## Yevamot Daf 35a

###### Yevamot 35a:1
[Yevamot 35a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:1)

וּגְזַרוּ רַבָּנַן קְטַנָּה מִשּׁוּם גְּדוֹלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And,** although there is no possibility for her to become pregnant, **the Sages issued** a rabbinic **decree** requiring the three month waiting period **for a female minor due to** this requirement for **a female adult** who engaged in promiscuous sexual acts.


###### Yevamot 35a:2
[Yevamot 35a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:2)

וּמִי גָּזְרִינַן קְטַנָּה מִשּׁוּם גְּדוֹלָה? וְהָתְנַן: אִם הָיוּ קְטַנּוֹת שֶׁאֵינָן רְאוּיוֹת לֵילֵד — מַחְזִירִין אוֹתָן מִיָּד. אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב: הוֹרָאַת שָׁעָה הָיְתָה. מִכְּלָל דַּהֲוַאי? אֶלָּא: כְּהוֹרָאַת שָׁעָה הָיְתָה. וְחִילּוּף לָא שְׁכִיחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And do we issue a decree** with regard to **a female minor due to** the ruling for **a female adult? But didn’t we learn** in the mishna: **If they were female minors who could not bear children, we return them immediately** to their husbands? This indicates that there is no concern for pregnancy, and the Sages did not issue a decree in this case. **Rav Giddel said** that **Rav said: This was a provisional edict** issued in exigent circumstances, and therefore one cannot extrapolate from the case in the mishna to other situations. The Gemara wonders: Can one assume **by inference that there was** such an occurrence? It would seem from the mishna that this was merely a possibility and not an actual occurrence, for if it actually happened it would have been appropriate for the mishna to relate the actual case. **Rather,** the ruling in the mishna is **like a provisional edict in that switching** of wives, such as described in the mishna, **is uncommon,** and in cases that are not common, the Sages do not issue a decree. Therefore, in the case of the mishna, the female minors were not required to wait.


###### Yevamot 35a:3
[Yevamot 35a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:3)

לִישָּׁנָא אַחֲרִינָא, אָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כּוּלָּן צְרִיכוֹת לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים, חוּץ מִגִּיּוֹרֶת וּמְשׁוּחְרֶרֶת גְּדוֹלָה. [אֲבָל] קְטַנָּה בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים. בְּמַאי? אִי בְּמֵיאוּן — הָאַמְרַהּ שְׁמוּאֵל חֲדָא זִימְנָא. אִי בְּגֵט — הָא קָאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל דְּבָעֲיָא! דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מֵיאֲנָה בּוֹ — אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים! נָתַן לָהּ גֵּט — צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים! אֶלָּא בִּזְנוּת, וּזְנוּת בִּקְטַנָּה לָא שְׁכִיחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Some say another version** of what was taught: **Shmuel said: All** women **must wait three months, except for a female convert** who is an adult **and a freed maidservant who is an adult;** these women need not wait. **However, an Israelite female minor need not wait three months** in any case. The Gemara clarifies: **With regard to what** situation is this statement referring? **If** it is referring to a female minor released from her marriage **by refusal,** it would be superfluous, **as didn’t Shmuel** already **state this** *halakha* **one time?** If it is referring to a woman released **by a bill of divorce,** but **didn’t Shmuel say that** in that case **she is required** to wait, **as Shmuel said:** If **she refused him she need not wait three months,** but **if he gave her a bill of divorce, she must wait three months? Rather,** this is referring to cases of **promiscuous sexual intercourse, and** an occurrence of **promiscuous sexual intercourse with female minors is uncommon,** and the Sages did not issue rabbinic decrees in uncommon instances.


###### Yevamot 35a:4
[Yevamot 35a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:4)

גִּיּוֹרֶת וּמְשׁוּחְרֶרֶת דִּשְׁכִיחַ בְּהוּ זְנוּת, לִיגְזוֹר! הוּא דְּאָמַר כְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי. דְּתַנְיָא: הַגִּיּוֹרֶת וְהַשְּׁבוּיָה וְהַשִּׁפְחָה שֶׁנִּפְדּוּ וְשֶׁנִּתְגַּיְּירוּ וְשֶׁנִּשְׁתַּחְרְרוּ — צְרִיכוֹת לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מַתִּיר לֵיאָרֵס וְלִינָּשֵׂא מִיָּד. אָמַר רַבָּה: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי — קָסָבַר אִשָּׁה מְזַנָּה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בְּמוֹךְ כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְעַבֵּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Let** the Sages **issue a decree** requiring **a female convert and a released maidservant** to wait three months, **as** at the time that one was a gentile and the other a maidservant, **promiscuous sexual intercourse was common for them.** The Gemara responds: Shmuel **stated** his *halakhic* ruling **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yosei, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: In the case of **the female convert; and the captured woman,** who is suspected of having been raped during her imprisonment; **and the maidservant, who were redeemed or who were converted or who were released, must wait three months** prior to marriage. This is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei allows** them **to be betrothed and married immediately. Rabba said: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Yosei? He holds that a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse uses** a contraceptive **resorbent** that she places at the opening of her womb **so as not to become impregnated.** Therefore, there is no concern that she might be pregnant.


###### Yevamot 35a:5
[Yevamot 35a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:5)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: בִּשְׁלָמָא גִּיּוֹרֶת, כֵּיוָן דְּדַעְתַּהּ לְאִיגַּיּוֹרֵי, מְנַטְּרָה נַפְשַׁהּ, כְּדֵי לְהַבְחִין בֵּין זֶרַע שֶׁנִּזְרַע בִּקְדוּשָּׁה, וּבֵין זֶרַע שֶׁנִּזְרַע שֶׁלֹּא בִּקְדוּשָּׁה. שְׁבוּיָה וְשִׁפְחָה נָמֵי, דְּשָׁמְעִי מִמָּרַיְיהוּ, וּמְנַטְּרִי נַפְשַׁיְיהוּ. אֶלָּא יוֹצֵאת בְּשֵׁן וָעַיִן הֵיכִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to him: Granted, a female convert** does this. **Since she is determined to convert, she guards herself** so as not to be impregnated while still a gentile **in order to distinguish between children conceived in sanctity,** i.e., after her conversion, **and children conceived out of sanctity. A captured woman and a maidservant** would **also** be cautious because **they hear from their masters** that they are about to be redeemed or that they are about to be released, **and they guard themselves** so as not to be impregnated. **However,** with regard to a maidservant who **is released due to** damage caused her by her masters, i.e., loss of one of her extremities such as **a tooth or an eye, how can you find** a case where there is no concern for her becoming impregnated? Since she could not have known in advance that she would be released, she would have had no reason to be careful not to become pregnant.


###### Yevamot 35a:6
[Yevamot 35a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:6)

וְכִי תֵּימָא: כֹּל דְּמִמֵּילָא מוֹדֶה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי — וְהָתְנַן: אֲנוּסָה וּמְפוּתָּה צְרִיכָה לְהַמְתִּין שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מַתִּיר לֵיאָרֵס וְלִינָּשֵׂא מִיָּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you would say** that in **any** case **where** the situation occurs **by itself,** as in the case where a woman was unaware of her pending release, **Rabbi Yosei concedes** that she must indeed wait, this is difficult. **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna: **A woman who was raped and a woman who was seduced must wait three months** as perhaps she became pregnant; this is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei permits her to be betrothed and to be married immediately.** Clearly, a woman who was raped could not have prepared herself ahead of time so as not to become pregnant.


###### Yevamot 35a:7
[Yevamot 35a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:7)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: אִשָּׁה מְזַנָּה, מִתְהַפֶּכֶת שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְעַבֵּר. וְאִידַּךְ? חָיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא לֹא נִתְהַפְּכָה יָפֶה יָפֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Abaye said: A woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse turns over** following intercourse, trying to prevent the absorption of the semen, so as **not to become pregnant.** Maidservants act in a similar manner. The Gemara asks: If indeed she tries not to become pregnant, how then would **the other** opinion, that of Rabbi Yehuda, explain why she must wait three months? The Gemara responds: **We are concerned** that **perhaps she did not turn over well enough** and therefore became pregnant.


###### Yevamot 35a:8
[Yevamot 35a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:8)

וְאִם הָיוּ כֹּהֲנוֹת כּוּ׳. כֹּהֲנוֹת — אִין, יִשְׂרְאֵלִיּוֹת — לָא! אֵימָא: אִם הָיוּ נְשֵׁי כֹהֲנִים. נְשֵׁי כֹהֲנִים — אִין, נְשֵׁי יִשְׂרְאֵלִים — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to the case of two betrothed women who were switched at the time they entered the wedding canopy, the mishna states: **And if they were daughters of priests,** they are disqualified from partaking in *teruma*. The Gemara asks: Does this indicate that with regard to the **daughters of priests, yes,** they are disqualified from partaking in *teruma*, but with regard to **the daughter of an Israelite, no,** she would not be disqualified? It would seem that an Israelite woman married to a priest should most certainly be disqualified from eating of her husband’s *teruma*. The Gemara answers: Rather, **say: If they were the wives of priests** then they are disqualified. The Gemara questions this formulation: Does this indicate that with regard to the **wives of priests, yes,** they are disqualified, but with regard to the **wives of Israelites, no,** they are not disqualified, and if their husbands died, they would be suitable for marriage to the priests?


###### Yevamot 35a:9
[Yevamot 35a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:9)

וְהָאָמַר רַב עַמְרָם: הָא מִילְּתָא אֲמַר לַן רַב שֵׁשֶׁת, וְאַנְהֲרִינְהוּ לְעַיְינִין מִמַּתְנִיתִין: אֵשֶׁת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנֶּאֶנְסָה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמּוּתֶּרֶת לְבַעְלָהּ — פְּסוּלָה לַכְּהוּנָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects to this: **But didn’t Rav Amram say: Rav Sheshet said this matter to us, and he lit our eyes** by showing us that this ruling is indicated **from what was** stated in **the mishna** (*Yevamot* 53b). He said: **The wife of an Israelite who was raped, even though she is permitted to** return to **her husband, she is** nevertheless **disqualified from the priesthood.** If her husband later dies, she may not marry a priest, for although she is permitted to her husband the rape disqualified her for matters of priesthood.


###### Yevamot 35a:10
[Yevamot 35a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:10)

אָמַר רָבָא, הָכִי קָאָמַר: אִם הָיוּ כֹּהֲנוֹת נְשׂוּאוֹת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל — נִפְסְלוּ מִן הַתְּרוּמָה דְּבֵי נָשַׁיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava** resolved this and **said: This is what** the *tanna* **is saying** in the mishna: **If they were daughters of priests** who **were married to an Israelite, they are disqualified from the *teruma* that is from the household of their fathers,** so that if their husbands die while they are childless, they may not go back to eat of the *teruma* in the house of their fathers. While other childless daughters of priests are again qualified to eat of the *teruma* the moment they leave their Israelite husbands, these women were disqualified by their act of forbidden sexual intercourse.


###### Yevamot 35a:11
[Yevamot 35a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/35a:11)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ אַרְבָּעָה אַחִין**