מִיקְּרוּ בְּנֵי – תָּא שְׁמַע, וְאוֹמֵר: ״בָּנִים לֹא אֵמֻן בָּם״,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why** is it necessary to cite these additional proofs introduced by the phrase: **And it states?** All these verses apparently make the same point. The Gemara explains why all the quotes are necessary. **And if you would say:** Granted, when they are **foolish they are** still **called sons,** as the verse states: “Foolish sons,” but **when they do not have faithfulness they are not called sons;** therefore, **come** and **hear** another verse. **And** that verse **states: “Sons in whom there is no faithfulness.”**


###### Kiddushin 36a:14
[Kiddushin 36a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:14)

וְכִי תֵּימָא: כִּי לֵית בְּהוּ הֵימָנוּתָא הוּא דְּמִיקְּרוּ בָּנִים, כִּי פָּלְחוּ לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לָא מִיקְּרוּ בָּנִים – תָּא שְׁמַע, וְאוֹמֵר: ״זֶרַע מְרֵעִים בָּנִים מַשְׁחִיתִים״. וְכִי תֵּימָא: ״בָּנִים מַשְׁחִיתִים״ הוּא דְּמִיקְּרוּ, בְּנֵי מְעַלְּיָיא לָא מִיקְּרוּ – תָּא שְׁמַע, וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְהָיָה בִּמְקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יֵאָמֵר לָהֶם לֹא עַמִּי אַתֶּם יֵאָמֵר לָהֶם בְּנֵי אֵל חָי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say: It is when they do not have faithfulness that they are called sons,** as stated, but **when** they **worship idols they are not called sons** anymore; therefore, **come** and **hear: And** the verse **states: “A seed of evildoers, sons who deal corruptly,”** which alludes to the corruption of idol worship. **And if you would say** that although **they are called “sons who deal corruptly,” they are no** longer **called full-fledged sons** of God once they have sinned, **come** and **hear: And** the **verse states: “And it shall come to pass that, instead of what was said to them: You are not My people, it shall be said to them: Sons of the living God.”** This verse indicates that when the Jews repent they are again called full-fledged sons of God.


###### Kiddushin 36a:15
[Kiddushin 36a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:15)

**מַתְנִי׳**, הַסְּמִיכוֹת, וְהַתְּנוּפוֹת, וְהַהַגָּשׁוֹת, וְהַקְּמִיצוֹת, וְהַ[הַ]קְטָרוֹת, וְהַמְּלִיקוֹת, וְהַקַּבָּלוֹת, וְהַזָּאוֹת – נוֹהֲגִים בַּאֲנָשִׁים וְלֹא בְּנָשִׁים, חוּץ מִמִּנְחַת סוֹטָה וּנְזִירָה שֶׁהֵן מְנִיפוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **the placing** of **hands** on the head of an offering, **and the waving** of certain offerings, **and the bringing near** of meal-offerings to the corner of the altar, **and the removal of a handful** from meal-offerings, **and the burning** of sacrificial parts on the altar, **and the pinching** of bird-offerings, **and the collecting** of blood of offerings in a vessel, **and the sprinkling** of blood, these **apply to men and not to women.** All these mitzvot apply specifically to men and not to women, **except for the meal-offering of a *sota*, and** the meal-offering of **a nazirite woman, which** these women **wave.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:16
[Kiddushin 36a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:16)

**גְּמָ׳** סְמִיכוֹת. דִּכְתִיב: ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְסָמַךְ״ – בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל סוֹמְכִים, וְאֵין בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל סוֹמְכוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** From where is it derived that **placing** of **hands** on the head of an offering applies only to men? **As it is written: “Speak to the sons of Israel…and he shall place** his hand” (Leviticus 1:2–4), which indicates that **the sons of Israel place hands** on offerings, **but the daughters of Israel do not place hands.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:17
[Kiddushin 36a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:17)

תְּנוּפוֹת. ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל... וְהֵנִיף״ – בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מְנִיפִין, וְאֵין בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל מְנִיפוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains that the *halakha* of **waving** is derived from the following verse: **“Speak to the sons of Israel…and he shall wave”** (see Leviticus 7:29–30), which likewise teaches that **the sons of Israel wave, but the daughters of Israel do not wave.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:18
[Kiddushin 36a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:18)

הַגָּשׁוֹת. דִּכְתִיב: ״וְזֹאת תּוֹרַת הַמִּנְחָה... הַקְרֵב אֹתָהּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן״ – בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן, וְלֹא בְּנוֹת אַהֲרֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to **bringing near,** this is **as it is written: “And this is the law of the meal-offering: The sons of Aaron shall bring it near”** (Leviticus 6:7). This teaches that **the sons of Aaron** bring the meal-offering near, **but not the daughters of Aaron.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:19
[Kiddushin 36a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:19)

קְמִיצוֹת. דִּכְתִיב: ״וֶהֱבִיאָהּ אֶל בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן וְקָמַץ״ – בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן, וְלֹא בְּנוֹת אַהֲרֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **the removal of a handful,** this is **as it is written: “And he shall bring it to the sons of Aaron,** the priests, **and he shall remove a handful”** (Leviticus 2:2). This teaches that **the sons of Aaron** take a handful, **but not the daughters of Aaron.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:20
[Kiddushin 36a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:20)

הַקְטָרוֹת. דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִקְטִירוּ אֹתוֹ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן״ – בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן, וְלֹא בְּנוֹת אַהֲרֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the **burning** of sacrificial parts, this is **as it is written: “And the sons of Aaron shall burn it”** (Leviticus 3:5). This teaches that it is **the sons of Aaron** who burn the parts, **but not the daughters of Aaron.**


###### Kiddushin 36a:21
[Kiddushin 36a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:21)

הַמְּלִיקוֹת. דִּכְתִיב: ״וּמָלַק... וְהִקְטִיר״, אִיתַּקַּשׁ מְלִיקָה לְהַקְטָרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **pinching,** this is **as it is written: “And he shall pinch…and he shall burn”** (Leviticus 1:15). The verse **juxtaposes killing to burning,** and just as the burning of an offering must be performed by men, so too pinching may be performed only by men.


###### Kiddushin 36a:22
[Kiddushin 36a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/36a:22)

הַקַּבָּלוֹת. דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִקְרִיבוּ בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן״, וְאָמַר מָר:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to **receiving,** this is **as it is written: “And the sons of Aaron shall present** the blood” (Leviticus 1:5). **And the Master said** in explanation of this verse: