Kiddushin 70b (ע:) — the Talmud in English

One may not inquire about a woman’s welfare,

because perhaps, through inquiring about one another’s welfare, they will become accustomed to interacting with each other and come to affection. And this concern exists even when the inquiry is conveyed through an agent.

He said to him,

Rav Naḥman: But surely it is possible to send her greetings

through her husband,

meaning: I will be the agent for this matter, and in such a manner there is no concern that affection will develop.

Rav Yehuda said to him

:

This is what Shmuel said: One may not inquire about a woman’s welfare at all,

because doing so habituates her heart and mind to him.

Yalta sent him

Yalta,

his wife

of Rav Naḥman, when she heard the exchange between them:

“Release him from his litigation”

[deal with his request quickly and dismiss him from your presence], so that

“he will not make you”

[that is, he will not regard you as]

“like any other ignoramus!”

Rav Naḥman said

to Rav Yehuda:

“What brings my master here?”

[What is my master’s way here? The word shiyyata is related to the word for a path, as in “to travel throughout the land.”] In other words, why did you come here?

Rav Yehuda said to him

:

“My master sent a summons to court after me”

[my master sent me a document summoning me to judgment]!

Rav Naḥman said to him: “Now, I do not understand my master’s speech”,

and

“would I send my master a summons to court?!”

Surely I do not even understand my master’s conversation; would I send you a summons to court?

Rav Yehuda took out

Rav Yehuda

the document of summons from his bosom and showed it to him

[he took the summons from his pocket and showed it to Rav Naḥman]. And

he said to him: “Here is the man, and here is the document”

[here is my master’s signature on the summons]!

Rav Naḥman said to him

: Although I am not worthy to judge you, nevertheless,

since

you

have already come here, let my master state his case

[let my master present his argument] and establish his own innocence,

“so that people will not say”

:

“The Sages flatter one another!”

For if I were to dismiss you without anything, people would say that Sages flatter one another and do not judge them according to Torah law as they judge the rest of Israel.

Rav Naḥman entered into judgment with him, and

said to him: “For what reason did my master excommunicate that man”

who called you “son of a fishmonger”?

Rav Yehuda said to him: Because he

caused distress to

my attendant, who is

an agent of the Sages.

Rav Naḥman said to him:

“Then my master should have flogged him!”

You should have punished him with lashes, rather than excommunicating him.

For Rav flogged

[administered lashes]

one who causes distress to an agent of the Sages.

Rav Yehuda said to him: A punishment

“more severe than it”

[than lashes]

“I gave him”,

I administered it to him, since excommunication is more severe than lashes.

Rav Naḥman asked him again:

“For what reason did my master publicly declare concerning”

that man

“that he is a slave?”

Rav Yehuda said to him

: Because

“he is accustomed”

this man

“to call”

[to refer]

“to people”

“my slaves.”

And it was taught,

and we already learned:

“Anyone who disqualifies”

others is himself

“disqualified.”

And

a disqualified person

“never speaks in praise”

of others

“ever”,

but speaks of their disgrace.

And Shmuel said: Anyone who disqualifies another

Anyone who disqualifies

“disqualifies him with his own defect!”

Since he was accustomed to calling people “my slaves,” this proves that he himself is a slave.

Rav Naḥman said to him:

“Say”,

one might say that what

“Shmuel said”,

“Anyone who disqualifies another disqualifies him with his own defect,” he said only

“to suspect him”

of being disqualified. But

“to publicly declare concerning him”

that he is certainly disqualified,

“who said”

that Shmuel said this?!

Meanwhile,

in the interim,

that litigant from Nehardea arrived.

That litigant said

[the man who had brought his case against Rav Yehuda]

to Rav Yehuda:

But

“you called me”

“a slave,”

a man of such distinguished lineage as I?

For

surely

“I come from the royal Hasmonean house”,

I come from the Hasmonean house, whose members were kings!

Rav Yehuda said to him

:

“This is what Shmuel said: Anyone who says”

“I come from the Hasmonean house”

“is a slave!”

Because Herod killed all the descendants of the Hasmonean house and reigned in their place. He himself was a slave, but he named his sons after the Hasmonean house. Presumably, he and his sons married gentile women or maidservants, since the Jewish people would not give their daughters to slaves.

Rav Naḥman said

to Rav Yehuda: But

“does my master not accept that which Rav Abba said in the name of Rav Huna in the name of Rav: Any Torah scholar who rules a halakhic ruling and comes”

in the name of his teacher—

“if before”

it

“occurred”

this case that he has now judged, he had already

“stated it”

as a halakha in the name of his teacher,

“we heed him.”

“But if not”,

if he mentions the halakha in the name of his teacher only now, at the time of the event,

“we do not heed him”,

because perhaps, on account of the case that has just arisen before him, he claims that he heard this from his teacher in order to strengthen his argument.

Since you are saying this now in the name of Shmuel, after the case arose before us, you are not reliable concerning it.

Rav Yehuda said to him

:

“There is Rav Mattana, who supports my position”,

as he too heard these words from Shmuel.

And the Gemara relates:

Rav Mattana

did not live in Nehardea, and

“had not been seen in Nehardea”

[he had not visited there] for

“thirteen years”

[thirteen years].

“That day”

on which this incident occurred,

“he came”,

Rav Mattana came to Nehardea and visited Rav Naḥman.

He asked

—

him

Rav Yehuda asked Rav Mattana:

“Does my master remember what Shmuel said when one leg was on the riverbank and one leg was on the bridge?”

[Does my master remember what Shmuel said at that time]?!

Rav Mattana said to him

:

“This is what Shmuel said: Anyone who says, ‘I come from the royal Hasmonean house,’ is a slave!”

For

there was

“no remnant of them except that one young woman”

[a girl], because Herod killed all the descendants of the Hasmonean house and left only one young woman among them.

When Herod wished to marry her,

“she went up to the roof and raised her voice”

[she climbed onto the roof and cried out],

“and she said: Anyone who says”

“I am from the Hasmonean house”

“is a slave,”

because I am the only one remaining from the Hasmonean house.

Immediately,

“she fell from the roof and died”

[she threw herself from the roof and died].

After Rav Naḥman heard this from Rav Mattana,

“he publicly declared concerning him”,

that man,

“that he is a slave.”

And the Gemara relates:

“That day, several marriage contracts were torn in Nehardea.”

On that day, the husbands who had married women from this family divorced their wives without paying the marriage settlement and tore up their marriage contracts, because the women were found to be disqualified from entering the congregation, and their marriages were not valid marriages.

“When he left”,

when Rav Yehuda left Nehardea,

“they went after him”

[they followed him]—those people of Nehardea who had been disqualified by him—in order

“to stone him”

[to stone him] because he had revealed their disqualification.

Rav Yehuda said to them

:

“If you remain silent, remain silent”

[it is better for you if you remain silent].

“But if not”

you remain silent,

“I will reveal concerning you”

[I will reveal about you]

“that which Shmuel said: There are two genealogical families”

[two families]

“in Nehardea.”

“One is called”

“the House of the Dove,”

“and one is called”

“the House of the Raven.”

One of them is fit, and one of them is disqualified.

“And your mnemonic”

to distinguish between the fit and the disqualified is:

“Impure”—

“impure,” and pure—

“pure!”

The family of the House of the Dove, named after a pure bird, is fit. The family of the House of the Raven, named after an impure bird, is disqualified.

They cast

[the people of Nehardea threw]

those stones

[the stones] with which they had intended to stone Rav Yehuda

from their hands,

and threw them into the river.

And

as a result,

a blockage arose

[a stoppage was created]

in the royal river,

as these stones blocked the river and halted its flow, because there were exceedingly many stones.

The Gemara continues and relates about amoraim who publicly declared individuals and families to be disqualified:

“Rav Yehuda would proclaim in Pumbedita”

[where he lived]:

“Ada and Yonatan”

[names of men]

“are slaves!”

And he likewise proclaimed:

“Yehuda bar Pappa

is

“a mamzer!”

And he likewise proclaimed:

“Betai bar Tuviyya

is also a slave,

“and because of his arrogance he did not accept a bill of emancipation,”

as a result of his pride he refused to accept a bill of emancipation, and he remains a Canaanite slave.

“Rava would proclaim in Meḥoza: Balai, Danai, Talai, Malai, Zaggai”

[names of families or places],

“all are disqualified.”

They are disqualified from entering the congregation.

Rav Yehuda said: The family called

the

“Guvai” is

“Gibeonite.”

Because they were Gibeonites, they were called “Guvai” in Babylonia. And they are forbidden to enter the congregation by David’s decree.

And the people of the village

“Dornonita”

are also descendants of the Gibeonites. For this reason the place was called “Dornonita,” because it is

“a village of”

“the Nethinim,”

and “Nethinim” means Gibeonites.

and “Nethinim” means Gibeonites.

Rav Yosef said: “This Be-Kuvei of Pumbedita”

[a village so called, near Pumbedita],

“all”

are descended

“from slaves”

among them.

“Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: Pashḥur ben Immer had four hundred slaves, and some say”

and there are those who say,

“four thousand slaves.”

He was a koen who lived in the time of Jeremiah.

“And all of them became assimilated into the priesthood.”

Since they ate teruma as was proper for slaves of kohanim, they came to regard themselves as kohanim and married daughters of kohanim. ["

“Became assimilated” is an expression meaning “became mixed in,” like “became mixed.” And dimua means intermingling].

“And any koen who possesses insolence is only from them,”

as his insolence indicates that he is one of those slaves who became mixed into the priesthood.

Abaye said:

And

“all of them”

[all these families of Pashḥur’s slaves who are presumed to be kohanim]

“sit”

in other words, reside

“in Shura”

[a place]

“of Nehardea.”

“And Shmuel disagrees”

with what

“that”

was said by

“Rabbi Elazar.”

“As Rabbi Elazar said: If you see a koen”

who behaves

“with brazen insolence, do not question his lineage”

and suspect that there is some disqualification in his family. For this is the characteristic of kohanim: they are quarrelsome.

“As it is stated”

[Hosea 4:4]:

“And your people are like those who quarrel with a koen.”

This is contrary to Shmuel’s statement, that a koen’s brazen insolence indicates that he is descended from slaves.

Rabbi Avin bar Rav Adda said in the name of Rav: Anyone who marries a woman who is not fitting for him

[who is disqualified for him on account of his lineage],

“when the Holy One, blessed be He, causes His Divine Presence to rest upon Israel,”

He

“testifies concerning all the tribes”

that they are of holy stock,

“but he does not”

testify

“concerning him,”

because he has blemished his lineage.

“As it is stated”

[Psalms 122:4]:

“The tribes of God—

a testimony for Israel.”

“When are they a testimony for Israel,”

when the Holy One, blessed be He, testifies concerning them that they are His?

“When the tribes”

are

“the tribes of God.”

Rabbi Ḥama bar Rabbi Ḥanina said: When the Holy One, blessed be He, causes His Divine Presence to rest, He does not cause it to rest

upon them

“except upon families of distinguished lineage among Israel.”

“As it is stated”

[Jeremiah 30:25]:

“At that time, says

the Lord,

“I will be God to all the families of Israel.”

And Rav Ḥama analyzes the verse:

“To all Israel”

“it is not stated.”

“Rather,”

“to all the families

of Israel,” only to those who possess proper family lineage and are complete Israelites.

The Gemara continues to expound what is written later in this verse: “

And they will be My people”—

Rabba bar Rav Huna said: This is an additional distinction

that

“exists between Israelites and converts.”

“For with regard to Israelites, it is written”

[Ezekiel 37:27]:

“And I will be their God, and they will be My people,”

for although they do not yet conduct themselves as My people, nevertheless I draw them close. And ultimately, as a result, they become My people.

“But with regard to converts, it is written”

[Jeremiah 30:21]:

“Who is this who has pledged his heart to approach Me, says the Lord; and you shall be My people, and I shall be your God,”

for Heaven does not draw them close unless they first draw themselves close by becoming worthy. Therefore it is written first, “You shall be My people,” and afterward, “And I shall be your God.”

Rabbi Ḥelbo said: Converts are as difficult for Israel as a leprous affliction,

as they are like an affliction of leprosy for Israel, because they are not meticulous in the mitzvot, and Israelites who are in their proximity are drawn after them and learn from their deeds.

“As it is stated”

[Isaiah 14:1]:

“And the convert shall join himself to them, and they shall attach themselves to the house of Jacob.”

And they derive this by means of a

“verbal analogy”:

with regard to converts

“it is written here,”

“and they shall attach themselves,” which is an expression for a leprous affliction;

“and it is written there,”

with regard to the passage concerning afflictions:

“for a swelling and for an affliction.”