Ketubot 60b (ס:) — the Talmud in English

until

they have passed

twenty-four months,

lest she become pregnant, her milk become spoiled, and she wean her son from nursing,

the words of Rabbi Meir.

And Rabbi Yehuda permits

the mother to marry

once

her son has reached

eighteen months,

because it is sufficient for an infant to nurse until that time.

Rabbi Natan bar Yosef said:

The statement of Rabbi Meir,

is precisely the statement of Beit Shammai—

and the statement of Rabbi Yehuda,

is precisely the statement of Beit Hillel.

As Beit Shammai say:

An infant’s nursing lasts

twenty-four months.

And Beit Hillel say: eighteen months.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: I shall explain!

According to the one who says,

Rabbi Meir,

twenty-four months

the infant must nurse, she is

permitted to marry

already

after twenty-one months,

even though he must nurse for another three months, as he proceeds to explain the reason.

And

according to the one who says,

Rabbi Yehuda, who permits

after eighteen months

the infant to be weaned—she is

permitted to marry

already

after fifteen months,

even though he must nurse for another three months.

Because the milk does not become spoiled

even if she becomes pregnant

until after three months

from the beginning of the pregnancy.

Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda!

And Mar Ukva said: Rabbi Ḥanina permitted me to marry

a nursing woman

after fifteen months

following her husband’s death, and this is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda and with Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel’s explanation.

Abaye’s sharecropper came before Abaye

[Abaye’s sharecropper came before Abaye],

he said to him

the sharecropper said to Abaye:

What is the ruling with regard to betrothing

a nursing woman

after fifteen months

from the birth of her son?

He said to him

Abaye said: You may betroth her, because:

First:

In the dispute

between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda, the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Yehuda said that eighteen months are sufficient for nursing, and since the milk becomes spoiled only after three months, you may betroth her after fifteen months.

Furthermore:

In the dispute

between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, the halakha is in accordance with Beit Hillel.

And Beit Hillel hold like Rabbi Yehuda.

And

furthermore,

Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda.

And

furthermore,

Mar Ukva said: Rabbi Ḥanina permitted me “to marry” after fifteen months—

and

all the more so you,

you are permitted, since you seek only

to betroth her.

When

Abaye

came before Rav Yosef

[when Abaye came before his teacher, Rav Yosef], and told him the ruling that he had issued to his sharecropper—

Rav Yosef said to him

Rav Yosef said to Abaye: Your ruling is incorrect, because

Rav and Shmuel both say: She must wait twenty-four full months

complete,

apart from the day on which

the infant was born

and apart from the day on which she was betrothed.

He ran,

Abaye ran

after him,

after his sharecropper,

three parasangs,

three parasangs, in order to retract his ruling.

And some say, one parasang through sand

[and some say that he ran after him for one parasang through sand], but

he did not reach him

[Abaye did not catch up with his sharecropper].

Abaye said,

following this incident:

This matter that the Sages said,

this matter that the Sages stated:

even permission to eat eggs in kutah

[the permission to eat eggs mixed with kutah, a food containing milk], although it is a simple matter,

a person should not issue a ruling in his teacher’s place

[a person should not permit this to those who ask him about it when the question is asked in his teacher’s presence]—

Not because it appears to be insolence,

the reason is not that it appears to be disrespect toward the teacher, with the student answering in his place.

Rather, because the matter does not succeed in being stated,

the student does not succeed in stating the law correctly when he issues a ruling in his teacher’s presence.

And there is proof:

For I myself had learned this teaching of Rav and Shmuel

[for I had learned and knew the words of Rav and Shmuel],

even so,

when the matter came before me for a practical ruling—

the matter did not succeed for me in being stated!

I was unable to state this law because I had issued a ruling in the presence of my teacher, Rav Yosef.

The Sages taught:

A nursing woman whose husband died, and

gave

her

son to another nursing woman

to nurse,

or weaned him

from nursing before his time,

or he died,

the child, she is

permitted to marry immediately.

Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, thought

to perform an action

[they wished to act] with a widow who had given her son to a nursing woman,

in accordance with this baraitha,

as in this baraitha, which permits her to marry.

She said to them—

to Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua—

that certain elderly woman:

I had an incident involving myself

of this kind, and I sought to marry,

and Rav Naḥman prohibited me.

And the Gemara wondered about this incident that she attributed to Rav Naḥman:

Is that so?

But Rav Naḥman permitted the

widows of

the house of the Exilarch

[but Rav Naḥman himself permitted the widows of the house of the Exilarch, who were nursing women and had given their sons to another nursing woman, to marry. This proves that the statement of that elderly woman in Rav Naḥman’s name is incorrect]!?

And we answer: Rav Naḥman prohibited a nursing woman who had given her son to another nursing woman for this reason: perhaps the nursing woman would retract her commitment to nurse; and if the infant were returned to his mother, he would refuse to nurse from her and would thereby be endangered.

However,

it is different

from the nursing women hired for the infants of

the house of the Exilarch—

for they would not retract,

the nursing women would fear retracting because of the men of the Exilarch, who were men to be feared.

Rav Pappi said to them

to Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, who had wished to permit her before they heard from that elderly woman that it was prohibited:

And you,

you alone, without Rav Naḥman’s instruction to prohibit it—would you

not yourselves reason

that it should be prohibited

from that which was taught,

that is, from what Shmuel ruled in accordance with Rabbi Meir in the following baraitha:

Every woman who is a widow or divorcee must wait three months before marrying another man, so that it will be possible to distinguish between the seed of the first husband and that of the second husband; this matter is called “discernment.”

If she was

the woman who had been widowed or divorced

eager to go to her father’s house,

as during most of her marriage to her first husband she longed for her father’s house and went there, in which case she would not become pregnant by her first husband—

or there was resentment in her husband’s house,

and in that case as well she would not become pregnant by him—

or her husband

the first

was imprisoned,

and it is clear that she did not become pregnant by him—

or her husband

the first

went overseas—

or her husband was elderly or ill

and unfit to father children—

or she was

herself

infertile

[her womb was incapable of conception and her uterus had been removed],

or

she was

elderly,

unable to become pregnant—or she was

an aylonit,

or

she was

a minor,

unable to become pregnant and give birth—

And

likewise, a woman

who miscarried

her fetus

after her husband’s death,

so that discernment is unnecessary—

and

likewise, a woman

who is incapable of bearing children,

for example, because of a drug or illness—

all of them,

although the issue of “discernment” does not apply to them, nevertheless

must

they

wait three months

like other women,

the words of Rabbi Meir,

because when the Sages instituted the requirement of discernment, they did not distinguish between one woman and another; therefore all of them must wait three months.

Rabbi Yosei permits

these women

to become betrothed and to marry immediately.

And Rav Naḥman said in the name of Shmuel: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir in his rabbinic decrees.

That is, wherever he rules stringently by rabbinic law!

And according to Rabbi Meir, whose view is the halakha, even with regard to a nursing woman, whom the Sages decreed may not marry, all women must be prohibited, because the Sages did not distinguish in their decree requiring twenty-four months between one woman and another.

And on the basis of this you should have prohibited her!

They said to him

Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said to Rav Pappi:

We were not aware,

we did not know this baraitha.

And the halakha is:

If

the infant died

the infant—

she is permitted

to become betrothed and to marry immediately.

But if

she weaned him—she is

prohibited

from becoming betrothed or marrying immediately, because she weaned him because she wished to marry.

Mar bar Rav Ashi said: Even if the infant died

the infant,

she is also prohibited

from marrying, because we are concerned

perhaps she killed him and then went and married

[perhaps she will kill her son and then go and marry].

And indeed,

there was an incident, and she strangled him

the nursing woman strangled her son so that she could marry.

But the Gemara says:

It is not so!

One should not rule in accordance with Mar bar Rav Ashi, since there is no reason for such concern—

because

that

woman who strangled her son, the woman

was insane.

For women do not strangle their children

[women do not kill their children in order to marry].

The Sages taught: If they gave her the son

of another woman

to nurse, she may not nurse with him either

her

own son, nor

her

friend’s son.

And if

the mother of the infant allotted

her

only a little

[little sustenance], she

eats a great deal

from her own food—as he proceeds to explain—in order to be able to nurse the child and not cause him to die.

And

she may not eat with him

as long as the son is with her so that she may nurse him,

foods that are harmful to the milk.

The Gemara wondered about the wording of the baraitha: “She may not nurse with him either her son or her friend’s son,” for “her friend’s son” is superfluous, because:

Now

if

you say concerning her son

that she

may not

nurse with him, concerning

her friend’s son,

that she may not nurse with him—

is it necessary

for the tanna to say this!?

And we answer:

Lest you say,

if the tanna of the baraitha had not said that she may not nurse her friend’s son as well, I would have said:

Only

her son, he

is the one whom the tanna prohibited her from nursing while she had undertaken to nurse another infant, because

she has pity on him

[since the woman has pity on her son],

she draws out more for him,

she will drain her breast and make the milk available to her son, who will consume all of it, leaving no milk for the infant whom she undertook to nurse.

But

to nurse together with him

her friend’s son,

I would have thought that it is permitted for her, because

if it were not that she had “an allowance”,

when she has no surplus milk,

she would not draw it out for him,

she would not drain the milk for her friend’s son; rather, she would preserve it for the infant whom she had undertaken to nurse.

Therefore

it teaches us

the baraitha that she is prohibited from nursing even her friend’s son together with him.

We learned in the baraitha:

If she was allotted,

they allotted sustenance to the nursing woman

only a little—she

eats

sustenance

a great deal:

And we raised a question about it:

From where?

From where does the nursing woman eat more sustenance than was allotted to her—from her own resources or from those who allotted it to her?

Rav Sheshet said:

She eats abundant sustenance

from her own resources,

so that she can fulfill her commitment and have abundant milk with which to nurse, so that the infant will not die. Since she agreed to provide him milk for payment for nursing, her commitment to nurse also includes eating abundant sustenance at her own expense, so that she will have plentiful milk.

We also learned in the baraitha:

She may not eat with him foods that are harmful

to the milk. And we raised a question about it:

What are they?

What are the foods that are harmful to the milk?

Rav Kahana said: For example, hops and ḥaziz

[the grasses of grain seed],

and small fish and soil.

Abaye said: Even gourds and quinces

[cucumbers and quinces], these too are harmful to the production of milk.

Rav Pappa said: Even korah

[the soft growth on a date palm, what has been added to the branch during the current year, Rashi],

and kufra

[young dates that have not yet ripened fully].

Rav Ashi said: Even kimkha

[a food made of kutah]

and harsena

[fish fried in flour together with their broth and fat], are harmful to her.

There are foods

among them,

among the foods mentioned, that

stop the milk

[they stop the production of milk]—

and there are foods

among them,

among the foods mentioned, that

spoil the milk,

they spoil the milk, and it is not good for the infant.

And apropos of the Gemara’s listing the foods that affect the quality of the milk, the Gemara also explains what things and foods affect pregnancy:

A woman who has intercourse in a millhouse,

a woman who has marital relations in a millhouse,

will have children

who will be

epileptic,

afflicted with the falling sickness.

who has intercourse on the ground [

on the ground],

she would have children with elongated necks,

and this is a defect.

A pregnant woman

who steps on donkey blood,

who steps on the blood of a donkey,

would have bald children [

bald].

A woman

who ate mustard [

mustard] during her pregnancy,

would have voracious children [

greedy].

who ate cress [

cress],

would have children whose eyes constantly water [

their eyes constantly discharge tears].

who ate small fish,

a woman who is accustomed to eating small fish,

would have children with protruding eyes [

their eyes protrude and move constantly].

who ate a clod of earth [

earth],

would have ugly children [

ugly].

who drank beer,

a pregnant woman who drinks beer,

would have black children [

children who are black].