## Shabbat Daf 53b

###### Shabbat 53b:1
[Shabbat 53b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:1)

דּוּמְיָא דְּקָמֵיעַ. שְׁמַע מִינָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**similar to** the case of **an amulet** worn for healing purposes. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, **learn from it** that this is the correct understanding.


###### Shabbat 53b:2
[Shabbat 53b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:2)

אָמַר מָר: וְלֹא בַּקָּמֵיעַ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מוּמְחֶה. וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן: וְלֹא בַּקָּמֵיעַ שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוּמְחֶה. הָא מוּמְחֶה — שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי! הָכָא נָמֵי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוּמְחֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further examines the *baraita* cited earlier. **The Master said: Nor** may an animal go out **with an amulet** on Shabbat, **even if** the amulet **proved effective.** The Gemara asks: **Didn’t we learn** in a mishna: One may **not** go out on Shabbat **with an amulet that has not proved effective?** By inference: If the amulet **proved effective,** he may **well** do so. The Gemara answers: **Here too**, it is referring to an amulet **that has not proved effective.**


###### Shabbat 53b:3
[Shabbat 53b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:3)

וְהָא ״אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מוּמְחֶה״ קָתָנֵי! מוּמְחֶה לְאָדָם וְאֵינוֹ מוּמְחֶה לִבְהֵמָה. וּמִי אִיכָּא מוּמְחֶה לְאָדָם וְלָא הָוֵי מוּמְחֶה לִבְהֵמָה? אִין, אָדָם דְּאִית לֵיהּ מַזָּלָא — מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ, בְּהֵמָה דְּלֵית לַהּ מַזָּלָא — לָא מְסַיַּיע לַהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Doesn’t** the *baraita* **teach: Even if** the amulet **proved effective?** The Gemara answers: The *baraita* is referring to an amulet that **proved effective for a person, and did not prove effective for an animal.** The Gemara wonders: **Is there** an amulet that **proved effective for a person and is not effective for an animal?** Healing an animal should be easier than healing a person. The Gemara answers: **Yes,** an amulet **aids a person, who is under** the protection of **an** advocate **angel [*mazal*];** however, **it does not aid an animal, which is not under** the protection of **an** advocate **angel.**


###### Shabbat 53b:4
[Shabbat 53b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:4)

אִי הָכִי, מַאי ״זֶה חוֹמֶר בַּבְּהֵמָה מִבָּאָדָם״? מִי סָבְרַתְּ אַקָּמֵיעַ קָאֵי? אַסַּנְדָּל קָאֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara poses a question: **If so,** that the *baraita* is referring to an amulet that did not prove effective for an animal, but if the amulet proved effective, the animal may indeed go out into the public domain with it; **what** is the meaning of the phrase in the *Tosefta*: **And this is a stricture** that applies **to animals beyond** the strictures that apply **to people?** The *halakha* is the same with regard to both people and animals. If the amulet has proven effective, even an animal may go out with it on Shabbat. If it has not proven effective, even a person may not go out with it. The Gemara responds: **Do you hold** that **this** statement **is referring to an amulet? It is referring to a shoe;** an animal may not go out with a shoe on Shabbat, but a person may.


###### Shabbat 53b:5
[Shabbat 53b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: סָכִין וּמְפַרְכְּסִין לְאָדָם, וְאֵין סָכִין וּמְפַרְכְּסִין לַבְּהֵמָה. מַאי לַָאו, דְּאִיכָּא מַכָּה וּמִשּׁוּם צַעַר! לָא, דִּגְמַר מַכָּה וּמִשּׁוּם תַּעֲנוּג.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to whether and to what extent the discomfort of animals is a factor taken into consideration on Shabbat, the Gemara says: **Come** and **hear** that which was taught in a *baraita*: **One may smear** on **oil and scrape** off a scab on Shabbat **for a person, and one may not smear** on **oil and scrape** off a scab **for an animal. Is it not** referring here to a case **where there is a wound, and** he smears on oil **and** scrapes the scab **due to** the **discomfort** caused by the wound, and nevertheless it was permitted exclusively for a person and not for an animal? The Gemara rejects this argument: **No,** it is referring to a case **where the wound has** already **ceased** and healed, and he smears oil and scrapes **due to** the **pleasure** caused by the treatment.


###### Shabbat 53b:6
[Shabbat 53b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:6)

תָּא שְׁמַע: בְּהֵמָה שֶׁאֲחָזָהּ דָּם, אֵין מַעֲמִידִין אוֹתָהּ בְּמַיִם בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁתִּצְטַנֵּן. אָדָם שֶׁאֲחָזוֹ דָּם, מַעֲמִידִין אוֹתוֹ בְּמַיִם בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיִּצְטַנֵּן. אָמַר עוּלָּא: גְּזֵירָה מִשּׁוּם שְׁחִיקַת סַמְמָנִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites an additional proof: **Come** and **hear** that which was taught in the following *baraita*: With regard to **an animal** suffering from heart **congestion** that restricts its **blood** supply and whose temperature has risen, **one may not stand it in water so that it will cool** off. However, with regard to **a person** suffering from heart **congestion** that restricts his **blood** supply, **one** may **stand him in water so that he will cool** off. Apparently, the suffering of an animal is of no concern. **Ulla said:** Here, the Sages issued **a decree** prohibiting all healing on Shabbat **due to the crushing of herbs** for medicinal purposes, which is prohibited by Torah law. The Sages prohibited cooling the animal in water lest one come to grind the ingredients used in the preparation of medicine.


###### Shabbat 53b:7
[Shabbat 53b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:7)

אִי הָכִי אָדָם נָמֵי! אָדָם נִרְאֶה כְּמֵיקֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If so,** the same decree should **also** apply in the case of **a person.** It should be prohibited to stand a sick person in water to cool him off due to the rabbinic prohibition against engaging in healing on Shabbat. The Gemara answers: In the case of **a person, it appears as** if he entered the water merely **to cool** off, not necessarily to cure an illness.


###### Shabbat 53b:8
[Shabbat 53b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:8)

אִי הָכִי בְּהֵמָה נָמֵי נִרְאֶה כְּמֵיקֵר! אֵין מֵיקֵר לִבְהֵמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If so**, say in the case of **an animal as well** that **it appears as** if it entered the water merely **to cool** off**,** not necessarily to cure an illness. The Gemara answers: **An animal** does **not** typically enter the water on its own to **cool** off. Neither does one typically stand an animal in water to cool it off unless it serves some healing purpose. Apparently, due to a decree, the Sages were stringent and prohibited standing the animal in water even if it will die as a result.


###### Shabbat 53b:9
[Shabbat 53b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:9)

וְלִבְהֵמָה מִי גָּזְרִינַן? וְהָתַנְיָא: הָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת חוּץ לַתְּחוּם, קוֹרֵא לָהּ וְהִיא בָּאָה. וְלָא גָּזְרִינַן דִּילְמָא אָתֵי לְאֵתוּיֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now asks: **Do we** really **issue a decree for an animal? Wasn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: If an animal **were standing beyond the** Shabbat **limit,** a situation in which it is prohibited to go fetch it, **he may call** the animal **and it will come** to him on its own? **And we do not issue a decree** to prohibit calling the animal, **lest he come to bring it** himself. Apparently, the Sages did not issue a decree in a case where one could incur a loss and there is no actual transgression committed. Here too, it should not be prohibited to stand his animal in water due to a decree lest he come to grind herbs and thereby violate a Torah prohibition.


###### Shabbat 53b:10
[Shabbat 53b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:10)

אָמַר רָבִינָא: כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיָה תְּחוּם שֶׁלָּהּ מוּבְלָע בְּתוֹךְ תְּחוּם שֶׁלּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Ravina said:** No proof can be cited from this case, as here it is a situation **where** the animal’s Shabbat **limit was subsumed within** the **limit** of its owner. The animal strayed beyond its own Shabbat limit, which is determined by the Shabbat limit of the shepherd entrusted with its herding. However, the animal remained within the Shabbat limit of its owner, which extended beyond that of the shepherd. Consequently, the owner is permitted to call the animal so that it will return on its own. Even if he forgets and goes out to fetch the animal, he will not have gone beyond his Shabbat limit. The fact that the animal itself went beyond its Shabbat limit is of no concern.


###### Shabbat 53b:11
[Shabbat 53b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:11)

רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: שְׁחִיקַת סַמְמָנִין גּוּפָה תַּנָּאֵי הִיא. דְּתַנְיָא: בְּהֵמָה שֶׁאָכְלָה כַּרְשִׁינִין לֹא יְרִיצֶנָּה בֶּחָצֵר בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁתִּתְרַפֶּה, וְרַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא מַתִּיר. דָּרֵשׁ רָבָא: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said:** The matter of the decree due to **crushing herbs is itself** subject to a dispute between **the *tanna’im*. As it was taught** in a *baraita*: In the case of **an animal that ate vetch,** which caused a life-threatening case of constipation, **one may not run it** around **in the courtyard to loosen** its bowels due to the decree prohibiting healing. **Rabbi Oshaya deems** it **permitted.** Apparently, the *tanna’im* disagree whether or not healing is prohibited with regard to animals. The Gemara adds that **Rava taught:** The ***halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Oshaya.**


###### Shabbat 53b:12
[Shabbat 53b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:12)

אָמַר מָר: לֹא יֵצֵא הַזָּב בַּכִּיס שֶׁלּוֹ, וְלֹא עִזִּים בַּכִּיס שֶׁבְּדַדֵּיהֶן. וְהָתַנְיָא: יוֹצְאוֹת עִזִּים בַּכִּיס שֶׁבְּדַדֵּיהֶן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Master said: Neither may a *zav* go out with his pouch,** which prevents his clothes from becoming sullied by his emissions, **nor goats with the pouch that is on their udders.** The Gemara asks: **Wasn’t it taught** in a different *baraita*: **Goats may go out with the pouch that is on their udders?**


###### Shabbat 53b:13
[Shabbat 53b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:13)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּמִיהַדַּק, הָא דְּלָא מִיהַדַּק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda said:** This is **not difficult. This** *baraita* is referring to a pouch **that is** tied **tightly** to the udder. It is permitted because there is no concern that the pouch will fall. **That** *baraita* is referring to a pouch **that is not tightly** tied. It is prohibited because of the concern that the pouch will fall and a person will come to retrieve it.


###### Shabbat 53b:14
[Shabbat 53b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:14)

רַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר: תַּנָּאֵי שָׁקְלַתְּ מֵעָלְמָא? תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, דִּתְנַן: הָעִזִּים יוֹצְאוֹת צְרוּרוֹת, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹסֵר בְּכֻלָּן חוּץ מִן הָרְחֵילוֹת הַכְּבוּנוֹת, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: עִזִּים יוֹצְאוֹת צְרוּרוֹת לְיַבֵּשׁ, אֲבָל לֹא לֵיחָלֵב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef said: Have you removed the *tanna’im* from the world?** This is subject to a disagreement between **the *tanna’im***, **as we learned** in our mishna: **She-goats may go out** with their udders **bound. Rabbi Yosei Rabbi Yosei prohibits** the animals from going out **with all** of **these** items, as he considers them burdens, **except for the ewes that are *kevunot*. Rabbi Yehuda says: Goats may go out** on Shabbat with their udders **bound to dry** their milk supply and discontinue their lactation in order to facilitate conception, as in that case, they are tied with a tight, permanent knot. **However,** they may **not** go out with their udders bound **to** conserve the **milk,** as in that case they are bound loosely. Apparently, there are *tanna’im* who rule leniently with regard to attaching pouches to the udders of goats and permit the practice, and others prohibit doing so.


###### Shabbat 53b:15
[Shabbat 53b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:15)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: הָא וְהָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וְלָא קַשְׁיָא: כָּאן לְיַבֵּשׁ, כָּאן לֵיחָלֵב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish, say** instead: Both **this** *baraita* **and that** *baraita* were taught **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, and** nevertheless it is **not difficult. Here,** where the goats are permitted to go out with a pouch on their udders, the *baraita* is referring to a case where it was done **to dry** their milk supply. **There,** where goats are prohibited to do so, the *baraita* is referring to a case where it was done **to** conserve **the milk**.


###### Shabbat 53b:16
[Shabbat 53b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:16)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּעִזִּים שֶׁל אַנְטוֹכְיָא שֶׁהָיוּ דַּדֵּיהֶן גַּסִּין, וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶן כִּיסִין כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִסָּרְטוּ דַּדֵּיהֶן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara adds: **It was taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yehuda said:** There was **an incident involving the goats** belonging to the residents of **a house in Antioch whose udders were** especially **large** and they would drag along the ground. **And they made pouches for them so that their udders would not get scratched.**


###### Shabbat 53b:17
[Shabbat 53b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:17)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאֶחָד שֶׁמֵּתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ וְהִנִּיחָה בֵּן לִינַק וְלֹא הָיָה לוֹ שְׂכַר מְנִיקָה לִיתֵּן, וְנַעֲשָׂה לוֹ נֵס וְנִפְתְּחוּ לוֹ דַּדִּין כִּשְׁנֵי דַּדֵּי אִשָּׁה וְהֵנִיק אֶת בְּנוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara cites a related *baraita* in which the **Sages taught:** There was **an incident where one** man’s **wife died, and she left** him **a son to nurse**, **and he did not have** money to pay **the wages of a wet-nurse. And a miracle was performed on his behalf, and he developed breasts like the two breasts of a woman, and he nursed his son.**


###### Shabbat 53b:18
[Shabbat 53b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:18)

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה גָּדוֹל אָדָם זֶה שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה לוֹ נֵס כָּזֶה! אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אַדְּרַבָּה כַּמָּה גָּרוּעַ אָדָם זֶה שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ לוֹ סִדְרֵי בְרֵאשִׁית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef said: Come and see how great this person is that a miracle** of **that** magnitude **was performed on his behalf. Abaye said to him: On the contrary, how dishonorable is this person that the order of creation was altered on his behalf.** A miracle was indeed performed on his behalf; however, it was performed in a demeaning and unpleasant manner.


###### Shabbat 53b:19
[Shabbat 53b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:19)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה קָשִׁים מְזוֹנוֹתָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנּוּ עָלָיו סִדְרֵי בְרֵאשִׁית. אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: תִּדַּע, דְּמִתְרְחִישׁ נִיסָּא וְלָא אִבְּרוּ מְזוֹנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda** added and **said: Come and see how difficult** it is to provide for **a person’s sustenance.** It is so difficult **that the order of creation had to be altered on** his **behalf,** which was apparently easier than providing him a source of financial support. **Rav Naḥman said: Know** that it is so, **as miracles are** often **performed** on a person’s behalf; **however,** it has **not** yet happened that **food was** miraculously **created** in a person’s home.


###### Shabbat 53b:20
[Shabbat 53b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:20)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאָדָם אֶחָד שֶׁנָּשָׂא אִשָּׁה גִּידֶּמֶת וְלֹא הִכִּיר בָּהּ עַד יוֹם מוֹתָהּ. אָמַר רַב: בֹּא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה צְנוּעָה אִשָּׁה זוֹ שֶׁלֹּא הִכִּיר בָּהּ בַּעֲלָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי חִיָּיא: זוֹ דַּרְכָּהּ בְּכָךְ. אֶלָּא: כַּמָּה צָנוּעַ אָדָם זֶה שֶׁלֹּא הִכִּיר בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates another unusual story. **The Sages taught:** There was **an incident involving one man who married a one-armed woman, and he did not realize** that she was one-armed **until the day that she died. Rav said: Come and see how modest this woman was that her husband did not realize** this **about her. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: That is** typical **conduct** for **her,** as a woman typically covers herself. All the more so a one-armed woman makes sure to cover her defect. **Rather,** say: **How modest was this man that he did not recognize** this **in his wife.**


###### Shabbat 53b:21
[Shabbat 53b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:21)

זְכָרִים יוֹצְאִין לְבוּבִין. מַאי ״לְבוּבִין״? אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: תּוּתָרֵי. מַאי מַשְׁמַע דְּהַאי ״לְבוּבִין״ לִישָּׁנָא דְּקָרוֹבֵי הוּא — דִּכְתִיב: ״לִבַּבְתִּנִי אֲחוֹתִי כַלָּה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
We learned in our mishna: **Rams may go out *levuvin*.** The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of ***levuvin*? Rav Huna said: Tied [*tutri*]** in pairs. The Gemara explains: **From where** may it **be inferred that this** word ***levuvin* is a term of closeness? As it is written: “You have drawn me near [*libavtini*], my sister my bride”** (Song of Songs 4:9).


###### Shabbat 53b:22
[Shabbat 53b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:22)

עוּלָּא אָמַר: עוֹר שֶׁקּוֹשְׁרִין לָהֶם כְּנֶגֶד לִבָּם — כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִפְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן זְאֵבִים. זְאֵבִים — אַזְּכָרִים נָפְלִי, אַנְּקֵיבוֹת לָא נָפְלִי? מִשּׁוּם דִּמְסַגּוּ בְּרֵישׁ עֶדְרָא. וּזְאֵבִין — בְּרֵישׁ עֶדְרָא נָפְלִי, בְּסוֹף עֶדְרָא לָא נָפְלִי? אֶלָּא: מִשּׁוּם דְּשַׁמִּינֵי. וּבִנְקֵבוֹת לֵיכָּא דְּשַׁמִּינָן? וְתוּ, מִי יָדְעִי בֵּין הָנֵי לְהָנֵי? אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּזָקְפִי חוּטְמַיְיהוּ וּמְסַגּוּ כִּי דָּווּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ulla said:** *Levuvin* refers to animal **hide that one ties over the hearts** [*lev*] of rams **so that wolves will not attack them**. The Gemara asks: Do **wolves attack rams** but **do not attack ewes?** Why is this protection provided only to males? The Gemara answers: **Because** the males **walk at the head of the flock.** The Gemara asks: Do **wolves attack the head of the flock** but **not the rear of the flock? Rather,** the wolves prey specifically on the rams **because they are plump**. The Gemara asks: **Are there no plump** ones **among the ewes? And furthermore, do** the wolves **know** how to distinguish **between these,** the plump ones, and **those,** the thin ones? **Rather,** the wolves prey specifically on the rams **because they raise their noses and walk while looking** to both sides. The wolves think that they are preparing to attack them.


###### Shabbat 53b:23
[Shabbat 53b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:23)

רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: עוֹר שֶׁקּוֹשְׁרִין לָהֶן תַּחַת זַכְרוּתָן כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲלוּ עַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת. מִמַּאי? — מִדְּקָתָנֵי סֵיפָא: וְהָרְחֵלִים יוֹצְאוֹת שְׁחוּזוֹת. מַאי ״שְׁחוּזוֹת״ — שֶׁאוֹחֲזִין הָאַלְיָה שֶׁלָּהֶן לְמַעְלָה כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּעֲלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן זְכָרִים. רֵישָׁא כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲלוּ עַל הַנְּקֵבוֹת, וְסֵיפָא כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּעֲלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן זְכָרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said**: *Levuvin* refers to animal **hide that one ties under their male** organ **so that they will not mount the females. And from where** do we derive that meaning? **Because the latter clause states: Ewes may go out *sheḥuzot*. What is** the meaning of ***sheḥuzot*?** It means **that they fasten [*she’oḥazin*] their tails** with animal hide **so that the males may mount them** more easily. It is reasonable to explain that **the first clause** refers to an action undertaken **so that the males will not mount the females, and the latter clause** to an action undertaken **so that the males will mount them.**


###### Shabbat 53b:24
[Shabbat 53b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/53b:24)

מַאי מַשְׁמַע דְּהַאי ״שְׁחוּזוֹת״ לִישָּׁנָא דְגַלּוֹיֵי הוּא? — דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִנֵּה אִשָּׁה לִקְרָאתוֹ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **From where** may it **be inferred that this** word ***sheḥuzot* is a term of exposure?** The Gemara answers: **As it is written** in the description of a wicked woman: **“And behold there met him a woman**