## Yevamot Daf 61b

###### Yevamot 61b:1
[Yevamot 61b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:1)

וְיֵשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים — לֹא יִשָּׂא אַיְלוֹנִית, שֶׁהִיא זוֹנָה הָאֲמוּרָה בַּתּוֹרָה. דְּאַזּוֹנָה כֹּהֲנִים הוּא דְּמִפַּקְדִי וְיִשְׂרָאֵל לָא מִפַּקְּדִי, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי קָתָנֵי כֹּהֵן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and he has children, he may not marry a sexually underdeveloped woman, as she is the *zona*** about whom it is **stated in the Torah** that a priest may not marry her. **It is priests who were commanded** not to marry **a *zona*, but Israelites were not commanded** this. It is **due to that** reason that **he taught** the first clause of the mishna about **a priest,** even though that *halakha* applies equally to Israelites.


###### Yevamot 61b:2
[Yevamot 61b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:2)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״אָכְלוּ וְלֹא יִשְׂבָּעוּ הִזְנוּ וְלֹא יִפְרֹצוּ״, כׇּל בִּיאָה שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ פִּירְצָה — אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא בְּעִילַת זְנוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Huna said: What is the reason** for the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda? As it is written: “And they shall eat, and not have enough, they shall commit harlotry, and shall not increase”** (Hosea 4:10). He expounds the verse as follows: **Any intercourse that does not** have the possibility to **increase** the population because the woman is incapable of having children, **is nothing other** than **licentious sexual intercourse.**


###### Yevamot 61b:3
[Yevamot 61b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:3)

תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: כֹּהֵן לֹא יִשָּׂא אֶת הַקְּטַנָּה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב חִסְדָּא לְרַבָּה: פּוֹק עַיֵּין בָּהּ, דִּלְאוּרְתָּא בָּעֵי לַהּ רַב הוּנָא מִינָּךְ. נְפַק עַיֵּין בָּהּ: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר, וְסָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Eliezer says: A priest may not marry a minor. Rav Ḥisda said to Rabba: Go** and **investigate** this *halakha*, **as in the evening Rav Huna** will **ask you** the reason for Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling. **He went** and **investigated it,** and arrived at the following conclusion: **Rabbi Eliezer holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, and he** also **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda.**


###### Yevamot 61b:4
[Yevamot 61b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:4)

סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר, דְּחָיֵישׁ לְמִיעוּטָא. וְסָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה, דְּאָמַר: אַיְלוֹנִית זוֹנָה הָוְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabba explains: **He holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, who** says that **one must be concerned for the minority.** Rabbi Meir does not allow one to assume that an unknown case is similar to the majority of cases. Consequently, one must take into account the possibility that a minor will turn out to be sexually underdeveloped, although this will not be true of most individuals. **And** he also **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, who said** that **a sexually underdeveloped woman is a *zona*** and therefore forbidden to a priest.


###### Yevamot 61b:5
[Yevamot 61b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:5)

וּכְרַבִּי מֵאִיר מִי סָבַר לַהּ? וְהָתַנְיָא: קָטָן וּקְטַנָּה לֹא חוֹלְצִין וְלֹא מְיַבְּמִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר: יָפֶה אָמַרְתָּ שֶׁאֵין חוֹלְצִין. ״אִישׁ״ כְּתִיב בַּפָּרָשָׁה, וּמַקְּשִׁינַן אִשָּׁה לְאִישׁ. אֶלָּא מַאי טַעְמָא אֵין מְיַבְּמִין?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges Rabba’s explanation: **And does** Rabbi Eliezer **hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir? Isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **A boy minor and a girl minor may not perform *ḥalitza* or levirate marriage;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.** The Rabbis **said to Rabbi Meir: You spoke well** when you said **that they may not perform *ḥalitza*,** as the term **“man” is written in the passage** of *ḥalitza* (Deuteronomy 25:7–10), which limits the *halakha* to an adult male, **and we compare a woman to a man** and therefore limit *ḥalitza* to an adult woman. **However, what is the reason** that **they may not perform levirate marriage?**


###### Yevamot 61b:6
[Yevamot 61b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:6)

[אָמַר לָהֶם:] קָטָן — שֶׁמָּא יִמָּצֵא סָרִיס, קְטַנָּה — שֶׁמָּא תִּמָּצֵא אַיְלוֹנִית, וְנִמְצְאוּ פּוֹגְעִין בְּעֶרְוָה. וְתַנְיָא: קְטַנָּה מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת וְאֵינָהּ חוֹלֶצֶת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Meir **said to them: A boy minor** may not perform levirate marriage **lest he be found** to be **a eunuch,** i.e., one who is incapable of fathering children for his late brother. Similarly, **a girl minor** may not perform levirate marriage **lest she be found** to be **sexually underdeveloped** when she grows up. In either case, the mitzva of levirate marriage does not apply, **and they turn out** to have **encountered a forbidden relative. And it was taught** in a different *baraita*: **A girl minor enters into levirate marriage but does not perform *ḥalitza*;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer.** This proves that Rabbi Eliezer disagrees with Rabbi Meir and is not concerned that a girl may turn out to be sexually underdeveloped.


###### Yevamot 61b:7
[Yevamot 61b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:7)

וּכְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה מִי סָבַר לַהּ? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״זוֹנָה״ — זוֹנָה כִּשְׁמָהּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: ״זוֹנָה״ זוֹ מוּפְקֶרֶת. רַבִּי מַתְיָא בֶּן חָרָשׁ אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ הָלַךְ בַּעְלָהּ לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ, וּבָא עָלֶיהָ בַּדֶּרֶךְ — עֲשָׂאָהּ זוֹנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues to challenge Rabba’s explanation of Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling. **And does** Rabbi Eliezer **hold in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda? Wasn’t it is taught in** a *baraita*: The ***zona*** forbidden to a priest is as **the name *zona*** implies, i.e., a married woman who committed adultery; this is **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Akiva says: A *zona* is** a woman, even an unmarried woman, **who** is **available** to all, i.e., she has intercourse with whoever is interested. **Rabbi Matya ben Ḥarash says: Even** if **her husband went to make her drink** the bitter waters after she disregarded his warning not to seclude herself with a certain man, and **he had intercourse with her on the way, he has** thereby **caused her** to become **a *zona*** because she was forbidden to him at the time, despite the fact that she is his wife.


###### Yevamot 61b:8
[Yevamot 61b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:8)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: זוֹנָה — זוֹ אַיְלוֹנִית. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵין זוֹנָה אֶלָּא גִּיּוֹרֶת וּמְשׁוּחְרֶרֶת וְשֶׁנִּבְעֲלָה בְּעִילַת זְנוּת. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: פָּנוּי הַבָּא עַל הַפְּנוּיָה שֶׁלֹּא לְשֵׁם אִישׁוּת — עֲשָׂאָהּ זוֹנָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda says: A *zona* is a sexually underdeveloped woman. And the Rabbis say:** The term ***zona*** applies **only to a female convert, a freed** maidservant, **and one who engaged in licentious sexual intercourse. Rabbi Elazar says:** Even in the case of **an unmarried man who had intercourse with an unmarried woman not for the purpose of marriage, he has** thereby **caused her** to become **a *zona*.** This *baraita* proves that Rabbi Eliezer does not agree with Rabbi Yehuda.


###### Yevamot 61b:9
[Yevamot 61b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:9)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: הָכָא בְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עָסְקִינַן. לְאֵימַת קָנֵי לַה, לְכִי גָדְלָה [לְכִי גָדְלָה] — בְּעוּלָה הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rav Adda bar Ahava said** that Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling that a priest may not marry a minor must be explained differently: **Here we are dealing with a High Priest,** and the problem is as follows: **When can he acquire her** as his wife? Only **when she is grown up.** However, if they had started living together as husband and wife when she was a minor, then when she is grown up and the marriage can legally take effect, **she is** already **a non-virgin,** and a High Priest is commanded to marry a virgin.


###### Yevamot 61b:10
[Yevamot 61b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:10)

אָמַר רָבָא: מְכַלֵּי לֵב, אִי דְּקַדְּשַׁהּ אֲבוּהּ — מֵהַהִיא שַׁעְתָּא הוּא דְּקָנֵי לַהּ. וְאִי דְּקַדִּשָׁה נַפְשַׁהּ — הָא רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הִיא וְלָא רַבָּנַן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** This explanation is **without reason. If her father betrothed her** to her husband, her husband **acquired her from that time,** as betrothal that a father carries out on his daughter’s behalf when she is a minor is effective by Torah law. **And if** the minor **betrothed herself,** is **this Rabbi Eliezer’s** opinion **and not** that of **the Rabbis?** The Rabbis would certainly agree that a High Priest may not marry a minor under these circumstances.


###### Yevamot 61b:11
[Yevamot 61b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:11)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: לְעוֹלָם בְּכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט — וְחָיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא תִּתְפַּתֶּה עָלָיו. אִי הָכִי יִשְׂרָאֵל נָמֵי! פִּתּוּיי קְטַנָּה אוֹנֶס הוּא, וְאוֹנֶס בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל מִישְׁרָא שְׁרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rava said: Actually,** Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling includes **a common priest,** and the reason he cannot marry a minor is that **we are concerned lest she be seduced** by another man, due to her tender age and naïveté, while married **to him.** The Gemara asks: **If so,** the same concern should apply to **an Israelite also.** The Gemara answers: **The seduction of a minor is** considered **rape, and a rape** victim remains **permitted** to her husband **in** a case where she is married to **an Israelite,** but not if she is married to a priest.


###### Yevamot 61b:12
[Yevamot 61b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:12)

רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: בְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְהַאי תַּנָּא הוּא דְּתַנְיָא: ״בְּתוּלָה״, יָכוֹל קְטַנָּה — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִשָּׁה״. אִי אִשָּׁה, יָכוֹל בּוֹגֶרֶת — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״בְּתוּלָה״. הָא כֵּיצַד? יָצְתָה מִכְּלַל קַטְנוּת, וְלִכְלַל בַּגְרוּת לֹא בָּאתָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said:** Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling applies specifically **to a High Priest, and it is** the opinion of **this *tanna*, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that when the verse states: **“A virgin** of his own people shall he take for a wife [*isha*]” (Leviticus 21:14), one **might** have thought a High Priest may marry **a minor; the verse** therefore **states** that he must marry **a woman [*isha*],** i.e., an adult. **If** he must marry a **woman,** one **might** have thought it means **a grown woman. The verse** therefore **states** that he must marry **a virgin,** which excludes a grown woman, who is considered only a partial virgin because her hymen is not fully intact. **How so?** He must marry a woman who **has left the class of minority but** who **has not** yet **reached the class of grown womanhood,** i.e., he must marry a maiden.


###### Yevamot 61b:13
[Yevamot 61b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:13)

רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: הַאי תַּנָּא הוּא דְּתַנְיָא: ״בְּתוּלָה״, אֵין בְּתוּלָה אֶלָּא נַעֲרָה. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וְהַנַּעֲרָה טוֹבַת מַרְאֶה מְאֹד בְּתוּלָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is** the opinion of **this *tanna*, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: The High Priest must marry **a virgin, and** the term **virgin** refers **only** to **a maiden. And** a verse **similarly states: “And the maiden was very fair to look upon, a virgin,** and no man had known her” (Genesis 24:16).


###### Yevamot 61b:14
[Yevamot 61b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:14)

רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: פָּנוּי הַבָּא עַל הַפְּנוּיָה שֶׁלֹּא לְשֵׁם אִישׁוּת — עֲשָׂאָהּ זוֹנָה. אָמַר רַב עַמְרָם: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* cited above mentioned that **Rabbi Elazar says:** In the case of **an unmarried man who had intercourse with an unmarried woman not for the purpose of marriage, he has caused her** to become **a *zona*. Rav Amram said: The *halakha* is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar.**


###### Yevamot 61b:15
[Yevamot 61b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** לֹא יִבָּטֵל אָדָם מִפְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן יֵשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: שְׁנֵי זְכָרִים, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **A man may not neglect** the mitzva to **be fruitful and multiply unless he** already **has children. Beit Shammai say:** One fulfills this mitzva with **two males, and Beit Hillel say: A male and a female, as it is stated: “Male and female He created them”** (Genesis 5:2).


###### Yevamot 61b:16
[Yevamot 61b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:16)

**גְּמָ׳** הָא יֵשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים — מִפְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה בָּטֵיל, מֵאִשָּׁה לָא בָּטֵיל. מְסַיְּיעָא לֵיהּ לְרַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל. דְּאָמַר: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ לְאָדָם כַּמָּה בָּנִים, אָסוּר לַעֲמוֹד בְּלֹא אִשָּׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא טוֹב הֱיוֹת הָאָדָם לְבַדּוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara infers from the mishna’s wording that if **he** already **has children he may neglect** the mitzva to **be fruitful and multiply,** but **he may not neglect** the mitzva to have **a wife.** This **supports** what **Rav Naḥman said** in the name of **Shmuel, who said: Even** if **a man has several children, it is prohibited to remain without a wife, as it is stated: “It is not good that the man should be alone”** (Genesis 2:18).


###### Yevamot 61b:17
[Yevamot 61b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:17)

וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: הָא יֵשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים — בָּטֵיל מִפְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה, וּבָטֵיל נָמֵי מֵאִשָּׁה. נֵימָא תֶּיהְוֵי תְּיוּבְתָּא דְּרַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל! לָא: אֵין לוֹ בָּנִים — נוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה בַּת בָּנִים, יֵשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים — נוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה דְּלָאו בַּת בָּנִים. נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ לִמְכּוֹר סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה בִּשְׁבִיל בָּנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And some say** a different version of the inference from the mishna: If **he** already **has children, he may neglect** the mitzva to **be fruitful and multiply and** he **may also neglect** the mitzva to have **a wife. Shall we say** this **is a conclusive refutation of** what **Rav Naḥman said** that **Shmuel** said? The Gemara responds: **No,** it means that **if he does not have children he must marry a woman** capable **of** bearing **children,** whereas if **he has children he may marry a woman who is not** capable **of** bearing **children. A practical difference** between a man who has children and one who does not is whether he is permitted **to sell a Torah scroll in order to** marry a woman capable of having **children.** This is permitted only for one who does not yet have children.


###### Yevamot 61b:18
[Yevamot 61b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/61b:18)

בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: שְׁנֵי זְכָרִים. מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי? יָלְפִינַן מִמֹּשֶׁה, דִּכְתִיב: ״בְּנֵי מֹשֶׁה גֵּרְשׁוֹם וֶאֱלִיעֶזֶר״. וּבֵית הִלֵּל: יָלְפִינַן מִבְּרִיָּיתוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם. וּבֵית שַׁמַּאי, לֵילְפֵי מִבְּרִיָּיתוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם? אֵין דָּנִין אֶפְשָׁר

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states that **Beit Shammai say** that one fulfills the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply when he has **two males.** The Gemara asks: **What is the reason of Beit Shammai?** The Gemara answers: **We learn** this **from Moses as it is written: “The sons of Moses, Gershom and Eliezer”** (I Chronicles 23:15). Since Moses did not have any other children, two sons must be sufficient to fulfill the mitzva. **And** the reason of **Beit Hillel** is that **we learn from the creation of the world,** as mankind was created male and female. The Gemara asks: **And Beit Shammai, let them learn from the creation of the world** as well. The Gemara answers that Beit Shammai could say to you: **We do not derive** a case where it is **possible**