Yevamot 45b — the Talmud in English

Who is he? —

who is he? —

Rav Yehuda!

But Rav Yehuda said: One who is half slave and half free man who had intercourse with a daughter of Israel —

that offspring has no remedy

to marry a daughter of Israel, because he is a mamzer?!

And we answer: There is a distinction between the cases:

For if one who is half slave and half free man had intercourse with an unmarried daughter of Israel, without marrying her, the offspring is fit!

But

when Rav Yehuda’s statement was stated

that that offspring has no remedy —

for example, that he betrothed

the one who is half slave and half free man

a daughter of Israel.

And since she is betrothed to his Israelite half, therefore the offspring is a mamzer,

for it is found that the slave side within him is using a married woman

who is betrothed to the Israelite side within him!

And the Gemara raises an objection that this is not a correct distinction: For —

But the scholars of Nehardea said in the name of Rabbi Yaakov:

According to the view of the one who disqualifies,

the offspring of a gentile or a slave who had intercourse with a daughter of Israel —

he disqualifies even when

the gentile or the slave had intercourse with a daughter of Israel

who is unmarried.

According to the view of the one who declares fit —

he declares fit even when

the gentile or the slave had intercourse with

a married woman

of Israel.

And both of them,

the one who declares fit and the one who disqualifies,

learned it only from the father’s wife,

beside which the law of mamzerut is stated in the Torah:

The one who disqualifies reasons: Just as with the father’s wife, with whom betrothal does not take effect

for the son of the father —

the offspring is a mamzer.

So too, with every woman with whom betrothal does not take effect,

including a gentile and a slave —

the offspring is a mamzer.

And the one who declares fit reasons: Just as with the father’s wife, for him

for the son of the father alone

betrothal does not take effect [

when she is unmarried, after his father’s death, or after his father divorced her], but

for others betrothal does take effect

when she is unmarried.

To exclude,

to exclude

a gentile and a slave, with whom betrothal does not take effect at all!

And therefore, even if a gentile or a slave had intercourse with a married Israelite woman, the offspring from him is not a mamzer.

And if so, it is impossible to say the distinction that we said: that in the case of one who is half slave and half free man, it is speaking of one whose Israelite half betrothed her, and therefore the offspring is a mamzer. For according to Rav Yehuda, who declares fit, the offspring is not a mamzer even if the slave had intercourse with a married woman!

Rather,

this is how it should be answered:

When Rav Yehuda’s statement was stated —

for example, that there came

one who was half slave and half free man

upon a married woman,

and the offspring is a mamzer, not on account of the slave side, but on account of the Israelite side!

Since

it is found that the free side within him is using a married woman.

Ravina said, Rav Gaza said to me: Rabbi Yosei bar Avin happened to come to our place,

to our place.

And there was an incident involving an unmarried woman

with whom a complete slave had intercourse —

and he declared fit

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin made the offspring.

And there was another incident,

involving a married woman

with whom a slave had intercourse —

and he disqualified

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin made the offspring.

Rav Sheshet said, Rav Gaza himself said to me: It was not

Rabbi Yosei bar Avin

who was in our place,

but it was Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida.

And he declared fit both in the case of an unmarried woman

with whom a complete slave had intercourse,

and in the case of a married woman

with whom a complete slave had intercourse. As explained above, there is a mamzer only from one with whom betrothal takes effect with others, and not from a gentile or a slave, with whom betrothal with Israelites does not take effect at all.

Rav Aha, son of Rabba, said to Ravina: Amemar happened to come to our place, and he declared fit both in the case of an unmarried woman and in the case of a married woman.

And the halakha is: A gentile or a slave who had intercourse with a daughter of Israel —

the offspring is fit, both in the case of an unmarried woman and in the case of a married woman.

Rava declared Rav Mari bar Rahel fit,

who was born from a gentile who had intercourse with a daughter of Israel,

and appointed him

and appointed him to be

among the pursei de-Bavel,

among the collectors appointed over Israel in Babylonia.

And

Rava appointed him to an appointment as an administrator over the public,

even though the Master said

in tractate Kiddushin [76b], concerning the verse in the Book of Deuteronomy [chapter 17], in the section concerning the appointment of a king:

“You shall surely set a king over you

from among your brothers.”

And the Sages expounded from here:

Every “appointment”,

appointed officials and collectors,

that you appoint

over you —

they shall be only “from among your brothers”!

Since

this one, since his mother is from Israel —

“from among your brothers” applies to him.

And from here onward the Gemara deals with the methods of conversion:

The slave of Rabbi Hiyya bar Ami immersed

he immersed

a certain gentile woman for the sake of a wife,

so that the immersion would purify her from her menstruation, and this was not an immersion for the sake of conversion.

Rav Yosef said: I am able to declare her and her daughter fit,

so that this immersion should be considered an immersion for the sake of conversion, and she and her daughter should be fit to marry an Israelite.

And Rav Yosef explains his words:

I am able to declare

her,

so that this immersion should benefit her as though it were an immersion for the sake of conversion, even though this was an immersion for purification from menstruation and not an immersion for the sake of conversion, because the fact that she observes the Jewish religion by immersing for her menstruation—something that a gentile woman does not do—that itself constitutes acceptance of the yoke of the mitzvot of the Jewish religion, and since this acceptance is made through immersion, this immersion is considered for her an immersion for the sake of conversion.

And

in accordance with Rav Asi,

who said the same thing below, in a similar case —

For Rav Asi said

concerning a person whom they called the son of a gentile woman because his mother had not immersed for her conversion:

Did she not immerse

his mother

for her menstruation!?

And it is sufficient that she immersed for purification from menstruation in order to consider the immersion an immersion for the sake of conversion.

And I am able to declare fit also

her daughter,

the daughter of that woman.

And even though after this immersion [through which she converted] she had intercourse with a gentile, and it is found that her daughter, who was born to her, is from the intercourse of a gentile with an Israelite woman, I have grounds to permit her, since I hold that

a gentile or a slave who had intercourse with a daughter of Israel —

the offspring is fit.

And now the Gemara brings the incident in which Rav Asi issued a ruling:

There was a certain one whom they called “son of an Aramean woman”,

because his mother had not immersed for the sake of conversion.

Rav Asi said: Is it that

indeed

she did not immerse

his mother

for her menstruation!?

And through this immersion, in which she observes it according to the religion of Israel, she converts.

There was a certain one whom they called son of an Aramean”,

who was born from a gentile, because his father had not immersed for his conversion [although he had circumcised himself].

Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said: Is it that his father did not immerse

his father

for

purification from the impurity of

his seminal emission!?

And through this immersion he converted.

Rav Hama bar Gurya said in the name of Rav: One who purchases a slave from a gentile, and the slave preceded

that slave

and immersed for the sake of becoming a free man —

he acquired himself as a free man.

And the Gemara explains:

What is the reason

that the slave acquired himself to become a free man?