Ketubot 10b — the Talmud in English

He said to him: ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

our ironing —

like their laundering.

That is to say, the water in the Land of Israel is effective for laundering, or the people of the Land of Israel had effective laundering agents; therefore, through laundering, they can whiten the garment, and then the signs of blood become visible upon it.

But in Babylonia the garment does not become properly whitened through laundering with water, until they rub it with a glass stone; and this rubbing is what is called “ironing.”

And if you say: Let us perform ironing,

that we should clean the garment in Babylonia by means of ironing — the signs of blood will not become visible upon it, since

the rubbing-stone removes it.

The rubbing with the glass stone also removes the signs of blood from the garment.

b.

A certain

man

who came before Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi

[Rabbi’s son].

He said to him: Rabbi, I had intercourse

the mitzva intercourse,

and I did not find blood.

She said to him

the woman to Rabban Gamaliel:

Rabbi, I am still a virgin,

for he came upon me without removing my virginity [by tilting, or through incomplete intercourse].

He said to them

Rabban Gamaliel to his men:

Bring me two maidservants, one a virgin and one one who had intercourse.

They brought him

these two maidservants,

and seated them upon the mouth of a wine barrel.

The one who had intercourse,

whose opening was open —

her scent spread,

they smelled from her mouth the scent of wine, which had entered her through her opening.

The virgin,

whose opening was closed —

her scent did not spread.

And after Rabban Gamaliel demonstrated the possibility of this examination —

also

the

one

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

he seated

Rabban Gamaliel her upon the wine barrel,

and her scent did not spread.

He said to him

Rabban Gamaliel to her husband:

Go; take possession of your purchase.

And we raise a difficulty concerning it: Why did Rabban Gamaliel need to bring the two maidservants and examine them by means of smell? —

Let him examine from the outset

at first

within her,

within her herself!

And we answer: Rabban Gamaliel had no experience with such an examination, but only

a tradition had been heard by him,

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

an actual occurrence

of such an examination in practice

he had not seen,

he had not witnessed it.

And

therefore,

he thought

Rabban Gamaliel,

perhaps he is not well versed in this matter within her,

perhaps he does not know how to carry out this examination correctly,

and it is not proper conduct

and it is not the way of the world

to treat lightly

such an examination

with the daughters of Israel,

to attempt to perform such an examination upon them without being certain that the examination is correct.

c.

A certain one who came before Rabban Gamaliel the Elder.

He said to him: Rabbi, I had intercourse and did not find blood.

She said to him

the woman:

Rabbi, I am from the family of Durkati, which has neither menstrual blood nor virginity blood.

Rabban Gamaliel examined her female relatives, and found as she had said.

He said to him: Go; take possession of your purchase. Fortunate are you that you merited the family of Durkati.

And the Gemara explains:

What

why is this family called by the name

“Durkati”

? A severed generation.

For they are distinct [like “a severed piece” standing by itself] from all people, in that they have neither menstrual blood nor virginity blood.

Rabbi Hanina said: Rabban Gamaliel consoled that man with vain consolations.

Since

Rabbi Hiyya taught: Just as leaven is effective for

making

the dough sour —

so blood is beneficial for a woman.

And a tan[nay] taught in the name of Rabbi Meir: Any woman whose blood is abundant —

her children are abundant.

And the Gemara brings that the amoraim disputed whether Rabban Gamaliel indeed consoled him with this or not.

It was stated: Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said: “Take possession of your purchase,” he said to him

Rabban Gamaliel.

And

if

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: “You have become obligated

you

in your purchase”

[against your will],

he said it to him.

And we raise a difficulty:

Granted, according to the one who says, “You have become obligated

in your purchase” —

this is in accordance with Rabbi Hanina,

for according to his words this is not a benefit but an obligation for him; therefore Rabbi Yosei bar Avin maintains that Rabban Gamaliel indeed did not console him, but explicitly said to him: You have become obligated in your purchase.

But according to the one who says, “Take possession

of your purchase,” he said to him —

what benefit

is there for him in a woman who has no blood, since blood is beneficial for a woman!? And we answer: The benefit is that

he will not come

that he will never come

to a doubt of menstruation.

d.

A certain

man

who came before Rabbi.

He said to him: Rabbi, I had intercourse and did not find blood.

She said to him

the woman:

Rabbi, I was still a virgin.

And

the Gemara adds: This incident took place during

two

years

of famine.

Rabbi saw that their faces were black

from hunger.

He commanded concerning them,

concerning the members of his household,

and they brought them into the bathhouse, and fed them and gave them drink.

And

afterward

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

He said to him

Rabbi:

Go; take possession of your purchase.

Rabbi recited concerning them

the verse in the Scroll of Lamentations [chapter 4]:

“Their skin clung

[stuck or became black]

to their bones; it was dry like wood.”

Mishna:

a. A woman who marries while she is

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, and

whose husband died and she fell to levirate marriage, and the levir removed his shoe from her, and she is

“a woman released by halitza” —

if this was

from betrothal,

when they had not yet married, and her previous husband divorced her or she was widowed from him, and they now married a second time, since they had not had intercourse [and had not even been close to intercourse in marriage], since they married her on 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 they married on the presumption that they were virgins —

they have a claim concerning virginity,

if the second husbands find that they are not virgins; this is a mistaken purchase, and they lose their entire marriage contracts, and they do not even receive a maneh.

Gemara:

And we raise a difficulty:

What

why is a woman whose husband died called

“a widow”?

Rav Hana of Baghdad said

[from Baghdad or from Bagdata]:

“A widow”

is called so

on account of a maneh,

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

And we object:

A widow from betrothal,

whose marriage contract is not a maneh but two hundred —

what is there to say, why is she called a widow?

And we answer:

And we answer:

Since

because

indeed,

her husband died after marriage,

they call her a widow, this one,

therefore this one as well, who was widowed from betrothal,

they also call her a widow.

And the Gemara adds another objection:

“Widow” that is written in the Torah,

before the Sages instituted marriage contracts [and it is impossible to say concerning her “but a maneh,” whose meaning is a maneh and not two hundred] —

what is there to say, why did the Torah call her a widow?

And we answer: Because

the Sages

will in the future institute for her

a marriage contract

of a maneh,

the Torah called her so on account of the future.

And we refute:

And 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 goes eastward toward Assyria.”

And Rav Yosef taught: “Assyria”

is not the name of that region [so that you could say that already at the creation of the world that region was called Assyria], but

this

is the city called today

Salika,

and it was formerly called Assyria.

And since Assyria is the name of the city and not the name of the region, it is clear that it was called so only from the time when the city was built;

and was there

the city of Assyria at the creation of the world?

Rather,

it is proven that since it

was destined

to be called so, Scripture called it Assyria on account of the future.

If

so,

here too,

in the case of a widow, Scripture called her so because

she was destined

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

The Gemara now brings additional sayings of Rav Hana of Baghdad:

And Rav Hana of Baghdad said: Rain —

waters

the earth,

moistens and fertilizes

it,

and makes

its fruits delicate,

and prolongs

the yield of the fruits.

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

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

a.

Its furrows,

the plowed rows of the earth —

moisten

them with irrigation from the rainwater.

b. And through this,

you bring satisfaction

you bring satisfaction to

its troops.

To the troops of people who await the rain that will moisten the ground.

c.

With showers,

with drops of rain —

you soften

[you fertilize the earth and make its fruits delicate].

d. And through the force of the rain,

it sprouts; may it prosper

[may its growth continue].

And the Gemara brings a similar exposition concerning another matter:

Rabbi Elazar said: “Altar,”

this is an expression formed by an acronym [a combination of letters from several words] —

a.

It removes,

and the Gemara assumes that the meaning is that it removes sins.

b.

And nourishes,

for through the merit of the sacrifices, 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 raise a difficulty:

“It atones for” —

this is “it removes”!

For the Gemara assumed that the meaning of “it removes” is the meaning of atonement, that the altar removes sins [“removes” 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] the

decrees

of evil from upon the people of Israel, so that they do not take effect.

And

likewise it

atones for

the

sins.

And Rav Hana of Baghdad said: Dates —

they warm,

they warm a person’s body,

they satisfy,

they make him satiated,

they loosen the bowels,

they bring him to diarrhea,

they strengthen,

they strengthen him,

and they do not make delicate,

they do not bring about fastidious sensitivity.

Rav said:

One who is a Rav who rules, if he

ate dates —

let him not rule

a practical halakhic ruling, because of intoxication. For dates have the power to cause confusion of thought like intoxication, and it is forbidden by the Torah to issue a practical halakhic ruling while intoxicated.

He objected

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

For it was taught:

Dates

are beneficial for a person to eat after eating.

And since the way of people [in their time] was to eat two meals a day, one at midday and one in the evening, and likewise their practice was also to eat bread in the morning,

therefore, if he ate them after the 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

Minha,

close to nightfall, after sleeping in the afternoon, which is not mealtime —

they are harmful

for him.

But if he ate them

at midday,

after he was satiated from the midday meal —

there are none like them

for benefit. For eating them then is better than eating them after the afternoon meal, since during the day he can relieve himself in a lavatory located in the fields, whereas at night it is difficult for him to relieve himself there. And eating them after the midday meal is also preferable to eating them in the morning, since eating morning bread is not comparable to eating an actual meal at midday.

And they eliminate

the dates eaten at midday

three things:

A bad thought,

a person’s worry, because they gladden the heart, and midday is suitable for this, for 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,

did Rav say

that they are not beneficial,

that dates are not useful to a person?

Rather, indeed dates

are beneficial

to him, eating them is beneficial for him,

but for a time they cause confusion,

but for the period of eating them they confuse his thought, and he is not fit to issue a halakhic ruling then.

Is it comparable

to what

happens with wine,

after drinking wine,

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

let him not issue a ruling

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

And if you wish, say: It is not difficult

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

This

that Rav said, that one who eats dates should not issue a ruling — he is speaking of one who ate them

before bread,

before eating bread, when their eating causes confusion of his mind.

This

that the beraita said that dates are beneficial for a person —

after bread,

after eating bread.

For Abaye said: My mother said to me

[the nurse who raised him, since Abaye was an orphan from the time of his birth]: Eating

dates before bread,

before eating bread, harms a person’s body,

for

it is like the blow with which

an ax

[an ax]

strikes a palm tree,

the palm tree.

But eating dates

after bread —

strengthens his body

like a bolt for a door.

Just as the bolt strengthens the door’s standing.

And why is the door called

“dasha” —

Rava said:

an acronym,

“way there.”

And why is the ladder called

“darga” —

Rava said:

because it serves as

a way

to the

roof.

And why is the bed called

“purya” —

Rav Pappa said:

because

they are fruitful and multiply upon it.

Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak said: