Ketubot 61a (סא.) — the Talmud in English

And the Gemara specifies the foods that are beneficial for a pregnant woman:

when she eats meat and drinks wine,

a pregnant woman who eats meat and drinks wine,

she will have sons!

healthy

[healthy].

When she eats eggs

[eggs],

she will have sons with large eyes

[their eyes will be large, which is attractive].

When she eats fish

[fish],

she will have graceful sons

[possessing charm].

When she eats karpas

[karpas],

she will have handsome sons

[of beautiful appearance].

When she eats coriander, she will have fleshy sons

[possessing flesh].

When she eats an etrog, she will have fragrant sons

[possessing a pleasant fragrance].

There was an incident involving

the daughter of Shapur the king,

the daughter of Shapur the king,

whom her mother ate—

when she was pregnant with her—

an etrog, and they would bring it

to her daughter

before her father, at the head of the fragrant items,

they would bring her daughter before her father first among the fragrant things.

Rav Huna said:

Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana tested us

[he was testing us to see whether we would know how to answer]

with the following question,

and Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana prefaced it:

This law is obvious: if

she

[the woman]

says

that she wants

to nurse

her son,

and he

[her husband]

says that she should not nurse,

so that she will not become unattractive but will retain her beauty —

we listen to her,

to nurse. For preventing a nursing woman from nursing

causes her distress,

[it causes her distress, since the milk accumulates in her breasts and causes her pain].

However, if

he

[the husband]

says

that she should

nurse

their son,

and she

[the woman]

says that she should not nurse,

but instead wishes the husband to hire a wet nurse—

what is the law?

And we resolved it for him,

and we—Rav Huna and the members of the group—resolved Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana’s question:

Whenever it is not her customary practice

[that she does not customarily nurse], when she comes from a family in which the women do not nurse their own sons but customarily hire a wet nurse,

we listen to her

not to nurse. Rather, the husband must hire a wet nurse.

Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana continued to ask in order to test us:

If

she,

the woman,

customarily does so,

it is the practice of her family to nurse,

and

if

he,

the husband,

does not customarily do so,

it is not the practice of his family to nurse—

what is the law?

What is the law in a case where he says that she should nurse, in accordance with the woman’s family practice, whereas she says that she should not nurse, in accordance with the husband’s family practice?

Do

we follow him

[the husband]

in this matter,

so that she has the right not to nurse, in accordance with his family practice,

or do we follow her

[the woman]

in this matter,

and since it is her family’s practice to nurse, she must nurse their son herself?

And Rav Huna said:

And we resolved it for him

[Rav Huna and the members of the group resolved it for Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana, who had tested us],

from this

that we learned above [48a]:

“She ascends

the woman

with him

[with her husband]

but does not descend with him”

[she rises to a higher level if his status is higher than hers, but she does not descend to his level if her status is higher than his].

Rav Huna said: What is the verse

from which there is a scriptural source that a woman ascends with him but does not descend with him?

As it is written [Genesis 20]:

“And she is a married woman”,

the verse teaches that one must treat a woman

according to the husband’s ascent, but not according to the husband’s descent.

Rabbi Elazar said: From here

it is learned, as it is written concerning Eve:

“For she was the mother of all life.”

The verse teaches that

the woman was created for life,

the woman,

and not created for suffering.

We learned in the Mishna:

If she brought him one maidservant,

she neither grinds nor bakes nor launders:

And the Gemara infers:

This implies that with regard to the other tasks,

the other forms of labor,

she performs them

the woman [such as cooking and nursing the son; the woman is obligated to perform these for her husband even though she brought him a maidservant]!

The Gemara objects:

Let her say to him

the woman should say to her husband:

“I brought you a woman in my place,”

I brought you a woman to serve in my stead and in my place, so why should I perform any labor myself!? And we answer:

Because he said to her,

the husband said to his wife:

“This one,

the maidservant,

is a burden for me and for herself

[for me and for herself], but

in your presence—

who will perform the work

[but in your presence, who will perform it]!?

We learned in the Mishna: If she brought him

two

[maidservants],

she neither cooks nor nurses

her son:

And the Gemara infers:

This implies that with regard to the other

tasks—she makes his bed and spins with wool—

she performs them

the woman!

The Gemara objects:

Let her say to him,

the woman should say to her husband: “Behold,

I brought you another woman who will perform the work for me and for herself

[I brought another woman who will work for her and for me],

and one more

[an additional woman] who will work

for you and for herself,”

so why should I work as well!? And we answer:

Because he said to her,

the husband said to his wife:

“Before guests and passersby

who will perform the work

[who will work before the guests]!?

We learned in the Mishna: If she brought him

three

[maidservants],

she need not make the bed

and need not spin with wool:

And the Gemara infers:

This implies that with regard to the other

tasks, such as minor matters,

she performs them

the woman!

Let her say to him,

the woman should say to her husband:

“I brought you

another maidservant

to serve the

the

guests and passersby,”

so why should I work as well!?

And we answer:

Because he said to her,

the husband said to his wife: Since

the members of the household are numerous,

as there are now many maidservants in the house,

there are also many

also

guests and passersby.

The guests too become more numerous; if so, who will work before them!?

And we object:

If so, even

when she brought him

four

maidservants,

as well

she should perform minor tasks for him. Why, then, did we learn: If she brought him four maidservants, she sits in a chair!? And we answer: When she brought him

four

maidservants,

since there are many of them, they assist one another

[because the maidservants are numerous, they help one another].

Rabbi Ḥana said, and some say Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani:

That which we learned in our Mishna—“If she brought him one maidservant,” and likewise two, three, or four, whereby the woman’s obligations to her husband are reduced—

does not

apply specifically when she

actually brought him

maidservants.

Rather, once she is in a position to bring them, even though she did not bring them,

it is considered as though she brought them.

For example, she brought him a large dowry, and it would be appropriate for the husband of a woman who brings such a dowry to purchase maidservants from part of the dowry and bring them into the household to serve her.

The tanna taught

in a beraita:

Both one who brought him

maidservants

and one who saved him expenses from her own resources,

for example, she economized on things that the husband was required to provide for her—in either case, she is not obligated to perform the work herself, except to the extent stated in the Mishna when she actually brought him maidservants.

We learned in the Mishna: If she brought him

four

[maidservants]—

she sits in a chair:

Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Ḥananya said that Rav Huna said:

Although they said

in our Mishna that when she brought him four maidservants

she sits in a chair,

and is not obligated to perform any work for him—

Nevertheless,

as a matter of good advice, it is proper that she herself

pour him a cup and make his bed,

and wash his face, hands, and feet,

because all these are expressions of affection and make the woman dear to her husband.

And

further,

Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Ḥananya said that Rav Huna said:

All the tasks

that we learned in the Mishna

that the woman performs

for her husband—

even when she is

a menstruating woman,

she

performs

them

for her husband.

Except for

these three tasks:

pouring the cup and making the bed

with a sheet,

and washing his face, hands, and feet,

because these acts are expressions of affection and lead to intimacy.

And the Gemara explains:

“And making the bed”—

Rava said: We said

that a menstruating woman may not make her husband’s bed

only when

she does so

in his presence,

her husband’s.

But when she does so in his absence,

her husband’s,

we have no concern,

and she is permitted to make it.

The Gemara further explains:

“And pouring the cup”—

Shmuel’s wife would alter it for him,

when she was a menstruating woman

with her left hand.

She would deviate from her usual practice: although she normally poured his cup, she would place it before him with her left hand, as a reminder.

The wife of

Abaye

would place it

the cup, when she was a menstruating woman,

at the mouth of the wine vessel.

She placed it on top of the wine vessel, but did not put it before him in its usual place.

And the wife of

Rava

would place

it at the head of the bed

[at his head], rather than in the place intended for him.

And the wife of

Rav Pappa

would place

it on the bench

[on the bench], rather than in the place intended for him.

And

further

Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Ḥananya said that Rav Huna said:

Everything,

all foods that the attendant serves at the table,

the attendant is made to wait for

before being given permission to eat, until the guests rise.

Except for meat and wine,

which must be given to him immediately, since he craves them and suffers if he does not taste them at once.

Rabbi Ḥisda said

and explained

:

This statement that we made, that meat and wine are not withheld from the attendant, applies specifically to

fatty meat and aged wine,

which he craves especially, and from which he suffers if he is made to wait.

Rava said

and explained

:

Fatty meat,

which we said is not withheld from the attendant, is so

throughout the entire year.

Whereas

aged wine is not withheld from him

except

during the season of Tammuz,

because the fragrance of wine is then particularly strong, and the heat of the day stirs it within the attendant like venom.

Rav Anan bar Taḥlifa said: I was standing before Mar Shmuel

[I was standing before Mar Shmuel],

and they brought him a dish of ardei

[and they brought Shmuel a dish of ardei, a type of truffle and mushroom].

And had he not given me some, I would have been endangered

[had he not given me some of the dish, I would have been in danger of being overcome by ravenous hunger].

Rav Ashi said: I was standing before Rav Kahana

[I was standing before Rav Kahana],

and they brought him slices of turnip pickled in vinegar

[and they brought him thin, round pieces of turnip in vinegar].

And had he not given me some, I would have been endangered

[if he had not given me some of it, I would have been in danger].

Rav Pappa said: Even the fatty dates of Huninta

[fatty dates] are harmful to one who does not taste them when they are being eaten in his presence—

And

the general principle

is: Which food is harmful and may not be withheld from the attendant?

Any

food

that has a fragrance and causes astringency

[anything that has a fragrance and causes the teeth to be set on edge] harms one who sees others eating it while he does not eat, and it may not be withheld from the attendant.

Avuha bar Ihi and Minyamin bar Ihi

conducted themselves with the attendant in different ways:

One

of them

would give

the attendant at the outset

from every type and every type

[one of them would first give the attendant some of every type of food that he served at the table].

And the other

of them

would give

the attendant at the outset only

from one type

[the other would give the attendant at the beginning of the meal only one type, so that he could eat it to satiety], whereas from the other types that the attendant served afterward, he would give him some only at the end of the meal.

One -

the same one who would give the attendant from each and every kind -

Elijah the

prophet

would speak with him [

Elijah the prophet would speak with him].

And

if

one -

who would give only one kind at the beginning of the meal -

would not

have

Elijah speak with him.

A story involving

two pious men [

two pious men whose names were not known],

and some say [

there are those who say that those pious men were]

Rav Mari and Rav Pinhaḥ, the sons of Rav Ḥisda:

For

one would give first [

one of them would give the attendant first, before the attendant served the food to those reclining at the meal],

and

if

one would give late

to the attendant after the attendant had already served all the guests].

That pious man

who would give first [

who would give the attendant first] -

Elijah

would

speak with him,

with that pious man.

But that pious man

who would give late -

Elijah would not

speak

with him,

because when the attendant gives food before the guests, he sees it and is distressed, and sometimes there are many guests.

The Gemara further relates concerning

Ameimar, Mar Zutra, and Rav Ashi,

who

were sitting at the entrance of King Azgor’s residence [

they were sitting at the entrance of King Azgor’s residence],

and

there passed by [

he passed before them]

the king’s aturanga [

the man appointed to place food before the ministers], carrying food and various cooked dishes.