Artificial Insemination and Surrogacy

10) He who inserts the head of the penis alone is called MEARAH, from the language, "her source he uncovered." One who inserts the whole member is called finisher. And in all the forbidden relations the MEARAH and the finisher and even if they didn't emit semen, and even if they exited and didn't finish inserting once he inserts the tip of the penis they are both liable death from the court or KARETH or lashes or lashes of rebellion. (And one who has sex with the privates vaginally and one who does so anally) when he inserts in her, they are both liable death, or KARETH, or lashes or rebellious lashes, whether they were laying or standing, on the insertion of the penis is the liability.

11) Whoever has forbidden sex without an erection, rather his penis was flisy like the penis of the dead like the sick. Or someone who was born like this, as the SERIS CHAMAH, even though they inserted the penis with his hand they are not liable KARETH, nor lashes, and needless to say death. For this is not sex. But he is invalidated from tithes. And the judges lash them both rebellious lashes.

They asked Ben Zoma: "A virgin who has become pregnant, what is her [permissibility] to [marry] a Kohen Gadol [who may only marry a virgin?" Do we consider the opinion of Shmuel, for Shmuel said, "I can have intercourse multiple times without [causing] bleeding." Or maybe [the case] of Shmuel is uncommon [and thus she would be forbidden]? He said to them: "[The case] of Shmuel is uncommon, but we consider that maybe in the baths, she was impregnated [by leftover semen]." But didn't Shmuel say, "Any semen that was not shot like an arrow, does not impregnate [in the halachic sense]?" Originally, this [leftover semen] was also shot like an arrow.

(11) A man is permitted to [marry] the daughter of his father's wife that she has from another man [i.e. his stepsister]. Even if she grew up in the house among the brothers [i.e. her stepbrothers] she is permitted to them, and we are not afraid of marit ha'ayin [an action that appears to be sinful] of people thinking that she is their sister.

... His sister is not permitted, from the Torah, making no difference his sister from his father or from his mother. From marriage or from promiscuity or even if his father slept with one not permitted to him and bore from her, it is his sister and he is liable upon her except for a sister from a maidservant or gentile. When does this apply? With a maidservant in general, but if his father came upon his own maidservant and bore from her, it is his sister. And it is permitted with the daughter of his father's wife, and even a step-daughter who was raised in the same house is permitted to her brother, and we do not worry about how it looks to say it appears to be her brother...

(10) A man's sister is forbidden to him by Torah law, whether she is his sister from his mother or his father, from wedded or unwed parents. Even if his father had a forbidden relationship and produced a daughter, she is his sister and forbidden to him, unless she is his sister from a female slave or a non-Jewish woman. Rem"a: "It seems to me that a priori she [a man's sister from a mother who is a female slave or non-Jewish] is forbidden to him, because there are those who are satisfied with saying that under Torah law the fetus has the status of the female slave or the non-Jewish woman, but under Rabbinic law it is his child, so therefore one should be stringent a priori." And there are those who say that these words apply to a regular maidservant, but if a man's father had relations with his own maidservant and produced a daughter, she is his sister. Rem"a: Even if he said his intentions were merely for promiscuity, he is not to be believed.

(11) A man is permitted to [marry] the daughter of his father's wife that she has from another man [i.e. his stepsister]. Even if she grew up in the house among the brothers [i.e. her stepbrothers] she is permitted to them, and we are not afraid of marit ha'ayin [an action that appears to be sinful] of people thinking that she is their sister.

Rabbi Eleizer said, because sex is separated into three sections, one for reproduction, and the second to ease from the wetness (or heat) of the body, and the third, the desire that is likened to the desire of the animals. And the verse says "for seed" the reason being even for seed. And here it is forbidden altogether, and perhaps it said "for seed" to recall the reasoning of the prohibition for it would not be know who the seed is from and would come from this great and evil abominations for both of them and it does not recall this by the punishment for even if he activated it and did not eject seed his is liable...

It is biblical law that it is permitted for a convert to marry his mother, or his sister from his mother that converted. Yet the sages prohibited this so that they wouldn't say: we came from stricter holiness to lenient holiness. So too a convert who slept with his mother or sister and she is still a gentile, it is as if he slept with an aramean.

Prohibition "it and its child" applies to females, for this is her child for sure; and if his father is known for sure, we do not slaughter them both in one day, but if they were slaughtered they are not liable for lashes, for the matter is unclear if it applies for males or it does not apply.

One who plants a seed, or branch, or uprooted the entire tree and planted it in a different place, one who grafts a branch in another tree, or 'Hamavrich,' one who makes a hole next to a tree and bends a branch of the tree into it, and buries the middle in the whole, and its head comes forth from the other side and makes a tree, they are all required in Orlah. Precisely when he cut this side from the essence of the tree, or it doesn't wean from it, but all the time it is connected and weans from it it is considered one of its branches and it's permitted. And if after it grew, the branch 'SheHivrich' and he bent and dug another branch in the land, and he did so a number of times one after another, while the first is connected to the essence of the tree, they are all permitted. If the first is disconnected from the essence of the tree they are liable, and they begin to count from when it is disconnected, and the essence is exempt. And if the essence is uprooted from the land it proceeds to be secondary to the branch 'SheHivrich' and we count the essence or the branch from the time it was uprooted.

And after it was established that she would bear a daughter and called her Dinah, however it was established from beforehand by God that two tribes would come from Rachel, and God heard the prayers of Leah and switched the fetus in her womb and Joseph was in the womb of Rachel and Dinah in the womb of Leah

Come and learn, two brother twin converts and so too freed slaves they do not perform Chalitzah and not Yevamah and are not liable due to sleeping with the others wife (post-marriage). If there conception was before conversion and their birth afterward they do not perform Chalitzah and not Yevamah and but are liable due to sleeping with the others wife (post-marriage). If conception and birth was after conversion, they are Israelites for all matters.

But they are liable - Karet, as the wife of a brother from the mother, since she is like an Israelite that bore sons.

Rather this, for Rabbah said a pregnant non-jewess the converted, her son does not require immersion , why is immersion not required? If you should say in accordance with Rabbi Yitchak, for Rabbi Yitchack said a matter of Torah majority and he is strict about it, it is a separation, majority separated but not strict about it it is not a separation

It is permitted to slaughter a pregnant animal. The fetus is the thigh of the mother. And if the fetus went out alive after slaughtering, we do not slaughter it on the same day. And if it was slaughtered, he is not lashed.

And when she was born her mother died - and it was not seen to call her mother.

They put close two wombs and it left one and entered another, it is questionable if the Bechor opened the womb of the one it entered; for indeed did it open the womb or it did not open it until the womb is opened by her child.

Mishnah. A woman who miscarried on the 40th day, she need not consider the possibility of childbirth; on the 41st day, she must consider a male, female and a menstruant. Rabbi Ishmael says, on the 41st day she considers male and female, day 81 she considers male, female and menstruant; since a male if fashioned on day 41 and a female on day 81. The Sages say one and the same is the creation of the male or female, they are both 41.

Gemara. Why was male mentioned? If in respect of the days of uncleanness, female was mentioned; and if in respect of the days of cleanness, was not a menstruant mentioned