Yevamot 34b (לד:) — the Talmud in English

And we raise an objection:

But Tamar

Judah’s daughter-in-law—

at her first intercourse

with Judah

became pregnant!

Rav Naḥman said to him:

Rav Naḥman:

Tamar

before her intercourse with Judah,

with a finger

he

caused her to rupture

her hymen, and her vaginal opening was already open. Therefore, with regard to this matter, it was considered as though her intercourse had been a second intercourse, through which she could become pregnant!

As Rabbi Yitzḥak said: All those whose hymens were ruptured in the house of Rabbi,

who ruptured and removed their hymens with a finger—

were called “Tamar.”

And why were they called “Tamar”?—

Because of Tamar, who ruptured

her hymen

with her finger.

And we raise an objection: How could Rava say that Tamar became pregnant through her first intercourse with Judah?

But

after all,

there were Er and Onan,

to whom she had been married before Judah had intercourse with her!?

And we answer:

Er and Onan

had intercourse unnaturally,

as they engaged in intercourse with her not in the usual place of intercourse.

The Gemara raises an objection: For all twenty-four months

during which a woman nurses her child, and there is danger to the fetus if its mother becomes pregnant, because her milk would spoil and the child would have nothing to nurse—her husband is permitted to engage in intercourse with her in a manner in which he

plows inside and spills

the semen

outside,

so that she will not become pregnant,

this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer.

The Sages said to him:

The Sages:

These

acts

are nothing other than like the act of Er and Onan!

This proves that Er and Onan engaged in intercourse in the usual manner, but ultimately wasted their semen on the ground. How, then, could Rava say that Judah had intercourse with Tamar at their first intercourse, and how could Rav Naḥman wonder how she became pregnant from it according to Rav Naḥman’s explanation!?

And we answer: What the Sages said—that one who does this acts like Er and Onan—does not mean that he does precisely what they themselves did.

Rather,

like the act of Er and Onan, but not like the act of Er and Onan!

Like the act of Er and Onan—

As it is written

[Genesis 38]:

“And it came to pass, when he went in to his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground”

But not like the act of Er and Onan—

for there,

they had intercourse with her

unnaturally,

and in this way they wasted their semen; and this is why Scripture called it, “and he spilled it on the ground.”

And

if

here, in the case of a nursing woman, according to Rabbi Eliezer, he had intercourse with her

in the usual manner,

in the usual manner,

but he wastes his semen on the ground.

The Gemara inquires:

Granted, as for Onan,

we know that he acted in this manner,

as it is written concerning him, “and he spilled it on the ground.”

But as for Er—

from where do we know

that he, too, acted in this manner?

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: As it is written

[Genesis 38]:

“And He put him also to death.”

Scripture teaches that

he, too, was in the same

cause leading to

death, and he died.

Granted, as for Onan,

he did this

because

he thought that

“the semen will not be his,”

but would be attributed to his brother Er, since Onan performed levirate marriage with her after the death of his brother Er.

But as for Er—

for what reason did he do this?

So that she would not become pregnant, and her beauty would suffer.

The Sages taught:

[Leviticus 15] It is written in the passage concerning the impurity of a man who has intercourse with a woman, through which both the man and the woman become impure:

“And a woman with whom

he

has intercourse with an emission of semen, and they shall bathe in water.”

The word “her” is an exclusion, and it comes to teach:

to exclude a bride,

who is penetrated at her first intercourse, as she does not become impure through that intercourse,

this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.

As the Gemara will explain below.

And the Sages say: “Her, an emission of semen”—

Her, with an emission of semen”—

to exclude one with whom

he had intercourse

unnaturally,

not in the usual place of intercourse.

He said to him,

he expressed surprise and asked,

Huna, son

of

Rav Naḥman, to Rav Naḥman:

Shall we say

that

Rabbi Yehuda holds: The Torah takes consideration for a bride’s ornaments,

for the rouge and the mascara that she applies to her face, so that they will not come off her during immersion in water!?

He said to him,

Rav Naḥman said to his son: The reason for Rabbi Yehuda’s ruling is

because a woman does not become pregnant through her first intercourse,

as the passage is not open when he has intercourse with her for the first time.

Therefore, this intercourse does not render the bride impure, despite the fact that the husband emitted semen, and despite the fact that it was in the usual place of intercourse, which is suitable for insemination during a second intercourse, when the passage will be open.

For the Torah excluded her from impurity because this is a first intercourse, through which she cannot become pregnant, since the passage is not open at that time and it is therefore not intercourse suitable for insemination.

Moreover, the husband’s semen that touches her does not render her impure, since this is contact in a concealed place. A person becomes impure with the impurity of contact through touching impurity only when he touches it with his hands or with the external side of his body, but not when the contact occurs in a “concealed place,” an internal part of the body hidden from view.

And the Gemara explains:

With regard to what do

the Sages and Rabbi Yehuda disagree?

The Sages hold

that this is the exclusion derived from the verse:

“An emission of semen”—

to exclude the initial penetration,

the beginning of intercourse, which is not suitable for insemination.

“Her”—

to exclude one

with whom there was intercourse

unnaturally,

not in the usual place of intercourse.

And Rabbi Yehuda holds: Both unnatural intercourse and initial penetration

are

derived from “an emission of semen.”

“Her”—

to exclude a bride.

When Ravin came

from the Land of Israel to Babylonia,

he said

in the name of

Rabbi Yoḥanan: Any

woman

who remained after

her husband died or divorced her,

her husband, for ten years, and then married—

will no longer give birth.

Rav Naḥman said: They taught this only when she did not intend to marry; but if she intended to marry—

she can become pregnant.

Rava said to

his wife, who was

the daughter of Rav Ḥisda,

and whom he had married after she had remained ten years following the death of her first husband, Rami bar Ḥama, and who became pregnant by Rava:

The Sages are gossiping about you,

wondering how you gave birth after waiting ten years following your first husband’s death!?

She said to him: I,

before ten years had elapsed,

had set my mind on you.

Therefore, I also became pregnant after ten years.

There was an incident involving

a certain

woman

who came before Rav Yosef.

She said to him: My teacher, I remained after my husband for ten years, and I gave birth!

Rav Yosef said to her:

Rav Yosef

said to her: My daughter, do not cast aspersion on the words of the Sages!

She said to him,

she admitted to him:

I had intercourse with a gentile

during that period!

Shmuel said: And all of them,

all women who have had intercourse,

must wait

before marrying after their intercourse

three months,

in order to distinguish between the semen of the first husband and that of the second husband. The Sages included all Jewish women in their decree, even minors who cannot give birth.

Except for a minor convert and a minor emancipated slave,

for whom the Sages did not decree that she must wait.

But a minor Jewish woman—

must wait three months.

And with regard to what

did they decree concerning Jewish minors?

If

they decreed concerning minors who leave their husbands

through refusal,

but Shmuel said that one who refuses does not require

waiting, since the Sages did not decree this concerning her.

And if

the reference is to minors who were married by their fathers under Torah law and leave

with a bill of divorce—

has

already

Shmuel said this once!

As Shmuel said: If she refused him—

she does not need to wait three months.

But if he

gave her a bill of divorce—

she must wait three months!

Rather,

Shmuel said that Jewish minors must wait, unlike converts, with regard to minors who have intercourse

promiscuously.