Ketubot 10b (י:) — the Talmud in English

He said to him:

our pressing—

like their laundering.

That is, the water in Eretz Yisrael is well suited for laundering [or the people of Eretz Yisrael had effective substances for laundering], and therefore, by laundering, they could whiten the garment, whereupon the traces of blood would become visible on it.

But in Babylonia, the garment would not be sufficiently whitened by laundering with water until they scrubbed it with a glass stone [and this scrubbing is what is called “pressing”].

And if you say that he should have it pressed,

that they should clean the garment in Babylonia by pressing—it would not reveal the traces of blood on it, since

the stone would remove it.

Scrubbing with a glass stone also removes the traces of blood from the garment.

b.

There was a certain

man

who came before Rabban Gamliel the son of Rabbi [

Rabbi’s son].

He said to him: Rabbi, I consummated

the mitzva act of intercourse,

but I did not find blood.

His wife said to him

the woman said to Rabban Gamliel:

Rabbi, I am still a virgin

because he had intercourse with me without breaking my hymen [by deviating, or through incomplete intercourse].

He said to them

Rabban Gamliel said to his attendants:

Bring me two maidservants, one a virgin and one a non-virgin.

They brought him

these two maidservants,

and seated them at the mouth of a wine barrel.

The non-virgin,

whose opening was open—

her scent wafted;

they could smell wine from her mouth, which had entered her through her opening.

The virgin,

whose opening was closed—

her scent did not waft.

And after Rabban Gamliel had demonstrated the possibility of this test—

he also

the woman

this one

who had come before him and claimed that she was still a virgin—

seated

Rabban Gamliel her on the wine barrel,

and her scent did not waft.

He said to him

Rabban Gamliel said to her husband:

Go and enjoy your acquisition.

And we raised a question concerning this: Why did Rabban Gamliel need to bring the two maidservants and test them by smell?—

Let him test from the outset

at the beginning,

within her

in the woman herself!

And we answer: Rabban Gamliel had no experience with such a test; rather,

he had heard it as a tradition,

that he had received a tradition that this was how they had tested the daughters of Jabesh-gilead. But

an actual demonstration

of such a test in practice

he had not seen,

he had never witnessed it.

And

therefore,

he reasoned

Rabban Gamliel:

perhaps he was not sufficiently versed in the matter within her,

perhaps he did not know how to conduct this test properly,

and it is not proper

and it is not decent

to treat lightly

such a test

with regard to the daughters of Israel,

to attempt to perform such a test on them without being certain that it was being conducted correctly.

c.

There was a certain man who came before Rabban Gamliel the Elder.

He said to him: Rabbi, I consummated the marriage but did not find blood.

She said to him

the woman:

Rabbi, I am from the family of Durketi, who have neither menstrual blood nor hymenal blood.

Rabban Gamliel examined her female relatives and found that her statement was true.

He said to him: Go and enjoy your acquisition. Fortunate are you that you have merited the family of Durketi.

And the Gemara explains:

What

is the reason this family was called

“Durketi”?—

A severed generation.

For they are distinct [like a separate “cut-off” unit] from all other people, in that they have neither menstrual blood nor hymenal blood.

Rabbi Ḥanina said: Rabban Gamliel offered that man empty consolation,

since

Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: Just as leaven is beneficial for

fermenting the

dough,

so blood is beneficial for a woman.

And a tanna taught in the name of Rabbi Meir: Any woman whose blood is abundant—

her children will be numerous.

And the Gemara reports that the amoraim disagreed as to whether Rabban Gamliel did in fact console him with this statement or not.

It was stated: Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: “Enjoy your acquisition,” he said to him

Rabban Gamliel.

And

if

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: “You are obligated

you

with regard to your acquisition [

against your will],”

he said it to him.

And we raised a question concerning this:

Granted, according to the one who says, “You are obligated

with regard to your acquisition”—

this is in accordance with Rabbi Ḥanina

for according to him, this is not an advantage but an obligation for the man; therefore Rabbi Yosei bar Avin maintains that Rabban Gamliel did not console him, but explicitly said to him: You are obligated with regard to your acquisition.

But according to the one who says, “Enjoy

your acquisition,” he said to him—

what advantage

is there for him in a wife who has no blood, given that blood is beneficial for a woman? And we answer: The advantage is

that he will not come

ever to

a uncertainty concerning niddah.

d.

There was a certain

man

who came before Rabbi.

He said to him: Rabbi, I consummated the marriage but did not find blood.

She said to him

the woman:

Rabbi, I was still a virgin.

And

the Gemara adds: This incident occurred during

two [

years of]

famine.

Rabbi saw that their faces were black

from hunger.

He instructed them,

his household,

to bring them into the bathhouse and give them food and drink.

And

afterward

he brought them into a room, had intercourse, and found blood.

He said to him

Rabbi:

Go and enjoy your acquisition.

Rabbi recited concerning them

the verse from the Book of Lamentations [chapter 4]:

“Their skin [

clung or became black]

to their bones; it was dry as wood.”

Mishna:

a. A woman who marries as

a virgin—

her marriage contract is two hundred

zuz.

And a widow

who marries—her marriage contract is

a maneh,

one hundred zuz.

b.

A virgin

who is

a widow,

or who is

divorced, or

whose husband died and she entered into levirate marriage, and the yavam performed ḥalitza with her, so that she is

a ḥalutza—

if this occurred

after betrothal,

when they had not yet married, and her previous husband divorced her or she was widowed from him, and she now married again, since they had not had intercourse [and had not even approached intercourse in marriage], because they married her with the presumption that she was a virgin—

their marriage contracts are two hundred.

And

likewise, although they had already been betrothed to their first husbands, since they had not married them and married their second husbands with the presumption that they were virgins—

they have a claim concerning virginity,

if their second husbands discover that they are not virgins, in which case the transaction was made in error and they lose their entire marriage contracts; they do not even receive a maneh.

Gemara:

And we raised a question concerning this:

What

is the reason that a woman whose husband died is called

“a widow”?

Rav Ḥana of Baghdad [

from Baghdad or Bagdeta]

said: She is called “a widow”

that way

on account of a maneh,

the one hundred zuz of her marriage contract if she comes to marry again [that is, “but a maneh,” only a maneh and not two hundred].

And we challenge this:

A widow from betrothal,

whose marriage contract is not one maneh but two hundred—

what can be said?

Why is she called a widow?

And we answer:

Since

because

indeed,

her husband died after marriage,

she is called a widow,

therefore this woman as well, who was widowed after betrothal,

is also called a widow.

The Gemara further raises a difficulty:

“Widow” that is written in the Torah,

before the Sages instituted marriage contracts [and it cannot be said of her, “but a maneh,” whose meaning is one maneh and not two hundred]—

what can be said?

Why did the Torah call her a widow?

And we answer: Because

the Sages were destined to institute for her

a marriage contract of

a maneh,

the Torah called her this on account of the future.

And we refute this:

Does a verse write about the future?

And we answer:

Yes.

For we find

that it is written [

Genesis 2]:

“And the name of the third river is Hiddekel; it is the one that flows east of Ashur.”

And Rav Yosef taught: “Ashur”

is not the name of that region [so that one could say that the region was already called Ashur at the time of Creation], but

this

is the city now called

Salika,

which was formerly called Ashur.

And since Ashur is the name of the city and not the name of the region, it is clear that it was called this only after the city was built;

and did it exist

at the time of Creation, the city of Ashur?

Rather,

it is proven that because

it was destined

to be called by this name, the verse called it Ashur on account of the future.

If

so,

here too,

with regard to a widow, the verse called her this because

she was destined

to be called so when the Sages would institute marriage contracts and declare that the marriage contract of a woman who married after her husband’s death would not be two hundred, “but a maneh.”

The Gemara now brings additional statements of Rav Ḥana of Baghdad:

And Rav Ḥana of Baghdad said: Rain—

waters

the earth,

moistens and fertilizes

it,

and refines

its produce,

and prolongs

the yield of the fruits.

Rava bar Rabbi Yishmael said, and some say Rav Yeimar bar Shelamya: What is the verse?

From where do we have support from a verse for this matter? It is stated in Psalms [65:11], in a request for rain to descend upon the earth:

a.

Its furrows,

the plowed rows of the earth—

water them

with the irrigation of the rainwater.

b. And thereby

you bring satisfaction

and bring satisfaction to

its bands,

to the groups of people awaiting rain to moisten the soil.

c.

With showers,

with drops of rain—

you soften it [

you fertilize the earth and refine its fruits].

d. And through the rain,

its growth will flourish [

its growth will continue].

The Gemara brings a similar derasha concerning another matter:

Rabbi Elazar said: “Mizbe’aḥ”

is an acronym [a combination of letters from several words]—

a.

It removes,

and the Gemara assumes that this means that it removes sins.

b.

And nourishes,

for through the merit of the offerings, which come from food, the world is nourished and blessed.

c.

It endears

Israel to their Father in Heaven.

d.

It atones for

sins.

And we raised a question concerning this:

“It atones”—

this is “it removes”!

For the Gemara assumed that “it removes” has the meaning of atonement, that the altar removes sins [the term “removes” being understood in the sense of “drives away”].

And if so, the difficulty is: What does the altar atone for, and what does it remove [drive away]?

And we answer: This is what Rabbi Elazar said: The altar

removes [

drives away, rejects]

decrees

of evil from upon Israel, so that they will not befall them.

And

likewise, it

atones

for

sins.

And Rav Ḥana of Baghdad said: Dates—

warm,

they warm the human body;

satiate,

they satisfy it;

loosen,

they cause one to have diarrhea;

strengthen,

they fortify him;

and do not pamper,

they do not cause an inclination toward delicacy [a sensitivity born of pampering].

Rav said:

A person who is a teacher of halakha, if he

ate dates—

he should not issue a ruling,

because of intoxication. Dates have the power to cause mental confusion resembling intoxication, and it is prohibited by Torah law to issue a practical halakhic ruling while intoxicated.

He challenged

Rav, who prohibited issuing a ruling after eating dates, from the words of the beraita, which says that eating dates is beneficial for a person:

As it was taught:

Dates

are beneficial for a person to eat after a meal.

And since people [in those times] customarily ate two meals a day, one in the afternoon and one in the evening, they likewise customarily ate bread in the morning.

Therefore, if he ate them after morning bread

in the morning, and

after his meal

in the evening—

they are beneficial

for him.

But if he ate them

at

the time of

Minḥa,

near sunset, after sleeping in the afternoon, which is not a mealtime—

they are harmful

for him.

But if he ate them

at midday,

after being satiated by the midday meal—

nothing compares to them

for benefit. Eating them then is better than eating them after the afternoon meal, since during the day he can relieve himself in a field latrine, whereas at night it is difficult for him to do so there. It is also preferable to eat them after the midday meal rather than in the morning, since eating morning bread is not comparable to eating an actual midday meal.

And dates eaten at midday eliminate

the dates eaten at midday

three things:

A bad mood,

a person’s worry, since they gladden the heart, and midday is an appropriate time for this, as it is a time of light and joy.

And intestinal illness, and hemorrhoids [

piles].

And since eating dates is beneficial for a person, why did Rav say that one who eats dates should not issue a halakhic ruling?

And we answer:

Do we say

that Rav said

that they are not beneficial,

that dates do not benefit a person?

Rather, dates indeed

are beneficial

to him; eating them is good for him,

but for the moment they cause confusion,

as for the period during which he eats them, they disturb his thoughts and he is not fit to issue a halakhic ruling at that time.

Is this any different

from

what occurs with wine,

after drinking wine,

as the Master said: One who drinks a quarter-log of wine—

should not issue a ruling

after drinking it, until the effect of the wine’s intoxication on his thoughts has passed. And drinking wine is beneficial for a person.

And if you wish, say: This is not difficult

from the beraita to Rav’s statement, for one must distinguish between two forms of eating dates:

This

statement of Rav, that one who eats dates should not issue a ruling, refers to one who ate them

before bread,

before eating bread, when eating them causes mental confusion.

This

statement of the beraita, that dates are beneficial for a person, refers to

after bread,

after eating bread.

For Abaye said: My mother [

the nurse who raised him, since Abaye was orphaned from birth] told me: Eating

dates before bread,

before eating bread, harms the human body,

as

the blow with which a

narga [

axe] strikes

a palm tree,

the palm tree.

But eating dates

after bread

strengthens his body

like a bolt for a door.

Just as a bolt strengthens the door’s stability.

And why is a door called

“dasha”?

Rava said:

It is an acronym for

“a way in.”

And why is a ladder called

“darga”?

Rava said: Because it serves as a

way

to

the

roof.

And why is a bed called

“purya”?

Rav Pappa said: Because

they increase and multiply upon it.

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: