Ketubot 60a — the Talmud in English

And the Gemara raised a question:

How much

—of how many months shall the infant be, so that we can say that he recognizes her and does not wish to nurse from another woman?

Rava said in the name of Rav Yirmeya bar Abba, who said in the name of Rav:

A son of

three months.

And Shmuel said:

A son of

thirty days.

And Rabbi Yitzhak said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan:

A son of

fifty days.

Rav Shimi bar Abaye said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yitzhak, who said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan,

fifty days.

And the Gemara wondered:

Granted, Rav and Rabbi Yohanan

hold

each one—

according to his acuity,

according to his acuity. There is an infant who recognizes his mother only after three months, and there is a more acute infant who recognizes his mother already after fifty days, and they disputed what is the usual age at which an infant recognizes his mother.

But as for Shmuel,

who says that he recognizes his mother already at the age of thirty days,

in such a case,

that the infant recognizes his mother after only thirty days—

can you find such a thing?

Is there an infant so acute as to recognize his mother after thirty days, to the point that he will not nurse from another woman?!

When [

when he came ]

Rami bar Yehezkel,

the brother of Rav Yehuda,

said: Do not listen [

do not listen ]

to these rules that

those rules which

Yehuda my brother, in the name of Shmuel,

formulated, and said that an infant recognizes his mother at the age of thirty days.

Rather,

this is what Shmuel said: As long as

the infant

recognizes her,

his mother. There is no fixed measure for this; rather, they examine the infant’s recognition of his mother. And if we see that he recognizes her, the husband compels his wife, and she nurses him.

There was a certain

divorcee

who came before Shmuel [

she came before Shmuel ], and she did not wish to nurse her son—

Shmuel said to

Rav Dimi bar Yosef:

Go examine her [

go and examine ] whether the infant recognizes her.

He went,

Rav Dimi bar Yosef went,

and seated her in the row

of women [

he seated the infant’s mother in a row of women ],

and took her son and passed him before them [

he took the infant and passed him before them ]—

When he arrived,

when he arrived with the infant

opposite her,

before his mother,

he was looking

the infant

at her face

of his mother [the infant was looking at her face]—

she closed her eyes from him [

the mother closed her eyes from the infant ]!

He said to her,

Rav Dimi bar Yosef:

Raise your eyes! Arise, carry your son! [

raise your eyes, and arise and carry your son ], and nurse him, since he recognizes you.

And the Gemara raised a question: An infant who is

blind—

how does he know [

how does he know who his mother is, the one who nurses him ]?

Rav Ashi said:

He recognizes his mother

by scent and by taste [

by the scent of the milk and by its taste ].

The Sages taught: An infant nurses and continues [

it is permitted for an infant to nurse his mother’s milk ]

until twenty-four months

from his birth.

From this point onward,

after twenty-four months, it is forbidden for her to nurse him, because from then on he is considered

as one who nurses an abomination,”

as though he were nursing something abominable,

the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

Rabbi Yehoshua says:

An infant nurses and continues

even four and five years.

Four years for a healthy one, and five years for a weak one.

And only if

he ceased

the infant from his mother, and stopped nursing from her

after twenty-four months, and returned

to nursing, this is

as one who nurses an abomination.

The Master said: From this point onward—

after twenty-four months—

as one who nurses an abomination:

And we raise a contradiction

to the words of this beraita from the words of another beraita:

For it was taught in tractate Keritot [22a]:

Could it be that the milk of those who walk

on

two [

a woman’s milk ]

is impure [

forbidden ]?

And it follows by logical judgment

that it should be forbidden:

And if an animal

is impure, such as a camel,

for which you were lenient regarding its contact,

for an impure animal does not impart impurity while alive, but only after its death, nevertheless

you were stringent regarding its milk,

which is forbidden —

A human being [

a woman ]

for whom you were stringent regarding his contact,

for she imparts impurity while alive when she is menstruating,

is it not logical that you should be stringent regarding his milk,

that the woman’s milk should be forbidden—

The verse says in the section of the prohibitions of eating impure animals [Leviticus 11:4]:

“

“The camel, because it brings up its cud, it.”

The Torah added the word “it,” in order to exclude and say:

Only

it,

the camel, and likewise its milk,

is impure.

But

the milk of those who walk on two is not impure, but pure.

the milk of one who walks on two is not impure; rather, it is pure.

And the beraita continues and says:

Could I exclude

from the prohibition only

the milk

of the woman, which alone would not be forbidden, because

it is not equal

in the prohibition of milk

in all cases,

for the milk of a pure animal is permitted—

But

I would not exclude

from the prohibition

the blood

of a human being, to permit it, since

it,

the prohibition of blood,

is equal in all cases,

for even the blood of a pure animal is forbidden?

The verse says [

from that same verse ] “The camel, because it brings up its cud,

it.”

The extra word “it” teaches us to exclude and say—

Only

it

the camel, and likewise its blood,

is impure.

But

the blood of one who walks on two

the blood of those who walk on two is not impure, but pure.

And

And from one verse we learn that the milk and blood of a human being are permitted.

And he said

about this beraita

Rav Sheshet: Even

the mitzva of abstention

rabbinically

does not apply to it

in the case of human milk, nor in the case of his blood!

But this permission of the beraita stands in contradiction to the words of the earlier beraita, that an infant who nurses from his mother beyond the time fixed for him is as one who nurses an abomination?!

And we answer:

It is not difficult:

This

that the beraita teaches that human milk is permitted speaks of a case

where it was separated,

where the milk has already been separated from the woman’s breasts into a vessel.

This

that the earlier beraita considers him “as one who nurses an abomination” speaks of a case

where it was not separated,

the milk from her, like an infant who nurses from his mother’s breasts; in this manner her milk is forbidden rabbinically.

And the reverse—

the reversal of the law is

with blood.

For if the blood separated from the human body, it is forbidden rabbinically. And when it did not separate, it is permitted.

As it was taught: Blood that

separated

onto a loaf,

for example, he bit the loaf of bread with his teeth and the blood is recognizable on the loaf—it is

scraped

the blood from atop the loaf,

and he eats it,

the loaf.

But blood

that

did not separate from the person, and is still

between the teeth,

he

sucks

the blood and swallows it,

and need not be concerned

because of the prohibition of eating human blood.

The Master said

in the beraita:

Rabbi Yehoshua says: [

an infant nurses and continues ]

even four and five years.

And we raise a difficulty:

But was it not taught: Rabbi Yehoshua says: Even

if the son grew until he carries

his bundle on his shoulder,

it is permitted for him to continue nursing from his mother.

And we answer:

Both this and that—

they are one measure.

It is all one measure: at the age of four or five he is capable of carrying his bundle on his shoulder.

Rav Yosef said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehoshua,

that an infant nurses and continues until four and five years.

And now the Gemara brings two additional statements whose halakha Rav Yosef ruled in accordance with:

1.

It was taught: Rabbi Marinos says: One who groans [

moans from pain in his heart ]

nurses milk

of a goat

on Shabbat

for the sake of healing.

And the Gemara explains:

What is the reason

that it is permitted to do this on Shabbat?

For when he

nurses

milk into his mouth, it is included in the labor of

“extracting” [

which is a derivative of the labor of threshing, one of the thirty-nine labors forbidden on Shabbat] performed

in an unusual manner [

by means of a change ], for people do not ordinarily nurse from an animal with their mouths; rather, they milk the milk into a vessel and drink it from the vessel. And a labor performed “in an unusual manner” [by means of a change] is forbidden on Shabbat only rabbinically.

And in a place of pain [

in a place of the sick person’s pain ]

the Sages did not decree.

Rav Yosef said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Marinos!

2.

It was taught: Nahum of Galya [

a place-name ]

says: A channel [

a gutter ] that channels rainwater from the roof,

in which debris has accumulated,

straw and grass that clog it and hinder the flow of water through it, and because of this the water does not descend through the gutter but spreads over the roof and leaks into the house beneath it—

he may

crush

the debris

with his foot discreetly on Shabbat,

so that it will not prevent the water from flowing,

and need not be concerned

because of the prohibition of Shabbat, even though by this he performs a labor of repair.

And the Gemara explains:

What is the reason

that it is permitted to do this on Shabbat?

For

“repairing” is an unusual manner,

it is by means of a change, since he repairs it with his foot, and it is forbidden only rabbinically,

and in a place of loss the Sages did not decree upon it

a prohibition.

And here too

Rav Yosef said: The halakha is in accordance with Nahum of Galya!

We learned in a beraita:

If he ceased [

the infant from his mother ]

after twenty-four months, and returned [

to nursing ], he is

as one who nurses an abomination:

The Gemara explains:

And how much

is the measure of the cessation, such that it is forbidden to return and nurse?

Said

the one who explained

Rav Yehuda bar Haviva said

in the name of Shmuel: Three days

is the measure of cessation; and after he ceased for this measure and returned, he is as one who nurses an abomination.

There are those who say:

It was not a statement of Rav Yehuda bar Haviva in the name of Shmuel.

Rather,

Rav Yehuda bar Haviva taught

a beraita

before Shmuel: The measure of cessation is

The measure of cessation is

three days.

The Sages taught: A nursing woman whose husband died within twenty-four months

from the birth of her son,

may not become betrothed and may not marry—