Avodah Zarah 22b — the Talmud in English

We learned in our Mishna: They do not establish an animal in the inns of star-worshippers!

Gemara:

The Gemara raises a contradiction to this law:

And we raise a contradiction,

for we learned in the Tosefta [chapter 2]—

they purchase

buy

from them

from the gentiles

an animal for a sacrifice, and one is not concerned

about it regarding any of the following concerns:

a.

Not on account of one that mated,

that is, if the animal is male, there is no concern lest a woman mated with the animal.

b.

And

one is not concerned

on account of one that was mated with,

lest this animal was mated with by a human. c.

Nor

is one concerned

on account of one that was set aside,

lest the gentile designated this animal to sacrifice it to idolatry.

d.

Nor

are we concerned

on account of one that was worshipped,

lest they already worshipped this animal as idolatry!

If so, it is difficult, for in this beraita we see that there is no defect in an animal that was in a star-worshipper’s domain. Whereas in our Mishna it is explained that it is prohibited to leave animals with the gentile?

Granted

with regard to the concern of

one set aside and one worshipped,

there is no need for concern. Since

if it is so that he set it aside,

if indeed the gentile set aside the animal to sacrifice it to idolatry,

and

likewise

if it is so that he worshipped it,

if indeed he worshipped this animal as idolatry—

he would not have sold it,

he would not have sold it!

Rather,

regarding the concern lest this animal be

one that mated or one that was mated with—

should one be concerned,

and refrain from taking it for a sacrifice!?

Rather, it is proven that there is no concern for this, and not as explained in our Mishna?

The Gemara answers:

Rav Taḥlifa said, Rav Sheila bar Avina said in the name

in the name

of Rav: A gentile takes pity on his animal

and does not mate with it, so that

it should not become barren.

So that it should not be injured and become barren through the mating. Therefore, there is no impediment to purchasing it from him for the purpose of the sacrifice.

However, he does not take pity on a Jewish animal staying in his inn, and is liable to mate with it. Therefore, they do not establish an animal in a gentile’s inn.

Still, it is difficult:

This works

for animals

females,

indeed there is no concern that the gentile mated with them, since he takes pity on his animal lest it become barren.

However, animals

males, what is there to say?

For there is no concern of becoming barren in them as there is among females. If so, there is concern lest the gentile mated with them. And again it is difficult: How do they purchase animals from them for sacrifices ?

Rav Kahana said:

Even regarding males there is no concern lest he mated with them.

Since

through the mating

they become lean

the animals

in flesh

of theirs. It follows that even regarding males the gentile takes pity, and does not mate with them.

Rather,

the difficulty should be raised from

that which was taught: They purchase an animal from their shepherd.

And why

should one be concerned

should we be concerned

lest

the shepherd

mated with it

the animal? Surely the shepherd is not concerned that it become barren, since he is selling it?

The Gemara answers:

Their shepherd is afraid

to mate with it,

because of loss of wages.

Since if they discover that he mated with it and harmed it, he will lose his wages.

However, concerning this reasoning there is a difficulty:

But that which was taught: A Jew may not

Israel

hand over an animal to their shepherd

of the gentiles. And why should he not hand it over?

Let us say

that

their shepherd is afraid because of loss of his wages?

The Gemara answers: There is a distinction between when the owner of the animal is a Jew and when he is a gentile.

And the distinction is as follows:

They,

the gentiles,

who know one another

who know and recognize these practices—

are afraid!

They are concerned about this, and the shepherd will not perform these acts with his fellow’s animal, because if the owner of the animal notices this, he will demand from the shepherd payment for what he damaged in it.

However,

we

we, Israel,

who do not know them,

who do not know and recognize practices of this kind and do not discern whether the animal was mated with—

are not feared.

The shepherds are not concerned because of us, and do not refrain from doing this with our animals. Therefore, a person may not hand over an animal to their shepherd.

Rava said: This is what people say

this is what people say:

The engraving splits the marble.

Just as marble fears the engraving [which is a tool for engraving and marking in marble], because the marble “recognizes” it and knows that it is made to cut with it,

so

a footman regarding his fellow—

knows.

So a talebearer and a worthless person [and other transgressors] know and recognize people who transgress like themselves. [

And the parallel here is as the words of the Gemara above. Indeed, a Jew does not recognize the actions of the gentile shepherd, who is liable to mate with the animal. However, the gentile knows and recognizes these actions, and therefore the shepherd is afraid to do so to the gentile’s animal].

The Gemara discusses:

If so,

if indeed there is no concern regarding the gentile seller that he will mate with the animal, since he is concerned lest the female become barren, or lest the flesh of the male become lean,

then animals

males from female

gentiles—

should not be purchased,

even from the hands of female sellers they should not be purchased.

For we are concerned,

there is concern

lest

the gentile woman

make it mate with her.

She makes the male animal mate with her, and there is no concern of financial loss in this, because a male animal that mates with a woman does not become lean in flesh. If so, it should be prohibited to purchase male animals from gentile female sellers?!

The Gemara answers: There is no concern lest the female sellers make the males mate with them.

Since

through this mating, in which she makes the male mate with her,

the male becomes aroused by her

and pursues her for this purpose. Therefore—

she is afraid.

The woman fears lest her disgrace become known publicly!

And this is difficult:

But that which Rav

taught

Rav

Yosef—

a widow

a widow

may not raise a dog

may not raise a dog in her domain,

and may not lodge a Torah scholar in the inn

and likewise may not host a Torah scholar, lest they come to transgression.

And the Gemara discusses this statement:

Granted

indeed,

a bar bei rav

a Torah scholar

is modest with regard to her.

He is modest. And even if they should come to sin, he will not reveal the matter publicly, and consequently she has no concern about sinning with him. And therefore, she is forbidden to host him.

But a dog,

a dog, behold,

since it is provoked by her,

as it is liable to be provoked by her mating, and to pursue her [as we said above regarding an animal] -

she will be afraid!

She will fear its mating,

and if so, there is no need to prohibit her from raising it, for there is no concern that she will come to sin.

The Gemara answers: the dog is different from other animals.

Since, when she throws it

when she throws toward it

a morsel

a little meat,

and it follows after her,

and it is accustomed to pursue its owner, in order that she give it more meat. And because of this, the woman thinks that

people will say

the people will say:

this

the reason

that

this dog

follows after her

pursues her -

is because of the morsel after which it follows.

It is pursuing in order to obtain meat [and not because of promiscuity], and because of this the woman will become lax, and she will come to have the dog mate with her; therefore, she is forbidden to raise it.

And after all this, one must ask: we learned above [15b] that even female animals and gentile women are not secluded together.

And it is difficult: female animals

with

gentile women

females—what is the reason that we do not seclude them,

for in this manner there is no actual concern of mating?

Mar Ukva bar Hama said: because idolaters are commonly found with

the gentile women

the wives of their fellows,

in order to sin with them.

And sometimes he does not find her

the woman,

and he finds the animal

and mates with it!

And because of this, it is also forbidden to seclude the woman with the animal, lest the man who comes to her mate with it.

Another manner of explaining the matter:

And if you wish, say: even if he finds her

the gentile finds the woman -

he also mates with it

with the animal!

For the Master said: their animals are dear to them

to the gentiles

more than their wives!

And how is such a thing possible? -

For Rabbi Yohanan said:

When

the serpent came upon Eve, it placed within her

filth!

And because of this, this animal, which is not of the descendants of Eve, is preferable to them than their wives, who have this filth within them.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

If so, Israelites too?

This filth also exists in the wives of Israelites.

The Gemara answers:

The Israelites who stood at Mount Sinai -

their filth ceased, for

at the revelation at Mount Sinai they were healed of all defects, their filth ceased . But idolaters, who did not stand at Mount Sinai, -

their filth did not cease!

They raised a dilemma before them: What is the law concerning birds,

whether all these concerns were also stated with regard to birds?

And the Gemara resolves it:

Come and hear: For Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel because of

in the name of

Rabbi Hanina: I saw an idolater who took a goose from the marketplace. He mated with it, strangled it, roasted it, and ate it!

And it is demonstrated that these acts are also performed with birds, and their law is like that of an animal in this regard.

And Rav Yirmeya of Difti said: I saw an Arab

one who took a thigh of an animal from the marketplace, and carved into it

a carving sufficient for

the measure of

an act of

mating,

and afterward

mated with it,

roasted it, and ate it!