21 Kislev 5781

Now Jacob was settled in the land where his father had sojourned, the land of Canaan. This, then, is the line of Jacob: At seventeen years of age, Joseph tended the flocks with his brothers, as a helper to the sons of his father’s wives Bilhah and Zilpah. And Joseph brought bad reports of them to their father. Now Israel loved Joseph best of all his sons, for he was the child of his old age; and he had made him an ornamented tunic. And when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than any of his brothers, they hated him so that they could not speak a friendly word to him. Once Joseph had a dream which he told to his brothers; and they hated him even more. He said to them, “Hear this dream which I have dreamed: There we were binding sheaves in the field, when suddenly my sheaf stood up and remained upright; then your sheaves gathered around and bowed low to my sheaf.” His brothers answered, “Do you mean to reign over us? Do you mean to rule over us?” And they hated him even more for his talk about his dreams. He dreamed another dream and told it to his brothers, saying, “Look, I have had another dream: And this time, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” And when he told it to his father and brothers, his father berated him. “What,” he said to him, “is this dream you have dreamed? Are we to come, I and your mother and your brothers, and bow low to you to the ground?” So his brothers were wrought up at him, and his father kept the matter in mind. One time, when his brothers had gone to pasture their father’s flock at Shechem, Israel said to Joseph, “Your brothers are pasturing at Shechem. Come, I will send you to them.” He answered, “I am ready.” And he said to him, “Go and see how your brothers are and how the flocks are faring, and bring me back word.” So he sent him from the valley of Hebron. When he reached Shechem, a man came upon him wandering in the fields. The man asked him, “What are you looking for?” He answered, “I am looking for my brothers. Could you tell me where they are pasturing?” The man said, “They have gone from here, for I heard them say: Let us go to Dothan.” So Joseph followed his brothers and found them at Dothan. They saw him from afar, and before he came close to them they conspired to kill him. They said to one another, “Here comes that dreamer! Come now, let us kill him and throw him into one of the pits; and we can say, ‘A savage beast devoured him.’ We shall see what comes of his dreams!” But when Reuben heard it, he tried to save him from them. He said, “Let us not take his life.” And Reuben went on, “Shed no blood! Cast him into that pit out in the wilderness, but do not touch him yourselves”—intending to save him from them and restore him to his father. When Joseph came up to his brothers, they stripped Joseph of his tunic, the ornamented tunic that he was wearing, and took him and cast him into the pit. The pit was empty; there was no water in it. Then they sat down to a meal. Looking up, they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, their camels bearing gum, balm, and ladanum to be taken to Egypt. Then Judah said to his brothers, “What do we gain by killing our brother and covering up his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, but let us not do away with him ourselves. After all, he is our brother, our own flesh.” His brothers agreed. When Midianite traders passed by, they pulled Joseph up out of the pit. They sold Joseph for twenty pieces of silver to the Ishmaelites, who brought Joseph to Egypt. When Reuben returned to the pit and saw that Joseph was not in the pit, he rent his clothes. Returning to his brothers, he said, “The boy is gone! Now, what am I to do?” Then they took Joseph’s tunic, slaughtered a kid, and dipped the tunic in the blood. They had the ornamented tunic taken to their father, and they said, “We found this. Please examine it; is it your son’s tunic or not?” He recognized it, and said, “My son’s tunic! A savage beast devoured him! Joseph was torn by a beast!” Jacob rent his clothes, put sackcloth on his loins, and observed mourning for his son many days. All his sons and daughters sought to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted, saying, “No, I will go down mourning to my son in Sheol.” Thus his father bewailed him. The Midianites, meanwhile, sold him in Egypt to Potiphar, a courtier of Pharaoh and his chief steward. About that time Judah left his brothers and camped near a certain Adullamite whose name was Hirah. There Judah saw the daughter of a certain Canaanite whose name was Shua, and he married her and cohabited with her. She conceived and bore a son, and he named him Er. She conceived again and bore a son, and named him Onan. Once again she bore a son, and named him Shelah; he was at Chezib when she bore him. Judah got a wife for Er his first-born; her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah’s first-born, was displeasing to the LORD, and the LORD took his life. Then Judah said to Onan, “Join with your brother’s wife and do your duty by her as a brother-in-law, and provide offspring for your brother.” But Onan, knowing that the seed would not count as his, let it go to waste whenever he joined with his brother’s wife, so as not to provide offspring for his brother. What he did was displeasing to the LORD, and He took his life also. Then Judah said to his daughter-in-law Tamar, “Stay as a widow in your father’s house until my son Shelah grows up”—for he thought, “He too might die like his brothers.” So Tamar went to live in her father’s house. A long time afterward, Shua’s daughter, the wife of Judah, died. When his period of mourning was over, Judah went up to Timnah to his sheepshearers, together with his friend Hirah the Adullamite. And Tamar was told, “Your father-in-law is coming up to Timnah for the sheepshearing.” So she took off her widow’s garb, covered her face with a veil, and, wrapping herself up, sat down at the entrance to Enaim, which is on the road to Timnah; for she saw that Shelah was grown up, yet she had not been given to him as wife. When Judah saw her, he took her for a harlot; for she had covered her face. So he turned aside to her by the road and said, “Here, let me sleep with you”—for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-law. “What,” she asked, “will you pay for sleeping with me?” He replied, “I will send a kid from my flock.” But she said, “You must leave a pledge until you have sent it.” And he said, “What pledge shall I give you?” She replied, “Your seal and cord, and the staff which you carry.” So he gave them to her and slept with her, and she conceived by him. Then she went on her way. She took off her veil and again put on her widow’s garb. Judah sent the kid by his friend the Adullamite, to redeem the pledge from the woman; but he could not find her. He inquired of the people of that town, “Where is the cult prostitute, the one at Enaim, by the road?” But they said, “There has been no prostitute here.” So he returned to Judah and said, “I could not find her; moreover, the townspeople said: There has been no prostitute here.” Judah said, “Let her keep them, lest we become a laughingstock. I did send her this kid, but you did not find her.” About three months later, Judah was told, “Your daughter-in-law Tamar has played the harlot; in fact, she is with child by harlotry.” “Bring her out,” said Judah, “and let her be burned.” As she was being brought out, she sent this message to her father-in-law, “I am with child by the man to whom these belong.” And she added, “Examine these: whose seal and cord and staff are these?” Judah recognized them, and said, “She is more in the right than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shelah.” And he was not intimate with her again. When the time came for her to give birth, there were twins in her womb! While she was in labor, one of them put out his hand, and the midwife tied a crimson thread on that hand, to signify: This one came out first. But just then he drew back his hand, and out came his brother; and she said, “What a breach you have made for yourself!” So he was named Perez. Afterward his brother came out, on whose hand was the crimson thread; he was named Zerah. When Joseph was taken down to Egypt, a certain Egyptian, Potiphar, a courtier of Pharaoh and his chief steward, bought him from the Ishmaelites who had brought him there. The LORD was with Joseph, and he was a successful man; and he stayed in the house of his Egyptian master. And when his master saw that the LORD was with him and that the LORD lent success to everything he undertook, he took a liking to Joseph. He made him his personal attendant and put him in charge of his household, placing in his hands all that he owned. And from the time that the Egyptian put him in charge of his household and of all that he owned, the LORD blessed his house for Joseph’s sake, so that the blessing of the LORD was upon everything that he owned, in the house and outside. He left all that he had in Joseph’s hands and, with him there, he paid attention to nothing save the food that he ate. Now Joseph was well built and handsome. After a time, his master’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph and said, “Lie with me.” But he refused. He said to his master’s wife, “Look, with me here, my master gives no thought to anything in this house, and all that he owns he has placed in my hands. He wields no more authority in this house than I, and he has withheld nothing from me except yourself, since you are his wife. How then could I do this most wicked thing, and sin before God?” And much as she coaxed Joseph day after day, he did not yield to her request to lie beside her, to be with her. One such day, he came into the house to do his work. None of the household being there inside, she caught hold of him by his garment and said, “Lie with me!” But he left his garment in her hand and got away and fled outside. When she saw that he had left it in her hand and had fled outside, she called out to her servants and said to them, “Look, he had to bring us a Hebrew to dally with us! This one came to lie with me; but I screamed loud. And when he heard me screaming at the top of my voice, he left his garment with me and got away and fled outside.” She kept his garment beside her, until his master came home. Then she told him the same story, saying, “The Hebrew slave whom you brought into our house came to me to dally with me; but when I screamed at the top of my voice, he left his garment with me and fled outside.” When his master heard the story that his wife told him, namely, “Thus and so your slave did to me,” he was furious. So Joseph’s master had him put in prison, where the king’s prisoners were confined. But even while he was there in prison, the LORD was with Joseph: He extended kindness to him and disposed the chief jailer favorably toward him. The chief jailer put in Joseph’s charge all the prisoners who were in that prison, and he was the one to carry out everything that was done there. The chief jailer did not supervise anything that was in Joseph’s charge, because the LORD was with him, and whatever he did the LORD made successful. Some time later, the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt gave offense to their lord the king of Egypt. Pharaoh was angry with his two courtiers, the chief cupbearer and the chief baker, and put them in custody, in the house of the chief steward, in the same prison house where Joseph was confined. The chief steward assigned Joseph to them, and he attended them. When they had been in custody for some time, both of them—the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were confined in the prison—dreamed in the same night, each his own dream and each dream with its own meaning. When Joseph came to them in the morning, he saw that they were distraught. He asked Pharaoh’s courtiers, who were with him in custody in his master’s house, saying, “Why do you appear downcast today?” And they said to him, “We had dreams, and there is no one to interpret them.” So Joseph said to them, “Surely God can interpret! Tell me [your dreams].” Then the chief cupbearer told his dream to Joseph. He said to him, “In my dream, there was a vine in front of me. On the vine were three branches. It had barely budded, when out came its blossoms and its clusters ripened into grapes. Pharaoh’s cup was in my hand, and I took the grapes, pressed them into Pharaoh’s cup, and placed the cup in Pharaoh’s hand.” Joseph said to him, “This is its interpretation: The three branches are three days. In three days Pharaoh will pardon you and restore you to your post; you will place Pharaoh’s cup in his hand, as was your custom formerly when you were his cupbearer. But think of me when all is well with you again, and do me the kindness of mentioning me to Pharaoh, so as to free me from this place. For in truth, I was kidnapped from the land of the Hebrews; nor have I done anything here that they should have put me in the dungeon.” When the chief baker saw how favorably he had interpreted, he said to Joseph, “In my dream, similarly, there were three openwork baskets on my head. In the uppermost basket were all kinds of food for Pharaoh that a baker prepares; and the birds were eating it out of the basket above my head.” Joseph answered, “This is its interpretation: The three baskets are three days. In three days Pharaoh will lift off your head and impale you upon a pole; and the birds will pick off your flesh.” On the third day—his birthday—Pharaoh made a banquet for all his officials, and he singled out his chief cupbearer and his chief baker from among his officials. He restored the chief cupbearer to his cupbearing, and he placed the cup in Pharaoh’s hand; but the chief baker he impaled—just as Joseph had interpreted to them. Yet the chief cupbearer did not think of Joseph; he forgot him.

Shout for joy, Fair Zion! For lo, I come; and I will dwell in your midst—declares the LORD. In that day many nations will attach themselves to the LORD and become His people, and He will dwell in your midst. Then you will know that I was sent to you by the LORD of Hosts. The LORD will take Judah to Himself as His portion in the Holy Land, and He will choose Jerusalem once more. Be silent, all flesh, before the LORD! For He is roused from His holy habitation. He further showed me Joshua, the high priest, standing before the angel of the LORD, and the Accuser standing at his right to accuse him. But [the angel of] the LORD said to the Accuser, “The LORD rebuke you, O Accuser; may the LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! For this is a brand plucked from the fire.” Now Joshua was clothed in filthy garments when he stood before the angel. The latter spoke up and said to his attendants, “Take the filthy garments off him!” And he said to him, “See, I have removed your guilt from you, and you shall be clothed in [priestly] robes.” Then he gave the order, “Let a pure diadem be placed on his head.” And they placed the pure diadem on his head and clothed him in [priestly] garments, as the angel of the LORD stood by. And the angel of the LORD charged Joshua as follows: “Thus said the LORD of Hosts: If you walk in My paths and keep My charge, you in turn will rule My House and guard My courts, and I will permit you to move about among these attendants. Hearken well, O High Priest Joshua, you and your fellow priests sitting before you! For those men are a sign that I am going to bring My servant the Branch. For mark well this stone which I place before Joshua, a single stone with seven eyes. I will execute its engraving—declares the LORD of Hosts—and I will remove that country’s guilt in a single day. In that day—declares the LORD of Hosts—you will be inviting each other to the shade of vines and fig trees.” The angel who talked with me came back and woke me as a man is wakened from sleep. He said to me, “What do you see?” And I answered, “I see a lampstand all of gold, with a bowl above it. The lamps on it are seven in number, and the lamps above it have seven pipes; and by it are two olive trees, one on the right of the bowl and one on its left.” I, in turn, asked the angel who talked with me, “What do those things mean, my lord?” “Do you not know what those things mean?” asked the angel who talked with me; and I said, “No, my lord.” Then he explained to me as follows: “This is the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit—said the LORD of Hosts. Whoever you are, O great mountain in the path of Zerubbabel, turn into level ground! For he shall produce that excellent stone; it shall be greeted with shouts of ‘Beautiful! Beautiful!’”

Thus said the LORD: For three transgressions of Israel, For four, I will not revoke it: Because they have sold for silver Those whose cause was just, And the needy for a pair of sandals. [Ah,] you who trample the heads of the poor Into the dust of the ground, And make the humble walk a twisted course! Father and son go to the same girl, And thereby profane My holy name. They recline by every altar On garments taken in pledge, And drink in the House of their God Wine bought with fines they imposed. Yet I Destroyed the Amorite before them, Whose stature was like the cedar’s And who was stout as the oak, Destroying his boughs above And his trunk below! And I Brought you up from the land of Egypt And led you through the wilderness forty years, To possess the land of the Amorite! And I raised up prophets from among your sons And nazirites from among your young men. Is that not so, O people of Israel? —says the LORD. But you made the nazirites drink wine And ordered the prophets not to prophesy. Ah, I will slow your movements As a wagon is slowed When it is full of cut grain. Flight shall fail the swift, The strong shall find no strength, And the warrior shall not save his life. The bowman shall not hold his ground, And the fleet-footed shall not escape, Nor the horseman save his life. Even the most stouthearted warrior Shall run away unarmed that day —declares the LORD. Hear this word, O people of Israel, That the LORD has spoken concerning you, Concerning the whole family that I brought up from the land of Egypt: You alone have I singled out Of all the families of the earth— That is why I will call you to account For all your iniquities. Can two walk together Without having met? Does a lion roar in the forest When he has no prey? Does a great beast let out a cry from its den Without having made a capture? Does a bird drop on the ground—in a trap— With no snare there? Does a trap spring up from the ground Unless it has caught something? When a ram’s horn is sounded in a town, Do the people not take alarm? Can misfortune come to a town If the LORD has not caused it? Indeed, my Lord GOD does nothing Without having revealed His purpose To His servants the prophets. A lion has roared, Who can but fear? My Lord GOD has spoken, Who can but prophesy?

The Ziphites came to Saul at Gibeah and said, “David is hiding in the hill of Hachilah facing Jeshimon.” Saul went down at once to the wilderness of Ziph, together with three thousand picked men of Israel, to search for David in the wilderness of Ziph, and Saul encamped on the hill of Hachilah which faces Jeshimon, by the road. When David, who was then living in the wilderness, learned that Saul had come after him into the wilderness, David sent out scouts and made sure that Saul had come. David went at once to the place where Saul had encamped, and David saw the spot where Saul and his army commander, Abner son of Ner, lay asleep. Saul lay asleep inside the barricade and the troops were posted around him. David spoke up and asked Ahimelech the Hittite and Abishai son of Zeruiah, Joab’s brother, “Who will go down with me into the camp to Saul?” And Abishai answered, “I will go down with you.” So David and Abishai approached the troops by night, and found Saul fast asleep inside the barricade, his spear stuck in the ground at his head, and Abner and the troops sleeping around him. And Abishai said to David, “God has delivered your enemy into your hands today. Let me pin him to the ground with a single thrust of the spear. I will not have to strike him twice.” But David said to Abishai, “Don’t do him violence! No one can lay hands on the LORD’s anointed with impunity.” And David went on, “As the LORD lives, the LORD Himself will strike him down, or his time will come and he will die, or he will go down to battle and perish. But the LORD forbid that I should lay a hand on the LORD’s anointed! Just take the spear and the water jar at his head and let’s be off.” So David took away the spear and the water jar at Saul’s head, and they left. No one saw or knew or woke up; all remained asleep; a deep sleep from the LORD had fallen upon them. David crossed over to the other side and stood afar on top of a hill; there was considerable distance between them. And David shouted to the troops and to Abner son of Ner, “Abner, aren’t you going to answer?” And Abner shouted back, “Who are you to shout at the king?” And David answered Abner, “You are a man, aren’t you? And there is no one like you in Israel! So why didn’t you keep watch over your lord the king? For one of [our] troops came to do violence to your lord the king. You have not given a good account of yourself! As the LORD lives, [all of] you deserve to die, because you did not keep watch over your lord, the LORD’s anointed. Look around, where are the king’s spear and the water jar that were at his head?” Saul recognized David’s voice, and he asked, “Is that your voice, my son David?” And David replied, “It is, my lord king.” And he went on, “But why does my lord continue to pursue his servant? What have I done, and what wrong am I guilty of? Now let my lord the king hear his servant out. If the LORD has incited you against me, let Him be appeased by an offering; but if it is men, may they be accursed of the LORD! For they have driven me out today, so that I cannot have a share in the LORD’s possession, but am told, ‘Go and worship other gods.’ Oh, let my blood not fall to the ground, away from the presence of the LORD! For the king of Israel has come out to seek a single flea—as if he were hunting a partridge in the hills.” And Saul answered, “I am in the wrong. Come back, my son David, for I will never harm you again, seeing how you have held my life precious this day. Yes, I have been a fool, and I have erred so very much.” David replied, “Here is Your Majesty’s spear. Let one of the young men come over and get it. And the LORD will requite every man for his right conduct and loyalty—for this day the LORD delivered you into my hands and I would not raise a hand against the LORD’s anointed. And just as I valued your life highly this day, so may the LORD value my life and may He rescue me from all trouble.” Saul answered David, “May you be blessed, my son David. You shall achieve, and you shall prevail.” David then went his way, and Saul returned home. David said to himself, “Some day I shall certainly perish at the hands of Saul. The best thing for me is to flee to the land of the Philistines; Saul will then give up hunting me throughout the territory of Israel, and I will escape him.” So David and the six hundred men with him went and crossed over to King Achish son of Maoch of Gath. David and his men stayed with Achish in Gath, each man with his family, and David with his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelite and Abigail wife of Nabal the Carmelite. And when Saul was told that David had fled to Gath, he did not pursue him any more. David said to Achish, “If you please, let a place be granted me in one of the country towns where I can live; why should your servant remain with you in the royal city?” At that time Achish granted him Ziklag; that is how Ziklag came to belong to the kings of Judah, as is still the case. The length of time that David lived in Philistine territory was a year and four months. David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Gizrites, and the Amalekites—who were the inhabitants of the region of Olam, all the way to Shur and to the land of Egypt.— When David attacked a region, he would leave no man or woman alive; he would take flocks, herds, asses, camels, and clothing. When he returned and came to Achish, Achish would ask, “Where did you raid today?” and David would reply, “The Negeb of Judah,” or “the Negeb of the Jerahmeelites,” or “the Negeb of the Kenites.” David would leave no man or woman alive to be brought to Gath; for he thought, “They might tell about us: David did this.” Such was his practice as long as he stayed in the territory of the Philistines. Achish trusted David. He thought: “He has aroused the wrath of his own people Israel, and so he will be my vassal forever.” At that time the Philistines mustered their forces for war, to take the field against Israel. Achish said to David, “You know, of course, that you and your men must march out with my forces.” David answered Achish, “You surely know what your servant will do.” “In that case,” Achish replied to David, “I will appoint you my bodyguard for life.” Now Samuel had died and all Israel made lament for him; and he was buried in his own town of Ramah. And Saul had forbidden [recourse to] ghosts and familiar spirits in the land. The Philistines mustered and they marched to Shunem and encamped; and Saul gathered all Israel, and they encamped at Gilboa. When Saul saw the Philistine force, his heart trembled with fear. And Saul inquired of the LORD, but the LORD did not answer him, either by dreams or by Urim or by prophets. Then Saul said to his courtiers, “Find me a woman who consults ghosts, so that I can go to her and inquire through her.” And his courtiers told him that there was a woman in En-dor who consulted ghosts. Saul disguised himself; he put on different clothes and set out with two men. They came to the woman by night, and he said, “Please divine for me by a ghost. Bring up for me the one I shall name to you.” But the woman answered him, “You know what Saul has done, how he has banned [the use of] ghosts and familiar spirits in the land. So why are you laying a trap for me, to get me killed?” Saul swore to her by the LORD: “As the LORD lives, you won’t get into trouble over this.” At that, the woman asked, “Whom shall I bring up for you?” He answered, “Bring up Samuel for me.” Then the woman recognized Samuel, and she shrieked loudly, and said to Saul, “Why have you deceived me? You are Saul!” The king answered her, “Don’t be afraid. What do you see?” And the woman said to Saul, “I see a divine being coming up from the earth.” “What does he look like?” he asked her. “It is an old man coming up,” she said, “and he is wrapped in a robe.” Then Saul knew that it was Samuel; and he bowed low in homage with his face to the ground. Samuel said to Saul, “Why have you disturbed me and brought me up?” And Saul answered, “I am in great trouble. The Philistines are attacking me and God has turned away from me; He no longer answers me, either by prophets or in dreams. So I have called you to tell me what I am to do.” Samuel said, “Why do you ask me, seeing that the LORD has turned away from you and has become your adversary? The LORD has done for Himself as He foretold through me: The LORD has torn the kingship out of your hands and has given it to your fellow, to David, because you did not obey the LORD and did not execute His wrath upon the Amalekites. That is why the LORD has done this to you today. Further, the LORD will deliver the Israelites who are with you into the hands of the Philistines. Tomorrow your sons and you will be with me; and the LORD will also deliver the Israelite forces into the hands of the Philistines.” At once Saul flung himself prone on the ground, terrified by Samuel’s words. Besides, there was no strength in him, for he had not eaten anything all day and all night. The woman went up to Saul and, seeing how greatly disturbed he was, she said to him, “Your handmaid listened to you; I took my life in my hands and heeded the request you made of me. So now you listen to me: Let me set before you a bit of food. Eat, and then you will have the strength to go on your way.” He refused, saying, “I will not eat.” But when his courtiers as well as the woman urged him, he listened to them; he got up from the ground and sat on the bed. The woman had a stall-fed calf in the house; she hastily slaughtered it, and took flour and kneaded it, and baked some unleavened cakes. She set this before Saul and his courtiers, and they ate. Then they rose and left the same night. The Philistines mustered all their forces at Aphek, while Israel was encamping at the spring in Jezreel. The Philistine lords came marching, each with his units of hundreds and of thousands; and David and his men came marching last, with Achish. The Philistine officers asked, “Who are those Hebrews?” “Why, that’s David, the servant of King Saul of Israel,” Achish answered the Philistine officers. “He has been with me for a year or more, and I have found no fault in him from the day he defected until now.” But the Philistine officers were angry with him; and the Philistine officers said to him, “Send the man back; let him go back to the place you assigned him. He shall not march down with us to the battle, or else he may become our adversary in battle. For with what could that fellow appease his master if not with the heads of these men? Remember, he is the David of whom they sang as they danced: Saul has slain his thousands; David, his tens of thousands.” Achish summoned David and said to him, “As the LORD lives, you are an honest man, and I would like to have you serve in my forces; for I have found no fault with you from the day you joined me until now. But you are not acceptable to the other lords. So go back in peace, and do nothing to displease the Philistine lords.” David, however, said to Achish, “But what have I done, what fault have you found in your servant from the day I appeared before you to this day, that I should not go and fight against the enemies of my lord the king?” Achish replied to David, “I know; you are as acceptable to me as an angel of God. But the Philistine officers have decided that you must not march out with us to the battle. So rise early in the morning, you and your lord’s servants who came with you—rise early in the morning, and leave as soon as it is light.” Accordingly, David and his men rose early in the morning to leave, to return to the land of the Philistines, while the Philistines marched up to Jezreel. By the time David and his men arrived in Ziklag, on the third day, the Amalekites had made a raid into the Negeb and against Ziklag; they had stormed Ziklag and burned it down. They had taken the women in it captive, low-born and high-born alike; they did not kill any, but carried them off and went their way. When David and his men came to the town and found it burned down, and their wives and sons and daughters taken captive, David and the troops with him broke into tears, until they had no strength left for weeping. David’s two wives had been taken captive, Ahinoam of Jezreel and Abigail wife of Nabal from Carmel. David was in great danger, for the troops threatened to stone him; for all the troops were embittered on account of their sons and daughters. But David sought strength in the LORD his God. David said to the priest Abiathar son of Ahimelech, “Bring the ephod up to me.” When Abiathar brought up the ephod to David, David inquired of the LORD, “Shall I pursue those raiders? Will I overtake them?” And He answered him, “Pursue, for you shall overtake and you shall rescue.” So David and the six hundred men with him set out, and they came to the Wadi Besor, where a halt was made by those who were to be left behind. David continued the pursuit with four hundred men; two hundred men had halted, too faint to cross the Wadi Besor. They came upon an Egyptian in the open country and brought him to David. They gave him food to eat and water to drink; he was also given a piece of pressed fig cake and two cakes of raisins. He ate and regained his strength, for he had eaten no food and drunk no water for three days and three nights. Then David asked him, “To whom do you belong and where are you from?” “I am an Egyptian boy,” he answered, “the slave of an Amalekite. My master abandoned me when I fell ill three days ago. We had raided the Negeb of the Cherethites, and [the Negeb] of Judah, and the Negeb of Caleb; we also burned down Ziklag.” And David said to him, “Can you lead me down to that band?” He replied, “Swear to me by God that you will not kill me or deliver me into my master’s hands, and I will lead you down to that band.” So he led him down, and there they were, scattered all over the ground, eating and drinking and making merry because of all the vast spoil they had taken from the land of the Philistines and from the land of Judah. David attacked them from before dawn until the evening of the next day; none of them escaped, except four hundred young men who mounted camels and got away. David rescued everything the Amalekites had taken; David also rescued his two wives. Nothing of theirs was missing—young or old, sons or daughters, spoil or anything else that had been carried off—David recovered everything. David took all the flocks and herds, which [the troops] drove ahead of the other livestock; and they declared, “This is David’s spoil.” When David reached the two hundred men who were too faint to follow David and who had been left at the Wadi Besor, they came out to welcome David and the troops with him; David came forward with the troops and greeted them. But all the mean and churlish fellows among the men who had accompanied David spoke up, “Since they did not accompany us, we will not give them any of the spoil that we seized—except that each may take his wife and children and go.” David, however, spoke up, “You must not do that, my brothers, in view of what the LORD has granted us, guarding us and delivering into our hands the band that attacked us. How could anyone agree with you in this matter? The share of those who remain with the baggage shall be the same as the share of those who go down to battle; they shall share alike.” So from that day on it was made a fixed rule for Israel, continuing to the present day. When David reached Ziklag, he sent some of the spoil to the elders of Judah [and] to his friends, saying, “This is a present for you from our spoil of the enemies of the LORD.” [He sent the spoil to the elders] in Bethel, Ramoth-negeb, and Jattir; in Aroer, Siphmoth, and Eshtemoa; in Racal, in the towns of the Jerahmeelites, and in the towns of the Kenites; in Hormah, Bor-ashan, and Athach; and to those in Hebron—all the places where David and his men had roamed. The Philistines attacked Israel, and the men of Israel fled before the Philistines and [many] fell on Mount Gilboa. The Philistines pursued Saul and his sons, and the Philistines struck down Jonathan, Abinadab, and Malchishua, sons of Saul. The battle raged around Saul, and some of the archers hit him, and he was severely wounded by the archers. Saul said to his arms-bearer, “Draw your sword and run me through, so that the uncircumcised may not run me through and make sport of me.” But his arms-bearer, in his great awe, refused; whereupon Saul grasped the sword and fell upon it. When his arms-bearer saw that Saul was dead, he too fell on his sword and died with him. Thus Saul and his three sons and his arms-bearer, as well as all his men, died together on that day. And when the men of Israel on the other side of the valley and on the other side of the Jordan saw that the men of Israel had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they abandoned the towns and fled; the Philistines then came and occupied them. The next day the Philistines came to strip the slain, and they found Saul and his three sons lying on Mount Gilboa. They cut off his head and stripped him of his armor, and they sent them throughout the land of the Philistines, to spread the news in the temples of their idols and among the people. They placed his armor in the temple of Ashtaroth, and they impaled his body on the wall of Beth-shan. When the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead heard about it—what the Philistines had done to Saul— all their stalwart men set out and marched all night; they removed the bodies of Saul and his sons from the wall of Beth-shan and came to Jabesh and burned them there. Then they took the bones and buried them under the tamarisk tree in Jabesh, and they fasted for seven days.

After the death of Saul—David had already returned from defeating the Amalekites—David stayed two days in Ziklag. On the third day, a man came from Saul’s camp, with his clothes rent and earth on his head; and as he approached David, he flung himself to the ground and bowed low. David said to him, “Where are you coming from?” He answered, “I have just escaped from the camp of Israel.” “What happened?” asked David. “Tell me!” And he told him how the troops had fled the battlefield, and that, moreover, many of the troops had fallen and died; also that Saul and his son Jonathan were dead. “How do you know,” David asked the young man who brought him the news, “that Saul and his son Jonathan are dead?” The young man who brought him the news answered, “I happened to be at Mount Gilboa, and I saw Saul leaning on his spear, and the chariots and horsemen closing in on him. He looked around and saw me, and he called to me. When I responded, ‘At your service,’ he asked me, ‘Who are you?’ And I told him that I was an Amalekite. Then he said to me, ‘Stand over me, and finish me off, for I am in agony and am barely alive.’ So I stood over him and finished him off, for I knew that he would never rise from where he was lying. Then I took the crown from his head and the armlet from his arm, and I have brought them here to my lord.” David took hold of his clothes and rent them, and so did all the men with him. They lamented and wept, and they fasted until evening for Saul and his son Jonathan, and for the soldiers of the LORD and the House of Israel who had fallen by the sword. David said to the young man who had brought him the news, “Where are you from?” He replied, “I am the son of a resident alien, an Amalekite.” “How did you dare,” David said to him, “to lift your hand and kill the LORD’s anointed?” Thereupon David called one of the attendants and said to him, “Come over and strike him!” He struck him down and he died. And David said to him, “Your blood be on your own head! Your own mouth testified against you when you said, ‘I put the LORD’s anointed to death.’” And David intoned this dirge over Saul and his son Jonathan— He ordered the Judites to be taught [The Song of the] Bow. It is recorded in the Book of Jashar. Your glory, O Israel, Lies slain on your heights; How have the mighty fallen! Tell it not in Gath, Do not proclaim it in the streets of Ashkelon, Lest the daughters of the Philistine rejoice, Lest the daughters of the uncircumcised exult. O hills of Gilboa— Let there be no dew or rain on you, Or bountiful fields, For there the shield of warriors lay rejected, The shield of Saul, Polished with oil no more. From the blood of slain, From the fat of warriors— The bow of Jonathan Never turned back; The sword of Saul Never withdrew empty. Saul and Jonathan, Beloved and cherished, Never parted In life or in death! They were swifter than eagles, They were stronger than lions! Daughters of Israel, Weep over Saul, Who clothed you in crimson and finery, Who decked your robes with jewels of gold. How have the mighty fallen In the thick of battle— Jonathan, slain on your heights! I grieve for you, My brother Jonathan, You were most dear to me. Your love was wonderful to me More than the love of women. How have the mighty fallen, The weapons of war perished! Sometime afterward, David inquired of the LORD, “Shall I go up to one of the towns of Judah?” The LORD answered, “Yes.” David further asked, “Which one shall I go up to?” And the LORD replied, “To Hebron.” So David went up there, along with his two wives, Ahinoam of Jezreel and Abigail wife of Nabal the Carmelite. David also took the men who were with him, each with his family, and they settled in the towns about Hebron. The men of Judah came and there they anointed David king over the House of Judah. David was told about the men of Jabesh-gilead who buried Saul. So David sent messengers to the men of Jabesh-gilead and said to them, “May you be blessed of the LORD because you performed this act of faithfulness to your lord Saul and buried him. May the LORD in turn show you true faithfulness; and I too will reward you generously because you performed this act. Now take courage and be brave men; for your lord Saul is dead and the House of Judah have already anointed me king over them.” But Abner son of Ner, Saul’s army commander, had taken Ish-bosheth son of Saul and brought him across to Mahanaim and made him king over Gilead, the Ashurites, Jezreel, Ephraim, and Benjamin—over all Israel. Ishbosheth son of Saul was forty years old when he became king of Israel, and he reigned two years. But the House of Judah supported David. The length of time that David reigned in Hebron over the House of Judah was seven years and six months. Once Abner son of Ner and the soldiers of Ish-bosheth son of Saul marched out from Mahanaim to Gibeon, and Joab son of Zeruiah and the soldiers of David [also] came out. They confronted one another at the pool of Gibeon: one group sat on one side of the pool, and the other group on the other side of the pool. Abner said to Joab, “Let the young men come forward and sport before us.” “Yes, let them,” Joab answered. They came forward and were counted off, twelve for Benjamin and Ish-bosheth son of Saul, and twelve of David’s soldiers. Each one grasped his opponent’s head [and thrust] his dagger into his opponent’s side; thus they fell together. That place, which is in Gibeon, was called Helkath-hazzurim. A fierce battle ensued that day, and Abner and the men of Israel were routed by David’s soldiers. The three sons of Zeruiah were there—Joab, Abishai, and Asahel. Asahel was swift of foot, like a gazelle in the open field. And Asahel ran after Abner, swerving neither right nor left in his pursuit of Abner. Abner looked back and shouted, “Is that you, Asahel?” “Yes, it is,” he called back. Abner said to him, “Turn to the right or to the left, and seize one of our boys and strip off his tunic.” But Asahel would not leave off. Abner again begged Asahel, “Stop pursuing me, or I’ll have to strike you down. How will I look your brother Joab in the face?” When he refused to desist, Abner struck him in the belly with a backward thrust of his spear and the spear protruded from his back. He fell there and died on the spot. And all who came to the place where Asahel fell and died halted; but Joab and Abishai continued to pursue Abner. And the sun was setting as they reached the hill of Ammah, which faces Giah on the road to the wilderness of Gibeon. The Benjaminites rallied behind Abner, forming a single company; and they took up a position on the top of a hill. Abner then called out to Joab, “Must the sword devour forever? You know how bitterly it’s going to end! How long will you delay ordering your troops to stop the pursuit of their kinsmen?” And Joab replied, “As God lives, if you hadn’t spoken up, the troops would have given up the pursuit of their kinsmen only the next morning.” Joab then sounded the horn, and all the troops halted; they ceased their pursuit of Israel and stopped the fighting. Abner and his men marched through the Arabah all that night and, after crossing the Jordan, they marched through all of Bithron until they came to Mahanaim. After Joab gave up the pursuit of Abner, he assembled all the troops and found nineteen of David’s soldiers missing, besides Asahel. David’s soldiers, on the other hand, defeated the Benjaminites and the men under Abner and killed three hundred and sixty men. They bore Asahel away and buried him in his father’s tomb in Bethlehem. Then Joab and his men marched all night; day broke upon them in Hebron. The war between the House of Saul and the House of David was long-drawn-out; but David kept growing stronger, while the House of Saul grew weaker. Sons were born to David in Hebron: His first-born was Amnon, by Ahinoam of Jezreel; his second was Chileab, by Abigail wife of Nabal the Carmelite; the third was Absalom son of Maacah, daughter of King Talmai of Geshur; the fourth was Adonijah son of Haggith; the fifth was Shephatiah son of Abital; and the sixth was Ithream, by David’s wife Eglah. These were born to David in Hebron. During the war between the House of Saul and the House of David, Abner supported the House of Saul. Now Saul had a concubine named Rizpah, daughter of Aiah; and [Ish-bosheth] said to Abner, “Why have you lain with my father’s concubine?” Abner was very upset by what Ish-bosheth said, and he replied, “Am I a dog’s head from Judah? Here I have been loyally serving the House of your father Saul and his kinsfolk and friends, and I have not betrayed you into the hands of David; yet this day you reproach me over a woman! May God do thus and more to Abner if I do not do for David as the LORD swore to him— to transfer the kingship from the House of Saul, and to establish the throne of David over Israel and Judah from Dan to Beer-sheba.” [Ish-bosheth] could say nothing more in reply to Abner, because he was afraid of him. Abner immediately sent messengers to David, saying, “To whom shall the land belong?” and to say [further], “Make a pact with me, and I will help you and bring all Israel over to your side.” He replied, “Good; I will make a pact with you. But I make one demand upon you: Do not appear before me unless you bring Michal daughter of Saul when you come before me.” David also sent messengers to Ishbosheth son of Saul, to say, “Give me my wife Michal, for whom I paid the bride-price of one hundred Philistine foreskins.” So Ishbosheth sent and had her taken away from [her] husband, Paltiel son of Laish. Her husband walked with her as far as Bahurim, weeping as he followed her; then Abner ordered him to turn back, and he went back. Abner had conferred with the elders of Israel, saying, “You have wanted David to be king over you all along. Now act! For the LORD has said concerning David: I will deliver My people Israel from the hands of the Philistines and all its other enemies through My servant David.” Abner also talked with the Benjaminites; then Abner went and informed David in Hebron of all the wishes of Israel and of the whole House of Benjamin. When Abner came to David in Hebron, accompanied by twenty men, David made a feast for Abner and the men with him. Abner said to David, “Now I will go and rally all Israel to Your Majesty. They will make a pact with you, and you can reign over all that your heart desires.” And David dismissed Abner, who went away unharmed. Just then David’s soldiers and Joab returned from a raid, bringing much plunder with them; Abner was no longer with David in Hebron, for he had been dismissed and had gone away unharmed. When Joab and the whole force with him arrived, Joab was told that Abner son of Ner had come to the king, had been dismissed by him, and had gone away unharmed. Joab went to the king and said, “What have you done? Here Abner came to you; why did you let him go? Now he has gotten away! Don’t you know that Abner son of Ner came only to deceive you, to learn your comings and goings and to find out all that you are planning?” Joab left David and sent messengers after Abner, and they brought him back from the cistern of Sirah; but David knew nothing about it. When Abner returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside within the gate to talk to him privately; there he struck him in the belly. Thus [Abner] died for shedding the blood of Asahel, Joab’s brother. Afterward, when David heard of it, he said, “Both I and my kingdom are forever innocent before the LORD of shedding the blood of Abner son of Ner. May [the guilt] fall upon the head of Joab and all his father’s house. May the house of Joab never be without someone suffering from a discharge or an eruption, or a male who handles the spindle, or one slain by the sword, or one lacking bread.”— Now Joab and his brother Abishai had killed Abner because he had killed their brother Asahel during the battle at Gibeon.— David then ordered Joab and all the troops with him to rend their clothes, gird on sackcloth, and make lament before Abner; and King David himself walked behind the bier. And so they buried Abner at Hebron; the king wept aloud by Abner’s grave, and all the troops wept. And the king intoned this dirge over Abner, “Should Abner have died the death of a churl? Your hands were not bound, Your feet were not put in fetters; But you fell as one falls Before treacherous men!” And all the troops continued to weep over him. All the troops came to urge David to eat something while it was still day; but David swore, “May God do thus to me and more if I eat bread or anything else before sundown.” All the troops took note of it and approved, just as all the troops approved everything else the king did. That day all the troops and all Israel knew that it was not by the king’s will that Abner son of Ner was killed. And the king said to his soldiers, “You well know that a prince, a great man in Israel, has fallen this day. And today I am weak, even though anointed king; those men, the sons of Zeruiah, are too savage for me. May the LORD requite the wicked for their wickedness!” When [Ish-bosheth] son of Saul heard that Abner had died in Hebron, he lost heart and all Israel was alarmed. The son of Saul [had] two company commanders, one named Baanah and the other Rechab, sons of Rimmon the Beerothite—Benjaminites, since Beeroth too was considered part of Benjamin. The Beerothites had fled to Gittaim, where they have sojourned to this day. ( Jonathan son of Saul had a son whose feet were crippled. He was five years old when the news about Saul and Jonathan came from Jezreel, and his nurse picked him up and fled; but as she was fleeing in haste, he fell and was lamed. His name was Mephibosheth.) Rechab and Baanah, sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, started out, and they reached the home of Ish-bosheth at the heat of the day, when he was taking his midday rest. So they went inside the house, as though fetching wheat, and struck him in the belly. Rechab and his brother Baanah slipped by, and entered the house while he was asleep on his bed in his bedchamber; and they stabbed him to death. They cut off his head and took his head and made their way all night through the Arabah. They brought the head of Ish-bosheth to David in Hebron. “Here,” they said to the king, “is the head of your enemy, Ish-bosheth son of Saul, who sought your life. This day the LORD has avenged my lord the king upon Saul and his offspring.” But David answered Rechab and his brother Baanah, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, and said to them, “As the LORD lives, who has rescued me from every trouble: The man who told me in Ziklag that Saul was dead thought he was bringing good news. But instead of rewarding him for the news, I seized and killed him. How much more, then, when wicked men have killed a blameless man in bed in his own house! I will certainly avenge his blood on you, and I will rid the earth of you.” David gave orders to the young men, who killed them; they cut off their hands and feet and hung them up by the pool in Hebron. And they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the grave of Abner at Hebron. All the tribes of Israel came to David at Hebron and said, “We are your own flesh and blood. Long before now, when Saul was king over us, it was you who led Israel in war; and the LORD said to you: You shall shepherd My people Israel; you shall be ruler of Israel.” All the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron, and King David made a pact with them in Hebron before the LORD. And they anointed David king over Israel. David was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned forty years. In Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah thirty-three years. The king and his men set out for Jerusalem against the Jebusites who inhabited the region. David was told, “You will never get in here! Even the blind and the lame will turn you back.” (They meant: David will never enter here.) But David captured the stronghold of Zion; it is now the City of David. On that occasion David said, “Those who attack the Jebusites shall reach the water channel and [strike down] the lame and the blind, who are hateful to David.” That is why they say: “No one who is blind or lame may enter the House.” David occupied the stronghold and renamed it the City of David; David also fortified the surrounding area, from the Millo inward. David kept growing stronger, for the LORD, the God of Hosts, was with him. King Hiram of Tyre sent envoys to David with cedar logs, carpenters, and stonemasons; and they built a palace for David. Thus David knew that the LORD had established him as king over Israel and had exalted his kingship for the sake of His people Israel. After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to David. These are the names of the children born to him in Jerusalem: Shammua, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon; Ibhar, Elishua, Nepheg, and Japhia; Elishama, Eliada, and Eliphelet. When the Philistines heard that David had been anointed king over Israel, the Philistines marched up in search of David; but David heard of it, and he went down to the fastness. The Philistines came and spread out over the Valley of Rephaim. David inquired of the LORD, “Shall I go up against the Philistines? Will You deliver them into my hands?” And the LORD answered David, “Go up, and I will deliver the Philistines into your hands.” Thereupon David marched to Baal-perazim, and David defeated them there. And he said, “The LORD has broken through my enemies before me as waters break through [a dam].” That is why that place was named Baal-perazim. The Philistines abandoned their idols there, and David and his men carried them off. Once again the Philistines marched up and spread out over the Valley of Rephaim. David inquired of the LORD, and He answered, “Do not go up, but circle around behind them and confront them at the baca trees. And when you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the baca trees, then go into action, for the LORD will be going in front of you to attack the Philistine forces.” David did as the LORD had commanded him; and he routed the Philistines from Geba all the way to Gezer. David again assembled all the picked men of Israel, thirty thousand strong. Then David and all the troops that were with him set out from Baalim of Judah to bring up from there the Ark of God to which the Name was attached, the name LORD of Hosts Enthroned on the Cherubim. They loaded the Ark of God onto a new cart and conveyed it from the house of Abinadab, which was on the hill; and Abinadab’s sons, Uzza and Ahio, guided the new cart. They conveyed it from Abinadab’s house on the hill, [Uzzah walking] alongside the Ark of God and Ahio walking in front of the Ark. Meanwhile, David and all the House of Israel danced before the LORD to [the sound of] all kinds of cypress wood [instruments], with lyres, harps, timbrels, sistrums, and cymbals. But when they came to the threshing floor of Nacon, Uzzah reached out for the Ark of God and grasped it, for the oxen had stumbled. The LORD was incensed at Uzzah. And God struck him down on the spot for his indiscretion, and he died there beside the Ark of God. David was distressed because the LORD had inflicted a breach upon Uzzah; and that place was named Perez-uzzah, as it is still called. David was afraid of the LORD that day; he said, “How can I let the Ark of the LORD come to me?” So David would not bring the Ark of the LORD to his place in the City of David; instead, David diverted it to the house of Obed-edom the Gittite. The Ark of the LORD remained in the house of Obed-edom the Gittite three months, and the LORD blessed Obed-edom and his whole household. It was reported to King David: “The LORD has blessed Obed-edom’s house and all that belongs to him because of the Ark of God.” Thereupon David went and brought up the Ark of God from the house of Obed-edom to the City of David, amid rejoicing. When the bearers of the Ark of the LORD had moved forward six paces, he sacrificed an ox and a fatling. David whirled with all his might before the LORD; David was girt with a linen ephod. Thus David and all the House of Israel brought up the Ark of the LORD with shouts and with blasts of the horn. As the Ark of the LORD entered the City of David, Michal daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and whirling before the LORD; and she despised him for it. They brought in the Ark of the LORD and set it up in its place inside the tent which David had pitched for it, and David sacrificed burnt offerings and offerings of well-being before the LORD. When David finished sacrificing the burnt offerings and the offerings of well-being, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of Hosts. And he distributed among all the people—the entire multitude of Israel, man and woman alike—to each a loaf of bread, a cake made in a pan, and a raisin cake. Then all the people left for their homes. David went home to greet his household. And Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, “Didn’t the king of Israel do himself honor today—exposing himself today in the sight of the slavegirls of his subjects, as one of the riffraff might expose himself!” David answered Michal, “It was before the LORD who chose me instead of your father and all his family and appointed me ruler over the LORD’s people Israel! I will dance before the LORD and dishonor myself even more, and be low in my own esteem; but among the slavegirls that you speak of I will be honored.” So to her dying day Michal daughter of Saul had no children. When the king was settled in his palace and the LORD had granted him safety from all the enemies around him, the king said to the prophet Nathan: “Here I am dwelling in a house of cedar, while the Ark of the LORD abides in a tent!” Nathan said to the king, “Go and do whatever you have in mind, for the LORD is with you.” But that same night the word of the LORD came to Nathan: “Go and say to My servant David: Thus said the LORD: Are you the one to build a house for Me to dwell in? From the day that I brought the people of Israel out of Egypt to this day I have not dwelt in a house, but have moved about in Tent and Tabernacle. As I moved about wherever the Israelites went, did I ever reproach any of the tribal leaders whom I appointed to care for My people Israel: Why have you not built Me a house of cedar? “Further, say thus to My servant David: Thus said the LORD of Hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the flock, to be ruler of My people Israel, and I have been with you wherever you went, and have cut down all your enemies before you. Moreover, I will give you great renown like that of the greatest men on earth. I will establish a home for My people Israel and will plant them firm, so that they shall dwell secure and shall tremble no more. Evil men shall not oppress them any more as in the past, ever since I appointed chieftains over My people Israel. I will give you safety from all your enemies. “The LORD declares to you that He, the LORD, will establish a house for you. When your days are done and you lie with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own issue, and I will establish his kingship. He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish his royal throne forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to Me. When he does wrong, I will chastise him with the rod of men and the affliction of mortals; but I will never withdraw My favor from him as I withdrew it from Saul, whom I removed to make room for you. Your house and your kingship shall ever be secure before you; your throne shall be established forever.” Nathan spoke to David in accordance with all these words and all this prophecy. Then King David came and sat before the LORD, and he said, “What am I, O Lord GOD, and what is my family, that You have brought me thus far? Yet even this, O Lord GOD, has seemed too little to You; for You have spoken of Your servant’s house also for the future. May that be the law for the people, O Lord GOD. What more can David say to You? You know Your servant, O Lord GOD. For Your word’s sake and of Your own accord You have wrought this great thing, and made it known to Your servant. You are great indeed, O Lord GOD! There is none like You and there is no other God but You, as we have always heard. And who is like Your people Israel, a unique nation on earth, whom God went and redeemed as His people, winning renown for Himself and doing great and marvelous deeds for them [and] for Your land—[driving out] nations and their gods before Your people, whom You redeemed for Yourself from Egypt. You have established Your people Israel as Your very own people forever; and You, O LORD, have become their God. “And now, O Lord GOD, fulfill Your promise to Your servant and his house forever; and do as You have promised. And may Your name be glorified forever, in that men will say, ‘The LORD of Hosts is God over Israel’; and may the house of Your servant David be established before You. Because You, O LORD of Hosts, the God of Israel, have revealed to Your servant that You will build a house for him, Your servant has ventured to offer this prayer to You. And now, O Lord GOD, You are God and Your words will surely come true, and You have made this gracious promise to Your servant. Be pleased, therefore, to bless Your servant’s house, that it abide before You forever; for You, O Lord GOD, have spoken. May Your servant’s house be blessed forever by Your blessing.”

For the leader; on shoshannim, eduth. Of Asaph. A psalm. Give ear, O shepherd of Israel who leads Joseph like a flock! Appear, You who are enthroned on the cherubim, at the head of Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh! Rouse Your might and come to our help! Restore us, O God; show Your favor that we may be delivered. O LORD, God of hosts, how long will You be wrathful toward the prayers of Your people? You have fed them tears as their daily bread, made them drink great measures of tears. You set us at strife with our neighbors; our enemies mock us at will. O God of hosts, restore us; show Your favor that we may be delivered. You plucked up a vine from Egypt; You expelled nations and planted it. You cleared a place for it; it took deep root and filled the land. The mountains were covered by its shade, mighty cedars by its boughs. Its branches reached the sea, its shoots, the river. Why did You breach its wall so that every passerby plucks its fruit, wild boars gnaw at it, and creatures of the field feed on it? O God of hosts, turn again, look down from heaven and see; take note of that vine, the stock planted by Your right hand, the stem you have taken as Your own. For it is burned by fire and cut down, perishing before Your angry blast. Grant Your help to the man at Your right hand, the one You have taken as Your own. We will not turn away from You; preserve our life that we may invoke Your name. O LORD, God of hosts, restore us; show Your favor that we may be delivered. For the leader; on the gittith. Of Asaph. Sing joyously to God, our strength; raise a shout for the God of Jacob. Take up the song, sound the timbrel, the melodious lyre and harp. Blow the horn on the new moon, on the full moon for our feast day. For it is a law for Israel, a ruling of the God of Jacob; He imposed it as a decree upon Joseph when he went forth from the land of Egypt; I heard a language that I knew not. I relieved his shoulder of the burden, his hands were freed from the basket. In distress you called and I rescued you; I answered you from the secret place of thunder I tested you at the waters of Meribah.Selah. Hear, My people, and I will admonish you; Israel, if you would but listen to Me! You shall have no foreign god, you shall not bow to an alien god. I the LORD am your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt; open your mouth wide and I will fill it. But My people would not listen to Me, Israel would not obey Me. So I let them go after their willful heart that they might follow their own devices. If only My people would listen to Me, if Israel would follow My paths, then would I subdue their enemies at once, strike their foes again and again. Those who hate the LORD shall cower before Him; their doom shall be eternal. He fed them the finest wheat; I sated you with honey from the rock. A psalm of Asaph. God stands in the divine assembly; among the divine beings He pronounces judgment. How long will you judge perversely, showing favor to the wicked?Selah. Judge the wretched and the orphan, vindicate the lowly and the poor, rescue the wretched and the needy; save them from the hand of the wicked. They neither know nor understand, they go about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth totter. I had taken you for divine beings, sons of the Most High, all of you; but you shall die as men do, fall like any prince. Arise, O God, judge the earth, for all the nations are Your possession. A song, a psalm of Asaph. O God, do not be silent; do not hold aloof; do not be quiet, O God! For Your enemies rage, Your foes assert themselves. They plot craftily against Your people, take counsel against Your treasured ones. They say, “Let us wipe them out as a nation; Israel’s name will be mentioned no more.” Unanimous in their counsel they have made an alliance against You— the clans of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites, Gebal, Ammon, and Amalek, Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assyria too joins forces with them; they give support to the sons of Lot.Selah. Deal with them as You did with Midian, with Sisera, with Jabin, at the brook Kishon— who were destroyed at En-dor, who became dung for the field. Treat their great men like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna, who said, “Let us take the meadows of God as our possession.” O my God, make them like thistledown, like stubble driven by the wind. As a fire burns a forest, as flames scorch the hills, pursue them with Your tempest, terrify them with Your storm. Cover their faces with shame so that they seek Your name, O LORD. May they be frustrated and terrified, disgraced and doomed forever. May they know that Your name, Yours alone, is the LORD, supreme over all the earth. For the leader; on the gittith. Of the Korahites. A psalm. How lovely is Your dwelling-place, O LORD of hosts. I long, I yearn for the courts of the LORD; my body and soul shout for joy to the living God. Even the sparrow has found a home, and the swallow a nest for herself in which to set her young, near Your altar, O LORD of hosts, my king and my God. Happy are those who dwell in Your house; they forever praise You.Selah. Happy is the man who finds refuge in You, whose mind is on the [pilgrim] highways. They pass through the Valley of Baca, regarding it as a place of springs, as if the early rain had covered it with blessing. They go from rampart to rampart, appearing before God in Zion. O LORD, God of hosts, hear my prayer; give ear, O God of Jacob.Selah. O God, behold our shield, look upon the face of Your anointed. Better one day in Your courts than a thousand [anywhere else]; I would rather stand at the threshold of God’s house than dwell in the tents of the wicked. For the LORD God is sun and shield; the LORD bestows grace and glory; He does not withhold His bounty from those who live without blame. O LORD of hosts, happy is the man who trusts in You. For the leader. Of the Korahites. A psalm. O LORD, You will favor Your land, restore Jacob’s fortune; You will forgive Your people’s iniquity, pardon all their sins;selah You will withdraw all Your anger, turn away from Your rage. Turn again, O God, our helper, revoke Your displeasure with us. Will You be angry with us forever, prolong Your wrath for all generations? Surely You will revive us again, so that Your people may rejoice in You. Show us, O LORD, Your faithfulness; grant us Your deliverance. Let me hear what God, the LORD, will speak; He will promise well-being to His people, His faithful ones; may they not turn to folly. His help is very near those who fear Him, to make His glory dwell in our land. Faithfulness and truth meet; justice and well-being kiss. Truth springs up from the earth; justice looks down from heaven. The LORD also bestows His bounty; our land yields its produce. Justice goes before Him as He sets out on His way. A prayer of David. Incline Your ear, O Lord, answer me, for I am poor and needy. Preserve my life, for I am steadfast; O You, my God, deliver Your servant who trusts in You. Have mercy on me, O Lord, for I call to You all day long; bring joy to Your servant’s life, for on You, Lord, I set my hope. For You, Lord, are good and forgiving, abounding in steadfast love to all who call on You. Give ear, O LORD, to my prayer; heed my plea for mercy. In my time of trouble I call You, for You will answer me. There is none like You among the gods, O Lord, and there are no deeds like Yours. All the nations You have made will come to bow down before You, O Lord, and they will pay honor to Your name. For You are great and perform wonders; You alone are God. Teach me Your way, O Lord; I will walk in Your truth; let my heart be undivided in reverence for Your name. I will praise You, O Lord, my God, with all my heart and pay honor to Your name forever. For Your steadfast love toward me is great; You have saved me from the depths of Sheol. O God, arrogant men have risen against me; a band of ruthless men seek my life; they are not mindful of You. But You, O Lord, are a God compassionate and merciful, slow to anger, abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. Turn to me and have mercy on me; grant Your strength to Your servant and deliver the son of Your maidservant. Show me a sign of Your favor, that my enemies may see and be frustrated because You, O LORD, have given me aid and comfort. Of the Korahites. A psalm. A song. The LORD loves the gates of Zion, His foundation on the holy mountains, more than all the dwellings of Jacob. Glorious things are spoken of you, O city of God. Selah. I mention Rahab and Babylon among those who acknowledge Me; Philistia, and Tyre, and Cush—each was born there. Indeed, it shall be said of Zion, “Every man was born there.” He, the Most High, will preserve it. The LORD will inscribe in the register of peoples that each was born there.Selah. Singers and dancers alike [will say]: “All my roots are in You.” A song. A psalm of the Korahites. For the leader; on maḥalath leannoth. A maskil of Heman the Ezrahite. O LORD, God of my deliverance, when I cry out in the night before You, let my prayer reach You; incline Your ear to my cry. For I am sated with misfortune; I am at the brink of Sheol. I am numbered with those who go down to the Pit; I am a helpless man abandoned among the dead, like bodies lying in the grave of whom You are mindful no more, and who are cut off from Your care. You have put me at the bottom of the Pit, in the darkest places, in the depths. Your fury lies heavy upon me; You afflict me with all Your breakers.Selah. You make my companions shun me; You make me abhorrent to them; I am shut in and do not go out. My eyes pine away from affliction; I call to You, O LORD, each day; I stretch out my hands to You. Do You work wonders for the dead? Do the shades rise to praise You?Selah. Is Your faithful care recounted in the grave, Your constancy in the place of perdition? Are Your wonders made known in the netherworld, Your beneficent deeds in the land of oblivion? As for me, I cry out to You, O LORD; each morning my prayer greets You. Why, O LORD, do You reject me, do You hide Your face from me? From my youth I have been afflicted and near death; I suffer Your terrors wherever I turn. Your fury overwhelms me; Your terrors destroy me. They swirl about me like water all day long; they encircle me on every side. You have put friend and neighbor far from me and my companions out of my sight. A maskil of Ethan the Ezrahite. I will sing of the LORD’s steadfast love forever; to all generations I will proclaim Your faithfulness with my mouth. I declare, “Your steadfast love is confirmed forever; there in the heavens You establish Your faithfulness.” “I have made a covenant with My chosen one; I have sworn to My servant David: I will establish your offspring forever, I will confirm your throne for all generations.” Selah. Your wonders, O LORD, are praised by the heavens, Your faithfulness, too, in the assembly of holy beings. For who in the skies can equal the LORD, can compare with the LORD among the divine beings, a God greatly dreaded in the council of holy beings, held in awe by all around Him? O LORD, God of hosts, who is mighty like You, O LORD? Your faithfulness surrounds You; You rule the swelling of the sea; when its waves surge, You still them. You crushed Rahab; he was like a corpse; with Your powerful arm You scattered Your enemies. The heaven is Yours, the earth too; the world and all it holds— You established them. North and south— You created them; Tabor and Hermon sing forth Your name. Yours is an arm endowed with might; Your hand is strong; Your right hand, exalted. Righteousness and justice are the base of Your throne; steadfast love and faithfulness stand before You. Happy is the people who know the joyful shout; O LORD, they walk in the light of Your presence. They rejoice in Your name all day long; they are exalted through Your righteousness. For You are their strength in which they glory; our horn is exalted through Your favor. Truly our shield is of the LORD, our king, of the Holy One of Israel. Then You spoke to Your faithful ones in a vision and said, “I have conferred power upon a warrior; I have exalted one chosen out of the people. I have found David, My servant; anointed him with My sacred oil. My hand shall be constantly with him, and My arm shall strengthen him. No enemy shall oppress him, no vile man afflict him. I will crush his adversaries before him; I will strike down those who hate him. My faithfulness and steadfast love shall be with him; his horn shall be exalted through My name. I will set his hand upon the sea, his right hand upon the rivers. He shall say to Me, ‘You are my father, my God, the rock of my deliverance.’ I will appoint him first-born, highest of the kings of the earth. I will maintain My steadfast love for him always; My covenant with him shall endure. I will establish his line forever, his throne, as long as the heavens last. If his sons forsake My Teaching and do not live by My rules; if they violate My laws, and do not observe My commands, I will punish their transgression with the rod, their iniquity with plagues. But I will not take away My steadfast love from him; I will not betray My faithfulness. I will not violate My covenant, or change what I have uttered. I have sworn by My holiness, once and for all; I will not be false to David. His line shall continue forever, his throne, as the sun before Me, as the moon, established forever, an enduring witness in the sky.”Selah. Yet You have rejected, spurned, and become enraged at Your anointed. You have repudiated the covenant with Your servant; You have dragged his dignity in the dust. You have breached all his defenses, shattered his strongholds. All who pass by plunder him; he has become the butt of his neighbors. You have exalted the right hand of his adversaries, and made all his enemies rejoice. You have turned back the blade of his sword, and have not sustained him in battle. You have brought his splendor to an end and have hurled his throne to the ground. You have cut short the days of his youth; You have covered him with shame.Selah. How long, O LORD; will You forever hide Your face, will Your fury blaze like fire? O remember how short my life is; why should You have created every man in vain? What man can live and not see death, can save himself from the clutches of Sheol? Selah. O Lord, where is Your steadfast love of old which You swore to David in Your faithfulness? Remember, O Lord, the abuse flung at Your servants that I have borne in my bosom [from] many peoples, how Your enemies, O LORD, have flung abuse, abuse at Your anointed at every step. Blessed is the LORD forever; Amen and Amen. A prayer of Moses, the man of God. O Lord, You have been our refuge in every generation. Before the mountains came into being, before You brought forth the earth and the world, from eternity to eternity You are God. You return man to dust; You decreed, “Return you mortals!” For in Your sight a thousand years are like yesterday that has passed, like a watch of the night. You engulf men in sleep; at daybreak they are like grass that renews itself; at daybreak it flourishes anew; by dusk it withers and dries up. So we are consumed by Your anger, terror-struck by Your fury. You have set our iniquities before You, our hidden sins in the light of Your face. All our days pass away in Your wrath; we spend our years like a sigh. The span of our life is seventy years, or, given the strength, eighty years; but the best of them are trouble and sorrow. They pass by speedily, and we are in darkness. Who can know Your furious anger? Your wrath matches the fear of You. Teach us to count our days rightly, that we may obtain a wise heart. Turn, O LORD! How long? Show mercy to Your servants. Satisfy us at daybreak with Your steadfast love that we may sing for joy all our days. Give us joy for as long as You have afflicted us, for the years we have suffered misfortune. Let Your deeds be seen by Your servants, Your glory by their children. May the favor of the Lord, our God, be upon us; let the work of our hands prosper, O prosper the work of our hands!

Fifteen [categories of] women exempt their rival wives and the rival wives of their rival wives and so on ad infinitum from halitzah and from yibbum. And these are they: his daughter, and the daughter of his daughter, and the daughter of his son, and the daughter of his wife, and the daughter of her son and the daughter of her daughter; (7) His mother-in-law and his mother-in-law’s mother, and his father-in-law’s mother; (10) His maternal sister and his mother’s sister and his wife’s sister (13) And his maternal brother’s wife; and the wife of his brother who died before he was born, (15) And his daughter-in-law. All these exempt their rival wives and the rival wives of their rival wives, and so on, ad infinitum, from halitzah and from yibbum. If any of them died, or made a declaration of refusal, or were divorced, or were found incapable of procreation, their rivals are permitted. And you cannot say of a man’s mother-in-law, or the mother of his mother-in-law and of the mother of his father-in-law that they were found incapable of procreation or that they made a declaration of refusal. How do they exempt their rival wives? If his daughter or any other of these forbidden relatives was married to his brother who also had another wife, and he died, then just as his daughter is exempt so is her rival exempt. If his daughter’s rival went and married a second brother of his, who also had another wife, and he died, then just as the rival of his daughter is exempt so is his daughter’s rival’s rival exempt, even if there were a hundred [brothers]. How is it that if they had died, their rivals are permitted? If a man’s daughter or any other of these forbidden relatives was married to his brother who also had another wife, and his daughter died or was divorced, and afterwards his brother died, her rival is permitted. The rival of any one who can make a declaration of refusal but did not make a declaration of refusal, must perform halitzah and may not have yibbum. There are six relatives that are more restricted than these, in that they may be married only to strangers, marriage with their rivals is permitted: his mother and his father’s wife, his father’s sister, his paternal sister, his father’s brother’s wife and his paternal brother’s wife. Beth Shammai permits the rival wives to the surviving brothers, and Beth Hillel prohibits them. If they perform the halitzah, Beth Shammai disqualifies them from marrying a priest, and Beth Hillel makes the eligible. If they performed yibbum, Beth Shammai makes them eligible [to marry a priest], and Beth Hillel disqualifies them. Though these forbid and these permit, and these disqualify and these make eligible, Beth Shammai did not refrain from marrying women from [the families of] Beth Hillel, nor did Beth Hillel [refrain from marrying women] from [the families of] Beth Shammai. [With regard to] purity and impurity, which these declare pure and the others declare impure, neither of them refrained from using the utensils of the others for the preparation of food that was ritually clean. What is the case of “the wife of his brother who died before he was born”? If there were two brothers, and one of them died, and then a third brother was born, and then the second brother had yibbum with his dead brother’s wife and then died himself, the first woman is exempt as the wife of his brother who died before he was born, and the second wife [is exempt] because she is her rival wife. If he had ma’amar with her and died, the second wife, must perform halitzah but may not have yibbum. If there were two brothers and one of them died, and the second had yibbum with his dead brother’s wife, and after a [third] brother was born the second died, the first wife is exempt on account of her being the wife of his brother who died before he was born, while the second is exempt as her rival. If he had ma’amar with her, the second wife must perform the halitzah but she may not have yibbum. Rabbi Shimon says: he may have yibbum with either of them or perform halitzah for either of them. A general rule has been said about the yavamah: Wherever she is prohibited as a forbidden relation, she may neither perform halitzah nor have yibbum. If her prohibition is due to a commandment or a prohibition due to holiness, she must perform halitzah but she may not have yibbum. If her sister is also her sister-in-law, she may perform halitzah or have yibbum. A “prohibition due to a commandment” [refers to] the secondary incest prohibitions forbidden by the scribes. “A prohibition due to holiness” [refers to the following forbidden relationships]: a widow to a high priest; a divorced woman, or one that had performed halitzah to a regular priest; a mamzereth or a netinah to an Israelite; and an Israelite woman to a natin or a mamzer. If one has any kind of brother, [that brother] requires his brother’s wife to have yibbum, and he is his brother in every respect, except for a brother born from a female slave or a non-Jewish woman. If one has any kind of son, [that son] exempts his father’s wife from yibbum, and he is liable for striking or cursing [his father], and he is his son in every respect, except for the son of a female slave or a non-Jewish woman. If a man betrothed one of two sisters and does not know which of them he has betrothed, he must give a get (a bill of divorce) to this one and a get to this one. If he died, and he had a brother, the brother must perform halitzah for both of them. If he had two brothers, one is to perform halitzah and the other may have yibbum. If they both preempted and married them they do not take [the women] away from them. If two men betrothed two sisters and one does not know whom he betrothed and the other does not know whom he betrothed, this one gives two bills of divorce and the other gives two bills of divorce. If they died and this one has a brother and this one has a brother, this brother performs halitzah for both widows and this brother performs halitzah for both widows. If one has one brother and the other has two brothers, one brother performs halitzah for both widows and [as regards] the two, one performs halitzah and the other may perform yibbum. If they both preempted and married they do not take [the women] away from them. If this one had two brothers and the other had two brothers, one brother of one performs halitzah for one widow and one brother of the other performs halitzah with the other widow, [and then the other] brother of the first may have yibbum with the halutzah of the second and [the other] brother of the second may have yibbum with the halutzah of the first. If both preempted and performed halitzah, the [other] two must not perform yibbum, rather one must perform halitzah and the other may then have yibbum. If they both preempted and married they do not take [the women] away from them. The commandment to perform yibbum is upon the oldest brother. If a younger brother preempted him [by performing yibbum], he has acquired [a wife]. If a man is suspected of [having relations] with a slave and then she was freed, or with a non-Jewish woman who then converted, he must not marry her. If, however, he did marry her they do not take her away from him. If a man is suspected of [having relations] with a married woman, and then [in consequence] she was taken away from her husband, even though he married her, he must divorce her. A man who brings a bill of divorce from a country beyond the sea and states, “it was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence”, must not marry the [divorcer’s] wife. [Similarly, if one states] “he died”, “I killed him”, or “We killed him”, he must not marry his wife. Rabbi Judah said: [If he says], “ I killed him”, the woman may not marry [any one]; [If, he states], “We killed him”, the woman may marry. A sage who has pronounced a woman forbidden to her husband because of a vow must not marry her himself. If, however, a woman made a declaration of refusal or performed halitzah in his presence, he may marry her, since he [is part of a] court. If any of these had wives who [subsequently] died, [the other women] are permitted to marry them. If [the women] were married to others and were [subsequently] divorced, or widowed, they may be married to these. They are permitted to their sons or brothers. Four brothers: two of whom were married to two sisters, if those who were married to the sisters died, behold these must perform halitzah but may not have yibbum. If they preemptively married them, they must divorce them. Rabbi Eliezer said: Beth Shammai holds that they may retain them, and Beth Hillel holds that they must divorce them. If one of the sisters was forbidden to one [of the brothers] under the prohibition of incest, he is forbidden to marry her but may marry her sister, while the second brother is forbidden to marry either of them. [If one sister] was forbidden due to a commandment or due to holiness they both perform halitzah and may not be taken in yibbum. If one of the sisters was forbidden to one brother under the prohibition of incest and the other sister was forbidden to the other under the prohibition of incest, she who is forbidden to the one is permitted to the other and she who is forbidden to the other is permitted to the first. This is what they said: when her sister is her sister-in-law she may either perform halizah or be taken in yibbum. Three brothers: two of whom were married to two sisters, or to a woman and her daughter, or to a woman and her daughter’s daughter, or to a woman and her son’s daughter, behold, these must perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. Rabbi Shimon exempts them. If one of them was forbidden to him by a prohibition of incest, he is forbidden to marry her but is permitted to marry her sister. If the prohibition is due to a commandment or to holiness, they must perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. Three brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters and the third was unmarried: When one of the sisters’ husbands died, the unmarried brother performed for her ma’amar, and then his second brother died: Beth Shammai says: his wife [remains] with him while the other is exempt because she is his wife’s sister. Beth Hillel however says that he must divorce his wife with a get and by halitzah, and his brother’s wife by halitzah. This is the case in regard to which they said: “woe to him because of his wife, and woe to him because of his brother’s wife.” Three brothers: two of whom were married to two sisters and the third was married to a stranger: If one of the sisters’ husbands died and the brother who was married to the stranger married his wife and then died himself, the first is exempt [from yibbum or halitzah] because she is his wife’s sister, and the second is exempt as her rival. If he had only had ma’amar with her and died, the stranger is to perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. Three brothers: two of whom were married to two sisters and the third was married to a stranger: If the brother who was married to the stranger died, and one of the sisters’ husbands married his wife and then died himself, the first is exempt [from yibbum or halitzah] because she is his wife’s sister, and the second is exempt as her rival. If he had only had ma’amar with her and died, the stranger is to perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. Three brothers: two of whom were married to two sisters and the third was married to a stranger: If one of the sisters’ husband died and the brother who was married to the stranger married his wife, and then the wife of the second brother died, and afterwards the brother who was married to the stranger died, behold she is forbidden to him forever, since she was forbidden to him for one moment. Three brothers: two of whom were married to two sisters and the third was married to a stranger. If one of the sisters’ husbands divorced his wife, and then the brother who was married to the stranger died, and he who had divorced his wife married her and then died,- this is a case concerning which they said: If any of them died or were divorced, their rivals are permitted. [If in any of these cases] the betrothal or divorce was in doubt, behold, these rivals must perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. What is a case of doubtful betrothal? If when he threw to her betrothal money it was uncertain whether it fell nearer to him or nearer to her – this is a case of doubtful betrothal. [What is a case of] doubtful divorce? If he wrote a get in his own handwriting and it bore no signatures of witnesses, or if it bore signatures of witnesses but was note dated, or if it was dated but had the signature of only one witness this is a case of doubtful divorce. Three brothers were married to three women who were strangers [to one another] and one of them died and the second brother did ma’amar with her and then he died, behold, these must perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum; for it is said “And one of them died…her husband’s brother shall unite with her” (Deuteronomy 25:5) only she who is bound due to one yavam but not she who is bound to due to two yavamim. R. Shimon says: he may have yibbum with whichever of these he wishes and then perform halitzah for the other. If two brothers were married to two sisters, and one of the brothers died, and afterwards the wife of the second brother died, behold, she is forbidden to him forever, since she was forbidden to him for one moment. If two men betrothed two women, and as they were entering into the bridal chamber, they exchanged the one for the other, behold, they are guilty of having relations with a married woman. If they were brothers they are guilty of having relations with a brother’s wife. If they were sisters, they are guilty of having relations with a wife’s sister. If they were menstruants [they are guilty] of having relations with a menstruant. They must be kept apart for three months, lest they are pregnant. If they were minors incapable of bearing children, they may be returned [to their rightful husband] at once. If the women were of priestly families they are disqualified from eating terumah. A yavam performs halitzah for his yevamah, and she is subsequently found to be pregnant and she gives birth:If the child is viable, he is permitted to marry her relatives and she is permitted to marry his relatives, and he does not disqualify her from marrying a priest. If the child is not viable, he is forbidden to marry her relatives and she is forbidden to marry his relatives, and he disqualifies her from marrying a priest. A yavam marries his yevamah and she is subsequently found to be pregnant, and she gives birth:If the child is viable, he must divorce her and both are obligated to bring a sacrifice; If the child is not viable, he may retain her [as a wife]. If it is doubtful whether it is a nine-months child of the first [husband] or a seven-months child of the second [husband] he must divorce her, and the child is legitimate, and they must bring an asham talui. If a shomeret yavam came into possession of money: Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel agree that she may sell it or give it away, and that her act is legally valid. If she dies, what shall be done with her ketubah and with property that comes in and goes out with her? Beth Shammai says: the heirs of her husband are to share it with the heirs of her father; Beth Hillel says: the property is to remain with those in whose possession it is, the ketubah is to remain in the possession of the heirs of the husband and the property which comes in and goes out with her remains in the possession of the heirs of her father. If he married her she is his wife in every respect save that her ketubah remains a debt on her first husband’s estate. The commandment of yibbum is upon the eldest [of the surviving brothers]. If he declines, they pass in turn to all the other brothers. If they decline, they return to the eldest and say to him, “the commandment is upon you; either perform halitzah or yibbum.” If he wished to suspend [his decision] until a minor becomes of age, or until the eldest returns from a country beyond the sea or [until a brother who was] a deaf-mute or an imbecile [should recover], he is not to be listened to, but is told, “the commandment is upon you; either perform halitzah or yibbum.” He who performs halitzah with his yevamah, behold he is regarded as one of the other brothers in respect of inheritance. If the father was living, the estate belongs to the father.The other brothers are permitted. He who marries his yevamah acquires his brother’s estate. R. Judah said: in either case, if the father was living the estate belongs to the father. He who performs halitzah with his yevamah, he is forbidden to marry her relatives and she is forbidden to marry his relatives: He is forbidden to marry her mother, her mother’s mother and her father’s mother; her daughter, her daughter’s daughter and her son’s daughter; and also her sister while she is alive. She is forbidden to marry his father and his father’s father; his son and his son’s son; his brother and his brother’s son. A man is permitted to marry the relative of the rival of his halutzah but is forbidden to marry the rival of the relative of his halutzah. If he performed halitzah for his yevamah, and his brother married her sister and died, she must perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. Similarly if a man divorces his wife and his brother marries her sister and dies behold she is exempt from halitzah and from yibbum. If the brother of the yavam had betrothed the sister of the shomeret yavam, in the name of Rabbi Judah ben Batera they said: they say to him “Wait until your older brother has done something”. If his brother performed halitzah for her or married her, he may marry his [betrothed] wife. If the yevamah died he may marry his [betrothed] wife. If the yavam died, he must divorce his wife with a get and [release] his brother’s wife by halitzah. The yevamah shall neither perform halitzah nor be taken in yibbum before three months have passed [since her husband’s death]. Similarly all other women shall be neither be betrothed nor married before three months have passed. Whether they were virgins or non-virgins, whether divorcees or widows, whether married or betrothed. Rabbi Judah said: those who were married may be betrothed [immediately], and those who were betrothed may be married [immediately], with the exception of the betrothed women in Judea, because there the bridegroom was intimate with [his bride]. Rabbi Yose said: all [married] women may be betrothed [immediately] with the exception of the widow because of her mourning. If four brothers were married to four women, and they died, if the eldest [surviving brother] desires he may contract yibbum with all of them. If a man was married to two women and died, sexual relations or halitzah with one of them exempts her rival. If one of them was eligible [to marry a priest] and one ineligible [to marry a priest], then if he performs halitzah it should be to her who is ineligible, and if he contracts yibbum it may be with her who is eligible. A man who remarried his divorced wife, or married his halutzah, or married the relative of his halutzah must divorce her, and the child is a mamzer; the words of Rabbi Akiva. But the Sages say: the child is not a mamzer. They agree that where a man married the relative of his divorcee the child is a mamzer. Who is a mamzer? [The offspring of a union with] any relative with whom cohabitation is forbidden, the words of Rabbi Akiva. Shimon the Yemenite says: [The offspring of any union] for which one is obligated kareth at the hands of heaven; and the halachah is like his words. Rabbi Joshua says: [The offspring of any union] for which one is obligated death at the hands of a court.Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I found a scroll of genealogical records in Jerusalem, and it was written on it, “So-and-so is a mamzer [having been born] from an adulterous woman”, which confirms the view of Rabbi Joshua. If a man’s wife died, he is permitted to marry her sister. If he divorced her and then she died he is permitted to marry her sister. If she was married to another man and died, he is permitted to marry her sister. If a man’s sister-in-law died, he may marry her sister. If he performed for her halitzah and then she died, he is permitted to marry her sister. Rabban Gamaliel says: There is no [validity] to a get given after a get, nor to a ma’amar after a ma’amar, nor to an act of sexual intercourse after another act of sexual intercourse, nor to a halitzah after another halitzah. However, the Sages say: There is [validity] to a get given after a get, and to a ma’amar after a ma’amar but not to an act of sexual intercourse after another act of sexual intercourse, or to a halitzah after another halitzah. How [is the release from yibbum effected]?If he performed ma'amar for his yevamah and gave her a get, she requires halitzah. If he performed ma'amar and and did halizah, she requires a get. If he performed ma’amar and then had intercourse with her, behold this is in accordance with the commandment. If the yavam gave her a get and then ma’amar, she needs [another] get and halitzah. If he gave her a get and then had intercourse with her, she needs [another] get and halitzah. If he gave her a get and then did halitzah, there is nothing after halitzah. If the yavam did halitzah and then he did ma’amar or gave her a get, or had intercourse with her; Or if he had intercourse with her and then did ma’amar, or gave her a get, or did halitzah, there is nothing after halitzah. [And the law is the same] whether there is one yevamah to one yavam or two yevamoth to one yavam. How is this so?If the yavam did ma'amar with this one and ma'amar with the other one, they need two letters of divorce and [one of them must have] halizah. If he did ma'amar with one and gave a get to the other, the [first one] needs a get and [one of them must have] halitzah. If he did ma'amar with one and had intercourse with the other, they need two gets and [one of them must have] halitzah. If he had ma'amar with one and gave halitzah to the other, the first needs a get. If he gave a get to one and a get to the other, [one of them] requires halitzah. If he gave a get to one and had intercourse with the other, [the second one] requires a get and [one of them must have] halitzah. [If he gave] a get to one and had ma'amar with the other, [the second] requires a get and [one of them must have] halitzah. [If he gave] a get to one and halizah to the other, there is nothing after halitzah. If he performed halitzah [for one] and then performed halitzah [for the other], Or performed halitzah [for one] and did ma'amar [with the other], or gave her get, or had intercourse with her; Or if he had intercourse [with one] and then with the other, Or had intercourse [with one] and then ma'amar with the other, or gave her a get, or performed halitzah there is nothing after halitzah. [There is no difference in the law] whether there was one yavam to two yevamoth or two yavamim to yevamah. [If the yavam] performed halitzah and then did ma’amar, gave her a get, or had intercourse with her; Or if he had intercourse with her and then did ma'amar, gave her a get, or performed halitzah, there is no valid act after halitzah,Whether [it was performed] in the beginning, in the middle, or at the end. Concerning intercourse, if it took place first there is no valid act after it; If it occurred in the middle or at the end there can be a valid act after it. Rabbi Nehemiah says: with both intercourse and halizah, whether it took place in the beginning, in the middle, or at the end, there is no validity in any act that follows it. One who has intercourse with his yevamah, whether in error or with presumption, whether under compulsion or of his own free will, even if he acted in error and she in presumption, or he in presumption and she in error, or he under compulsion and she not under compulsion, or she under compulsion and he not under compulsion, whether he only began to have intercourse or he completed having intercourse, he has acquired her as a wife. The laws do not make a distinction between different types of intercourse. Similarly, one who has intercourse with any of the forbidden relatives listed in the Torah, or with any of those who are disqualified to marry him as, for instance, a widow to a high priest, a divorced woman or a halutzah to a common priest, a mamzeret or a netinah to an Israelite or the daughter of an Israelite to a mamzer or a nathin, he has disqualifed [her from marrying a priest], and the laws do not make a distinction between different types of intercourse. A widow to a high priest, a divorced woman or a halutzah to an ordinary priest they do not eat terumah from the point of betrothal. Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon declare them eligible. If they became widows or were divorced after full marriage they are ineligible; If after betrothal they are eligible. A high priest shall not marry a widow whether she became a widow after a betrothal or after a marriage. He shall not marry one who has reached puberty. Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Shimon permit him to marry one who has reached puberty, but he may not marry one who lost her virginity through a stick. [A priest who] betrothed a widow, and was subsequently appointed high priest, may bring her into marriage. It once happened with Joshua ben Gamla that he betrothed Marta the daughter of Boethus, and the king appointed him high priest, and he brought her into marriage. If a shomeret yavam became liable to have yibbum with an ordinary priest and then he was appointed high priest, even though he already did ma’amar, he may not bring her into marriage. A high priest whose brother died must perform halitzah but may not contract yibbum. An ordinary priest shall not marry a woman incapable of procreation, unless he already has a wife or children. Rabbi Judah said: even though he has a wife and children he shall not marry a woman incapable of procreation, since she is a zonah, as mentioned in the Torah. But the Sages said: the term zonah implies only a female convert, freed slavewoman and one who has been subjected to illicit intercourse. A man shall not abstain from procreation unless he already has children. Beth Shammai says: two males, And Beth Hillel says: male and a female, for it says, “Male and female created he them” (Genesis 5:2). If a man married a woman and lived with her for ten years and she bore no child, he may not abstain [any longer from the duty of propagation]. If he divorced her she is permitted to marry another, and the second husband may also live with her for ten years. If she miscarried [the period of ten years] is counted from the time of her miscarriage. A man is commanded concerning the duty of propagation but not a woman. Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka says: Concerning both of them it is said, “And God blessed them; and said to them… “Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28). If a widow [who married] a high priest, or if a divorced woman or a halutzah [who married] an ordinary priest brought in to her husband melog slaves and tzon barzel slaves, the melog slaves may not eat terumah but the tzon barzel slaves may eat of it. The following are melog slaves: those who, if they die, are the wife’s loss and, if their value increases, are her profit. Even though it is the husband's duty to maintain them, they may not eat terumah. The following are tzon barzel slaves: if they die, they are the loss of the husband and, if their value increases, they are a profit to him. Since he is responsible for them, they are permitted to eat terumah. If the daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest, and she brought him in slaves, they are permitted to eat terumah whether they are melog slaves, or tzon barzel slaves. If the daughter of a priest was married to an Israelite and she brought him in slaves, they may not eat terumah whether they are melog slaves or tzon barzel slaves. If the daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest who died and left her pregnant, her slaves may not eat terumah because of the share of the fetus, since a fetus prevents [its mother] from eating [terumah] but does not cause her to be able to eat [terumah], the words of Rabbi Yose. They said to him: since you have testified to us concerning the daughter of an Israelite who was married to a priest, even concerning the daughter of a priest who was married to a priest, and he died and left her pregnant her slaves may not eat terumah because of the share of the fetus! A fetus, a yavam, betrothal, a deaf-mute, and a boy who is nine years and one day old, disqualify [a woman] from [terumah], but do not allow her to eat terumah, If it is doubtful whether the boy is nine years and one day old or not, or whether he has produced two hairs or not, If a house collapsed upon a man and upon his brother’s daughter, and it is not known which of them died first, her rival must perform halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. The rapist, the seducer and the insane man neither disqualify [a woman from eating terumah] nor do they allow her to eat [terumah].If they are unfit to enter into the assembly of Israel they do disqualify [a woman from eating terumah]. How is this so? If an Israelite had intercourse with the daughter of a priest she continues to eat terumah.If she becomes pregnant she may no longer eat terumah.[Even if] she becomes pregnant she may not eat.And if his father’s mother was the daughter of an Israelite married to a priest, she may not eat terumah;And if his mother’s mother was the daughter of an Israelite married to a priest, she may eat terumah; If the embryo was miscarried in her womb she may eat. If a priest had intercourse with the daughter of an Israelite, she may not eat terumah.If she gave birth may eat.A slave disqualifies a woman from eating terumah through intercourse but not as her offspring.If she was the daughter of a priest married to an Israelite she may eat terumah.If she was the daughter of a priest married to an Israelite she may not eat terumah. It is found that the power of the son is greater than that of the father. How is this so? If the daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest or the daughter of a priest was married to an Israelite, and she bore a son by him, and the son went and had intercourse with a slave-woman who bore a son by him, such a son is a slave;A mamzer disqualifies a woman from eating terumah and can allow her to eat terumah. How is this so? If the daughter of an Israelite was married to a priest or the daughter of a priest was married to an Israelite, and she bore a daughter by him, and the daughter went and married a slave or a Gentile who bore a son by him, such a son is a mamzer; A high priest sometimes disqualifies [his mother’s mother] from being able to eat terumah. How is this so? If a priest’s daughter was married to an Israelite and she bore a daughter by him, and the daughter went and married a priest and bore a son by him, such a son is fit to be a high priest, to stand and serve at the altar. He allows his mother to eat terumah but disqualifies his mother’s mother. And she can say, “[May there] not be like my grandson the high priest who disqualified me from eating terumah.” An uncircumcised [priest] and all impure persons may not eat terumah. Their wives and slaves may eat terumah. [A priest] whose testes are crushed or whose member is cut off, as well as their slaves, may eat terumah, but their wives may not. If, however, he did not know her after the his testes were crushed or his member was cut off, the wives may eat [terumah]. Who is considered a “petzua dakkah”? Anyone whose testes are wounded even one of them. And a “kerut shofkhah”? A man whose member is cut off. If [any part] of the corona remained, even so much as a hair’s breadth, the man is regarded as fit [to serve as a priest]. A man who testes are wounded, and one whose member is cut off, are permitted to marry a convert or a freed slave. They are only forbidden to enter into the congregation, as it is said “No one whose testes are crushed or whose member is cut off shall be admitted into the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:2). An Ammonite and a Moabite are forbidden [to enter into the congregation of the Lord] and their prohibition is for ever. However, their women are permitted at once. An Egyptian and an Edomite are forbidden only until the third generation, whether they are males or females. Rabbi Shimon permits their women immediately. Said Rabbi Shimon: This is a kal vehomer: if where the males are forbidden for all time the females are permitted immediately, where the males are forbidden only until the third generation how much more should the females be permitted immediately. They said to him: If this is a halakhah, we shall accept it; but if it is only a logical reference, there is a refutation. He replied: This is not so, I am in fact saying a halakhah. Mamzerim and nethinim are forbidden, and their prohibition is forever, whether they be males or females. Rabbi Joshua said: I have heard that a eunuch performs halitzah and that halitzah is performed by others for his wife, and also that a eunuch does not perform halitzah and that no halitzah is performed for his wife, and I am unable to explain this. Rabbi Akiva said: I will explain it: a man-made eunuch performs halitzah and halitzah is also performed for his wife, because there was a time when he was fit [to have children]. A eunuch by nature neither performs halitzah nor is halitzah performed for his wife, since there never was a time when he was fit. Rabbi Eliezer said: Not so! Rather a eunuch by nature performs halitzah and halitzah is performed for his wife, because he may be cured. A man-made eunuch neither performs halitzah nor is halitzah performed for his wife, since he cannot be cured. Rabbi Joshua ben Baterra testified concerning Ben Megusat, who was a man-made eunuch living in Jerusalem and they performed yibbum for his wife, thus confirming the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. The eunuch neither performs halitzah nor contracts yibbum. So too a woman who is incapable of procreation neither performs halizah nor is taken in yibbum. If a eunuch performed halitzah for his yevamah, he does not disqualify her [from subsequently marrying a priest]. If he has intercourse with her he disqualifies her, since this is an act of fornication. Similarly where brothers performed halitzah for a woman incapable of procreation, they do not disqualify her [from marrying a priest]. If they have intercourse with her they do disqualify her, since this is an act of fornication. If a priest who was eunuch by nature married the daughter of an Israelite, he confers upon her the right to eat terumah. Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon stated: if a priest who was an hermaphrodite married the daughter of an Israelite, he confers upon her the right to eat terumah. Rabbi Judah stated: if a tumtum was opened up and found to be a male, he may not perform halitzah, because he has the same status as a eunuch. The hermaphrodite may marry [a wife] but may not be married [by a man]. Rabbi Eliezer stated: concerning the hermaphrodite, [the one who has relations with him] is liable to be stoned like one [who has relations with] a male. Some women are permitted to their husbands and forbidden to their yevamim, Others are permitted to their yevamim and forbidden to their husbands, Others are permitted to both, Others are forbidden to both.[In all these cases the women] are permitted to their husbands and forbidden to their yevamim. These are the women who are permitted to their husbands and forbidden to their yevamim: An ordinary priest married a widow and had a brother who was a high priest; A halal married a woman who was fit and had a brother of legitimate status; An Israelite married the daughter of an Israelite and had a brother who was a mamzer, A mamzer married a mamzeret and had a brother who was an Israelite. The following are permitted to their yevamim and forbidden to their husbands:A high priest who betrothed a widow and has a brother who is an ordinary priest; A fit [priest] who married a halalah and has a brother who is a halal; An Israelite who married a mamzeret and has a brother who is a mamzeret; A mamzer who married the daughter of an Israelite and has a brother who is an Israelite. [In these cases the women] are permitted to their yevamim and forbidden to their husbands. The following are forbidden to both; A high priest who married a widow has a brother who is a high priest, or who is an ordinary priest; A fir [priest] who married a halalah and has a brother who was a fit [priest]; An Israelite who married a mamzeret and has a brother who is Israelite; A mamzer who married the daughter of an Israelite and has a brother who is a mamzer, [In these cases the women] are forbidden to both [the husband and the yavam]. All other women are permitted to both their husbands and their yevamim. [Concerning] relatives of the second degree [of incest laws who are forbidden] by the words of the scribes:[A woman who is] a second degree of kinship to the husband but not a second degree of kinship to the yavam, is forbidden to the husband and permitted to the yavam; [A woman who is] a second degree of kinship to the yavam but not a second degree of kinship to the husband is forbidden to the yavam and permitted to the husband; [A woman who is] a second degree of kinship to the one and to the other is forbidden to the one as well as to the other. She cannot claim her ketubah or usufruct or support money, or her worn clothes. The child is fit [to marry a priest], but the husband is compelled to divorce her. A widow who was married to a high priest, a divorcee or halutzah who was married to an ordinary priest, a mamzer or a netinah who was married to an Israelite, or the daughter of an Israelite who was married to a natin or a mamzer is entitled to her ketubah. The daughter of an Israelite who was betrothed to a priest, or who was pregnant from a priest, or was a shomeret yavam to a priest; And similarly, the daughter of a priest [who was in such relationship] with an Israelite, may not eat terumah. The daughter of an Israelite who was betrothed to a Levite, or who was pregnant from a Levite, or was a shomeret yavam to a Levite; And similarly, the daughter of a Levite [who was in such a relationship] with an Israelite may not eat tithe. The daughter of a Levite who was betrothed to a priest, or who was pregnant from a priest, or was a shomeret yavam to a priest; And similarly, the daughter of a priest [who was in such relationship] with a levite, may eat neither terumah nor tithe. The daughter of an Israelite married to a priest may eat terumah. If he died and she has a son by him she may continue to eat terumah. If she was [subsequently] married to a Levite, she may eat tithe. If he died and she had a son by him, she may continue to eat tithe. If she was [subsequently] married to an Israelite she may eat neither terumah nor tithe. If he died and she has a son by him, she may eat neither terumah nor tithe. If her son by the Israelite died, she may again eat tithe. If her son by the Levite died she may again eat terumah. If her son by the priest died, she may eat neither terumah nor tithe. The daughter of a priest who was married to an Israelite may not eat terumah. If he died and she had a son by him she may not eat terumah. If she was [subsequently] married to a Levite she may eat tithe. If he died and she had a son by him she may eat tithe. If she was [subsequently] married to a priest she may eat terumah. If he died and she had a son by him she may eat terumah. If her son by the priest died she may not eat terumah. If her son by the levite died she may not eat tithe. If her son by the Israelite died she returns to the house of her father; And it is concerning such a woman that it is said, “And she returns to her father’s house, as in her youth, she may eat of her father’s bread” (Leviticus 22:13). A woman whose husband had gone to a country beyond the sea and they came and told her, “Your husband died”, married, and then her husband returned: She must leave this one and that one, and she also requires a get from this one and that one. She has no ketubah, no usufruct, no support money or worn clothes, neither from this one nor from that one. If she has taken anything from this one or that one, she must return it. The child from this one or that one is a mamzer. Neither this one nor that one may impurify himself for her. Neither this one and that one has a claim to whatever she may find, nor what she makes with her hands, nor to invalidate her vows. If she was the daughter of an Israelite, she becomes disqualified from marrying a priest; if the daughter of a Levite, from the eating of tithe; and if the daughter of a priest, from the eating of terumah. Neither the heirs of this one nor the heirs of that one are entitled to inherit her ketubah. And if [the husbands] die, the brother of the one and the brother of the other must perform halitzah, but may not contract yibbum. Rabbi Yose said: her ketubah remains a charge upon the estate of her first husband. Rabbi Elazar said: the first husband is entitled to whatever she may find, and what she makes with her hands, and also has the right to invalidate her vows. Rabbi Shimon said: intercourse or halitzah with the brother of the first husband exempts her rival, and the child from him is not a bastard. If she married without an authorization, she may return to him. If she married with the authorization of the court, she must leave, but is exempt from bringing a sacrifice. If she married without the authorization of the court, she must leave and is liable to bring a sacrifice. The authority of the court is thus more greater in that it exempts her from the sacrifice. If the court ruled that she may be married and she went and disgraced herself, she must bring a sacrifice, because the court permitted her only to marry. If a woman whose husband and son went to a country beyond the sea was told, “Your husband died and your son died afterwards”, and she married again, and later she was told, “the [deaths] happened in the opposite order” she must leave, and any child born before or after is a mamzer. If she was told “Your son died and your husband died afterwards”, and she had yibbum, and afterwards she was told, “the [deaths] happened in the opposite order” she must leave, and any child born before or after is a mamzer. If she was told, “Your husband died”, and she married, and afterwards she was told, “He was alive but is now dead”, she must leave, and any child born before [the death of her first husband] is a mamzer, but one born after it is not a mamzer. If she was told, “Your husband died”, and she was betrothed, and afterwards her husband appeared, she is permitted to return to him. Although the second one gave her a get he has not thereby disqualified her from marrying a priest. This Rabb Elazar ben Mathia expounded: “A woman divorced from her husband” (Leviticus 21:7) not from a man who is not her husband. If a man’s wife had gone to a country beyond the sea and he was told, “Your wife is dead”, and he married her sister, and afterwards his wife came back, [the latter] is permitted to return to him. He is permitted to marry the relatives of the second woman, and the second woman is permitted to marry his relatives. If the first wife died he is permitted to marry the second. If he was told that his wife was dead, and he married her sister, and then he was told that she was then alive but had since died, any child born before [his first wife’s death] is a mamzer, but anyone born after [her death] is not a mamzer. Rabbi Yose says: whoever disqualifies for others disqualifies for himself and whoever does not disqualify for others does not disqualify for himself. If a man was told “Your wife is dead” and he married her paternal sister; [and when he was told] “She is dead’, he married her maternal sister; [and when he was told] “She is dead”, and he married her paternal sister; [and when he was told] “She is dead, he married her maternal sister; and later it was found that they were all alive, he is permitted to the first, third and fifth, and they exempt their rivals; But he is forbidden to the second and the fourth, and intercourse with one of these does not exempt her rival. If he had intercourse with the second after the death of the first, he is permitted to the second and fourth, and they exempt their rivals; But he is forbidden to the third and the fifth, and intercourse with one of these does not exempt her rival. A boy of the age of nine years and one day disqualifies [his sister-in-law for marriage] with his brothers, and his brothers disqualify her for him, but while he disqualifies her from the outset only, the brothers disqualify her from the outset and at the end. How is this so? A boy of the age of nine years and one day who had intercourse with his sister-in-law disqualifies her [for marriage] with his brothers; The brothers disqualify her [for marriage with him] whether they had intercourse with her, did ma’amar, gave her a get or submitted to her halitzah. If a boy of the age of nine years and one day had intercourse with his yevamah and then his brother who was of the age of nine years and one day had intercourse with her, [the latter] disqualifies her for [the former]. Rabbi Shimon says: he does not render her unfit. If a boy of the age of nine years and one day had intercourse with his yevamah and afterwards had intercourse with her rival wife, he has disqualified [both women for marriage] with himself. Rabbi Shimon says: he does not disqualify them. If a boy of the age of nine years and one day had intercourse with his yevamah and then died, she must undergo halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum. If he had married [any other] woman and she subsequently died, she is exempt [from both halitzah and yibbum]. If a boy of the age of nine years and one day had intercourse with his sister-in-law, and after he had come of age he married another woman and then died, if he had not known the first woman after he had become of age, the first one must have halitzah but may not be taken in yibbum, while the second may either have halitzah or yibbum. Rabbi Shimon says: [the yavam] may perform yibbum with whichever one he wants, and he must perform halitzah for the other [woman]. [The same law applies] whether he is of the age of nine years and one day, or whether he is of the age of twenty years but had not produced two pubic hairs. A man is permitted to marry [the relative] of a woman [whom he has] raped or seduced. He who rapes or seduces [a relative] of his married wife, is guilty. A man may marry a woman whom his father has raped or seduced or a woman whom his son has raped or seduced. Rabbi Yehudah forbids [marriage] with a woman whom one’s father has raped or seduced. The sons of a female convert who converted with her do not perform halitzah or yibbum, even if the one was not conceived in holiness but was born in holiness, and the other was both conceived and born in holiness. So also [is the law] where the sons of a female slave were freed together with her. If the children of five women were mixed up and, when these mixed up children grew up, they took wives and then died, four perform halitzah for one [of the widows] and one contracts with her yibbum. [Then] he and three [brothers] perform halitzah to [another one of the widows] and one has with her yibbum. Thus every one [of the widows] has halitzah four times and yibbum once. If the child of a woman was mixed up with the child of her daughter-in-law and the mixed-up children grew up and married women and then died, the [other] sons of the daughter-in-law perform halitzah but may not contract yibbum, for it is uncertain whether she is the wife of his brother or the wife of his father’s brother. The [other] sons of the older woman either perform halitzah or yibbum, since the only doubt is whether she is the wife of his brother or the wife of his brother’s son. If the not-mixed-up sons died then [with respect to the widows of the sons of the older woman] the mixed-up sons perform halitzah and may not have yibbum, since it is uncertain whether she is the wife of his brother or the wife of his father’s brother; [With respect to the widows] of the sons of the daughter-in-law one performs halitzah and the other [may] have yibbum. If the child of a priest’s wife was mixed-up with the child of her female slave, behold both may eat terumah and [together] they receive one share at the threshing-floor. They may not defile themselves for the dead nor may they marry any women whether these are eligible [for marriage with a priest] or ineligible. If when they grew up, the mixed-up children freed one another they may marry women who are eligible for marriage with a priest and they may not defile themselves for the dead. If they defiled themselves, they do not receive the penalty of forty lashes. They may not eat terumah, but if they did eat they need not pay compensation either for the principal or [the additional] fifth. They are not to receive a share at the threshing-floor, but they may sell [their own] terumah and the proceeds are theirs. They receive no share in the holy things of the temple, and no holy things are given to them but others do not take their holy things from them. They are exempt from [giving to any priest] the shoulder, the cheeks and the maw, while the firstling of either of them should remain in the pasture until it contracts a blemish. The restrictions relating to priests and the restrictions relating to Israelites are both imposed upon them. If a woman did not wait three months after [separation from] her husband, and married again and gave birth [to a son], and it is unknown whether it is a nine-months child by the first husband or a seven-months child by the second, if she had other sons by the first husband and other sons by the second, these must perform halitzah but may not contract yibbum. So too he, with their widows performs halitzah but may not contract yibbum. If he had brothers by the first and also brothers by the second, but not by the same mother, he may either perform halitzah or contract yibbum, But as for them, one performs halitzah and the other may [then] contract yibbum. If one of [the two husbands] was an Israelite and the other a priest: He may only marry a woman who is eligible to marry a priest. He may not defile himself for the dead, but if he did defile himself he does not suffer the penalty of forty stripes. He may not eat terumah, but if he did eat he need not pay compensation either for the principal or [for the additional] fifth. He does not receive a share at the threshing-floor, but he may sell [his own] terumah and the profits are his. He receives no share in the holy things of the temple, no holy things are given to him, but he is not deprived of his own. He is exempt from [giving to any priest] the shoulder, the cheeks and the maw, while his firstling must remain in the pasture until it contracts a blemish. The restrictions relating to priests and the restrictions relating to Israelites are imposed upon him. If the two [husbands] were priests: He must be an onen mourner for them and they must be onenim mourners for him, but he may not defile himself for them, nor may they defile themselves for him. He may not inherit from them, but they may inherit from him. He is exempt if he strikes or curses the one or the other. He goes up [to serve] in the Temple watch of the one as well as of the other, but he does not receive a share [in the offerings]. If both served in the same watch, he receives a single portion. The commandment of halitzah must be performed in the presence of three judges, even though all the three are laymen. If the woman performed the halitzah with a shoe, her halitzah is valid, [but if] with a felt sock it is invalid. If with a sandal to which a heel is attached it is valid, but [if with one] that has no heel it is invalid. [If the sandal was tied] below the knee the halitzah is valid, but if above the knee it is invalid. If the woman performed the halitzah with a sandal that did not belong to him, or with a wooden sandal, or with the one of the left foot [which he was wearing] on his right foot, the halitzah is valid. If she performed the halizah with a sandal too large [for him], in which, however, he is able to walk, or with one too small which, however, covers the greater part of his foot, her halizah is valid. If she performed the halitzah at night, her halitzah is valid. Rabbi Elazar disqualifies [halitzah at night]. [If she performed it] with [the yavam’s] left shoe, her halitzah is invalid, Rabbi Elazar validates it. If she took off his shoe and spat, but did not recite [the formula], her halitzah is valid. If she recited [the formula] and spat, but did not draw off the shoe, her halitzah is invalid. If she drew off the shoe and recited [the formula] but did not spit: R. Eliezer says her halitzah is invalid; and R. Akiva says: her halitzah is valid. R. Eliezer said to him: “‘So shall be done’ (Deut. 25:9), anything which is a deed is essential.” R. Akiva said to him: “From there is your proof!: ‘So shall be done to the man”, only that which is to be done to the man [is essential]. If a deaf yavam submitted to halitzah or if a deaf yevamah performed halitzah, or if a halitzah was performed on a minor, the halizah is invalid. If a minor yevamah performed halitzah she must again perform halitzah when she becomes of age; if she does not again perform it, the halitzah is invalid. If she performed halitzah in the presence of two men or in the presence of three men and one of them was discovered to be a relative or in any other way unfit [to act as judge], her halitzah is invalid. R. Shimon and R. Yohanan Ha-Sandelar declare it valid. And it once happened that a man submitted to halitzah between himself and herself in a prison, and when the case came before R. Akiva he declared the halitzah valid. [This is the procedure in the performance of] the commandment of halitzah:He and his deceased brother’s wife come to the court, and they offer him appropriate advice, for it is said, “Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him” (Deut. 25:8). She then says: “My husband’s brother refuses to establish a name for his brother in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a levir (yavam)” (verse. Then he says: “I do not wish to marry her” (verse. [These sayings] were spoken in the holy tongue (Hebrew). “Then his brother’s widow shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, pull the sandal off his foot and spit in his face” (verse spit that the judges can see. “And make this declaration: Thus shall be done to the man who will not build up his brother’s house”. Thus far they used to dictate. When Rabbi Hyrkanus was under the terebinth at Kefar Etam he dictated the reading and completed the entire section, the practice was established to complete the entire section. “And he shall go in Israel by the name of ‘the family of the unsandaled one’” (verse. [The recitation of this verse] is a commandment [to be performed] by the judges and not by the disciples. Rabbi Judah says: it is a commandment incumbent upon all present to cry “[the man] that had his shoe pulled off, [the man] that had his shoe pulled off, [the man] that had his shoe pulled off.” Beth Shammai says: Only those who are betrothed may exercise the right of refusal; But Beth hillel says: Both those who are betrothed and those who are married. Beth Shammai says: [A declaration of refusal may be made] against a husband but not against a yavam; But Beth Hillel says: Either against a husband or against a yavam. Beth Shammai says: [The declaration] must be made in his presence, But Beth Hillel says: Either in his presence or not in his presence. Beth Shammai says: [The declaration must be made] before the court, But Beth Hillel says: Either before the court or not before the court. Beth Hillel said to Beth Shammai: [A girl] may exercise the right of refusal while she is a minor even four or five times. Beth Shammai said to them: “The daughters of Israel are not ownerless property! Rather, either she makes a declaration of refusal and then waits until she is of age, or she makes a declaration of refusal and marries again [immediately]. Section one: According to Beth Shammai only those who are betrothed are allowed to make a declaration of refusal and thereby leave their husbands without a get. Beth Hillel says even if she was married she may do so. According to the Talmud, Beth Shammai allows only the betrothed woman to refuse because if the married woman also was able to refuse, men would not want to spend the money involved in marrying a minor, lest she later refuse the marriage. Section two: If the minor girl was married off by her mother or brother and then her husband died, according to Beth Shammai she cannot make a declaration against her yavam. Rather she must wait until she reaches majority age and then request halitzah. However, according to Beth Hillel she may make such a declaration against the yavam as well. However, even though she has annulled her marriage to the yavam’s brother, she cannot at a later point marry the yavam, since she was at one point his brother’s wife. Section three: According to Beth Shammai, she must make the declaration of refusal in front of him. According to Beth Hillel, this is not necessary. Section four: According to Beth Shammai, she must make the declaration of refusal in front of a court. According to Beth Hillel, this is not necessary. Section five: According to Beth Hillel, as long as she is still a minor, she may be married off as many times as her brothers and mother wish and she may later refuse as many marriages as they offer. Beth Shammai offers a moral objection to this possibility, for through it a girl could be betrothed (but according to Beth Shammai not married) to several men without ever having received a get. Rather she either waits until she is an adult or makes a declaration of refusal and then marries immediately, at which point she could no longer refuse, according to Beth Shammai. Note that this last section is phrased differently than the previous sections. According to some mishnaic commentators, since Beth Shammai explains their position the halakhah is according to them in this section. In all of the other sections, the halakhah follows Beth Hillel, as it usually does. Which minor must make the declaration of refusal?Any whose mother or brothers have given her in marriage with her consent. If they gave her in marriage without her consent she need not make any declaration of refusal. Rabbi Hanina ben Antigonus says: Any child who is unable to take care of her token of betrothal need not make any declaration of refusal. Rabbi Eliezer says: The act of a minor has no validity at all, rather [she is to be regarded] as one seduced. The daughter of an Israelite [who was married] to a priest may not eat terumah, and the daughter of a priest [who was married] to an Israelite may eat terumah. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: In the case of any hindrance that was due to the husband, she is considered to be his wife; But in the case of any hindrance that was not due to the husband she is not considered to be his wife. If a minor made a declaration of refusal against a man, he is permitted [to marry] her relatives and she is permitted to [marry] his relatives, and he does not disqualify her from[marrying] a priest. If he gave her a get, he is forbidden to [marry] her relatives and she is forbidden to [marry] his relatives, and he also disqualifies her from [marrying] a priest. If he gave her a get and remarried her and then she a made a declaration of refusal against him, and then she was married to another man and became a widow or was divorced, she is permitted to return to him. If she made a declaration of refusal against him and then he remarried her, and then he gave her a get and then she was married to another man and became a widow or was divorced, she is forbidden to return to him. This is the general rule: if divorce followed meun she is forbidden to return to him, and if meun followed divorce she is permitted to return to him. If a minor made a declaration of refusal against a man, and then she was married to another man who divorced her, and afterwards to another man against whom she made a declaration of refusal, and then to another man who divorced her: she is forbidden to return to any man from whom she was separated by a get, but is permitted to return to any man from whom she was separated by her declaration of refusal. If a man divorced his wife and remarried her, she is permitted to marry the yavam; Rabbi Elazar forbids. Similarly, if a man divorced an orphan and remarried her, she is permitted to marry the yavam; Rabbi Elazar forbids. If a minor was given in marriage by her father and was divorced she is like an orphan in her father’s lifetime and then her husband remarried her, all agree that she is forbidden to marry the yavam. If two brothers were married to two sisters who were minors and orphans, and the husband of one of them died, [the widow] is free since she is the [the yavam’s] wife’s sister. Similarly in the case of two deaf-mute [sisters]. [If the two brothers were married to two sisters one of whom was] of age and [the other] a minor, if the husband of the minor died, the minor is free since she is the [the yavam’s] wife’s sister. If the husband of the elder sister died: Rabbi Eliezer says the minor is to be instructed to make a declaration of refusal against him. Rabban Gamaliel says: If she made a declaration of refusal, then she did so; but if [she did] not, let her wait until she is of age and then she will be free since she is the [the yavam’s] wife's sister. Rabbi Joshua says: Woe to him because of his wife and woe to him because of his brother’s wife! He must allow his wife to go by [giving her] a get, and [he must let go] his brother’s wife through halitzah. If a man who was married to two minors orphans died, intercourse or halitzah with one of them exempts her rival. And the same is true with regard to two deaf women. [If a man was married to] a minor and to a deaf woman [and then died], intercourse with one of them does not exempt her rival. If one was of sound senses and one was deaf, intercourse with the woman of sound senses exempts the deaf woman, but intercourse with the deaf woman does not exempt the woman of sound senses. If one was of age and the other a minor, intercourse with the one of age exempts the minor, but intercourse with the minor does not exempt the one of age. If a man who was married to two orphans who were minors died, and the yavam had intercourse with one, and then he also had intercourse with the other, or his [the yavam’s] brother had intercourse with the other, he has not thereby disqualified the first [for him]; And the same is true with regard to two deaf women. [If one was] a minor and the other deaf, and the yavam had intercourse with the minor and then he had intercourse with the deaf widow, or a brother of his had intercourse with the deaf widow, he has not disqualified the minor [for him]. If the yavam had intercourse with the deaf widow and then he also had intercourse with the minor, or a brother of his had intercourse with the minor, he has disqualified the deaf widow [for him]. [If one was] of sound senses and the other deaf, and the yavam had intercourse with the woman of sound senses and then he also had intercourse with the deaf woman, or a brother of his had intercourse with the deaf woman, he does not disqualify the former [for him]. If the yavam had intercourse with the deaf woman, and then he also had intercourse with the woman of sound senses, or a brother of his had intercourse with the woman of sound senses, he disqualifies the deaf woman [for him]. [If one was] of age and the other a minor, and the yavam had intercourse with the one who was of age, and then he had intercourse with the minor, or a brother of his had intercourse with the minor, he does not disqualify the elder for him. If the yavam had intercourse with the minor, and then he also had intercourse with the one who was of age, or a brother of his had intercourse with the one who was of age, he disqualifies the minor [for him]. Rabbi Elazar says: the minor is to be instructed to make a declaration of refusal. If a yavam who was a minor had intercourse with a yevamah who was a minor, they should be brought up together. If he had intercourse with a yevamah who was of age, she should bring him up until he is of age. If a yevamah declared within thirty days [after yibbum], “he has not had intercourse with me”, they force him to perform halitzah; [If her declaration was made] after thirty days, they request that he perform halitzah. If he admits [that he did not have intercourse with her], they force him to perform halitzah. If a woman vowed to have no benefit from her yavam:If the vow was made during the husband’s lifetime they force him to perform halitzah, [If her vow was made] after the death of her husband, they request of him to perform halitzah. If this was her intention, [even if her vow was made] during the lifetime of her husband, they request of him to perform halitzah. If a deaf man married a woman of sound senses or a man of sound senses married a deaf woman he may, if he wishes, divorce her, and he may, if he wishes retain her; just as he marries by gestures so he divorces her by gestures. If a man of sound senses married a woman of sound senses and she became deaf, he may, if he wishes, divorce her; and he may, if he wishes, retain her. If she became insane he may not divorce her. If he became deaf or insane, he may never divorce her. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: Why may a woman who became deaf be divorced while a man who became deaf may not divorce [his wife]? They answered him: a man who divorces is not like a woman who is divorced, for while a woman may be divorced with her consent and without her consent, a man can divorce only with his consent. Rabbi Nehunia ben Gudgada testified concerning a deaf-mute whose father had given her in marriage, that she could be sent away with a bill of divorcement; They said to him: the other also is similar to her. If two deaf brothers were married to two deaf sisters, or to two sisters who were of sound senses, or to two sisters one of whom was deaf and the other was of sound senses; And so also if two deaf sisters were married to two brothers who were of sound senses, or to two deaf brothers, or to two brothers one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses: Behold these [women] are exempt from halitzah and from yibbum. If [the women] were strangers they must marry them, and if they wish to divorce them, they may do so. If two brothers, one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, were married to two sisters who were of sound senses, and the deaf brother, the husband of the sister who was of sound senses, died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the sister of sound senses, do? [Nothing, since she] is exempt, because she is his wife’s sister. If the brother of sound senses, the husband of [the sister who was] of sound senses, died, what should the deaf brother, the husband of [the sister who was] of sound senses, do? He must release his wife with a get, while his brother’s wife is forbidden forever [to marry again]. If two brothers of sound senses were married to two sisters one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, and the brother of sound senses, the husband of the deaf sister, died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the sister who was of sound senses, do? [Nothing, since she is] exempt because she is his wife’s sister. If the brother of sound senses, the husband of the sister who was of sound senses, died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the deaf sister, do? He must release his wife with a get and his brother’s wife by halitzah. If two brothers, one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, were married to two sisters, one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, and the deaf brother, the husband of the deaf sister, died, what should the brother who was of sound senses, the husband of the sister who was of sound senses, do? [Nothing, since she is] exempt because she is his wife’s sister. If the brother of sound senses, the husband of the sister who was of sound senses, died, what should the deaf brother, the husband of the deaf sister, do? He must release his wife with a get, while his brother’s wife is forever forbidden [to marry again]. If two brothers, one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, were married to two strangers who were of sound senses, and the deaf brother, the husband of the woman who was of sound senses, died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the woman of sound senses, do? He either performs halitzah or yibbum. If the brother of sound senses, the husband of the woman who was of sound senses, died, what should the deaf brother, the husband of the woman who was of sound senses, do? He must marry her and he may never divorce her. If two brothers of sound senses were married to two strangers, one of whom was of sound senses and the other deaf, and the brother of sound senses, the husband of the deaf woman died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the woman of sound senses, do? He must marries her and if he wishes to divorce her he may do so. If the brother of sound senses, the husband of the woman of sound senses, died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the deaf woman, do? He may either perform halitzah or yibbum. If two brothers, one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, were married to two strangers, one of whom was deaf and the other of sound senses, and the deaf brother, the husband of the deaf woman, died, what should the brother of sound senses, the husband of the woman of sound senses do? He must marry her, but if he wishes to divorce her he may do so. If the brother of sound senses, the husband of the woman of sound senses, died, what should the deaf brother, the husband of the deaf woman, do? He must marry her and he may never divorce her. If a woman and her husband went to a country beyond the sea [at a time when there was] peace between him and her and [when there was also] peace in the world, and she came back and said, “My husband is dead”, she may marry again; and if she said, “My husband is dead [and he had no children]” she may contract yibbum. If there was peace between him and her, but war in the world, [or if there was] discord between him and her, but peace in the world, and she came back and said, ‘My husband is dead”, she is not believed. Rabbi Judah says: she is never believed unless she comes weeping and her garments are rent. They said to him: she may marry in either case. Bet Hillel says: we heard [such a tradition] only in respect of a woman who came from the harvest and [whose husband died] in the same country, and in a case similar to the one that happened. Bet Shammai said to them: [the law is] the same whether the woman came from the harvest or from olive picking, or from grape picking, or from one country to another--the Sages spoke of the harvest only [because the incident to which they referred] occurred then. Bet Hillel changed their view to rule in accordance with Bet Shammai. Bet Shammai says: she may marry and she receives her ketubah. Bet Hillel says: she may marry but she does not receive her ketubah. Bet Shammai said to them: you have permitted [what might be] the serious consequence of illicit intercourse, why should you not permit [the taking of her husband’s] money which is of less consequence! Bet Hillel said to them: we find that based on her testimony, the brothers may not receive their inheritance. Bet Shammai said to them: do we not learn this from her ketubah scroll wherein [her husband] writes to her “if you are married to another man, you will receive what is prescribed for you”! Bet Hillel changed their view to rule in accordance with Bet Shammai. All are believed to testify for her [concerning her husband’s death] except for her mother-in-law, the daughter of her mother-in-law, her rival wife, her sister-in-law and her husband’s daughter. Why is [the bringing of] a letter of divorce different [from testifying regarding] death?The written document provides the proof. If one witness stated, “he is dead”, and his wife married again, and another came and stated “he is not dead”, she need not leave [her new husband]. If one witness said “he is dead” and two witnesses said “he is not dead”, even if she married again, she must leave him. If two witnesses stated, “he is dead”, and one witness stated, “he is not dead”, even if she had not married, she may do so. If one wife said “he is dead’ and the other wife said, “he is not dead” , the one who said, “he is dead” may marry again and she also receives her ketubah, while the one who said, “he is not dead”, may neither marry again nor does she receive her ketubah. If one wife said, “he is dead” and the other stated “he was killed”: Rabbi Meir says: since they contradict one another they may not marry again. Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Shimon say: since both admit that he is not alive, both may marry again. If one witness says, “he is dead”, and another witness says “he is not dead’, Or if one woman says “he is dead”, and another woman says, “he is not dead’, she may not marry again. If a woman and her husband went to a country beyond the sea, and she returned and stated, “my husband is dead”, she may be married again and she also receives her ketubah. However, her rival wife is forbidden to remarry.If [her rival wife] was the daughter of an Israelite [who was married] to a priest, she is permitted to eat terumah, the words of Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Akiva says: this is not a way that would lead her away from transgression, unless [it be enacted that] she shall be forbidden both to marry and to eat terumah. If she stated, “my husband died first and my father-in-law died after him”, she may marry again and she also receives her ketubah, but her mother-in-law is forbidden [to remarry]. If [her mother-in-law] was the daughter of an Israelite [who was married] to a priest, she is permitted to eat terumah, the words of Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Akiva says: this is not a way that would lead her away from transgression, unless [it be enacted that] she shall be forbidden both to marry and to eat terumah. If a man betrothed one of five women and he does not know which of them he has betrothed, and each states, “he has betrothed me”, he gives a letter of divorce to every one of them, and he leaves one ketubah [sum] for them and withdraws, the words of Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Akiva says: this is not a way that would lead him away from transgression, unless he gives to each of them both a get and a ketubah. If a man robbed one of five persons and does not know which of them he has robbed, and each one states, “he has robbed me”, he leaves the [amount of] the robbery among them and withdraws, the words of Rabbi Tarfon. Rabbi Akiva says: this is not a way that would lead them away from transgression, unless one pays [the full amount of the robbery] to every one [of the persons involved]. A woman who went with her husband to a country beyond the sea, and her son was with her, and who came back and stated, “my husband died and afterwards my son died”, is believed. [If she stated] “my son died and afterwards my husband died”, she is not believed, but we are concerned that her words [might be true] and she must, therefore, perform halitzah but may not contract yibbum. [If a woman states], “A son was given to me [while I was] in a country beyond the sea” and she also states, “my son died and afterwards my husband died”, she is believed. [If she states], “my husband died and afterwards my son died”, she is not believed, but we are concerned that her words [might be true] and she must, therefore, perform halitzah but may not contract yibbum. [If a woman states] “a brother-in-law was given to me [while I was] in a country beyond the sea”, and afterwards she states, “my husband died and afterwards my brother-in-law died” or “my brother-in-law died and afterwards my husband died”, she is believed. If a woman and her husband and her brother-in-law went to a country beyond the sea, and she [on returning home] stated, “my husband died and afterwards my brother-in-law [died]” or “my brother-in-law [died] and afterwards my husband [died]” she is not believed; For a woman is not to be believed when she asserts “my brother-in-law is dead”, in order that she may marry again; Nor [is she believed when she states that] her sister is dead, in order that she may enter his house. A man also is not believed when he states “my brother is dead”, so that he may have yibbum with his wife, nor [when he states that] his wife is dead, in order that he may marry her sister. A woman whose husband and rival wife went to a country beyond the sea, and to whom people came and said, “your husband is dead”, must neither marry nor contract yibbum until she has ascertained whether her rival wife is pregnant. If she had a mother-in-law she need not be concerned [she had another son]. But if [the mother-in-law] departed while pregnant she must be concerned [that another son was born]. Rabbi Joshua says: she need not be concerned. Two sisters-in-law, one says, “My husband is dead”, and the other also says, “My husband is dead”, this one is forbidden on account of the husband of this one, and this one is forbidden on account of the husband of this one. If one had witnesses and the other had no witnesses, she who has the witnesses is forbidden, while she who has no witnesses is permitted. If the one has children and the other has no children, she who has children is permitted and she who has no children is forbidden. If they contracted yibbum, and the yevamim died, they are forbidden [to marry again]. Rabbi Elazar says: since they were permitted to marry the yevamim, they are subsequently permitted to marry any man. They are allowed to testify only about the face with the nose, even though there were also marks on the man’s body or clothing. They are allowed to testify only when his soul has departed, even though they have seen him cut up or crucified or being devoured by a wild beast. They are allowed to testify only [if they saw the body] within three days [of death]. Rabbi Judah ben Baba says: not all men, all places, or all times are alike. If a man fell into water, whether it had [a visible] end or not, his wife is forbidden [to marry again]. Rabbi Meir said: it once happened that a man fell into a large cistern and came out after three days. Rabbi Yose: it once happened that a blind man descended into a cave to immerse and his guide went down after him; and after waiting long enough for their souls to depart, permission was given to their wives to marry again. Another incident occurred at Asia where a man was lowered into the sea, and only his leg was brought up, and the Sages ruled: [if the recovered leg contained the part] above the knee [the man’s wife] may marry again, [but if it contained only the part] below the knee, she may not marry again. Even if he only heard from women saying, “so-and-so is dead”, this is enough. Rabbi Judah says: even if he only heard children saying, “behold we are going to mourn for a man named so-and-so and to bury him” [it is enough]. Whether [such statement was made] with the intention [of providing evidence] or was made with no such intention [it is valid]. Rabbi Judah ben Bava says: with an Israelite [the evidence is valid] only if the man had the intention [of acting as witness]. In the case of a non-Jew the evidence is invalid if his intention was [to act as witness]. They may testify [even if the body was seen] in candle light or in moonlight. And a woman may be given permission to marry again on the evidence of a mere voice. It once happened that a man was standing on the top of a hill and cried, “so-and-so son of so-and-so from such-and-such a place is dead”, but when they went [to the top of the hill] they didn’t find anyone there. [Nevertheless], they allowed his wife to remarry. In another instance, at Zalmon a person declared, “I am so-and-so son of so-and-so; a snake has bitten me, and I am dying”; and when they went [to examine the corpse] they did not recognize him, they [nevertheless] allowed his wife to remarry. Rabbi Akiva said: When I went down to Nehardea to intercalate the year, I met Nehemiah of Bet D’li who said to me, “I heard that in the land of Israel no one, permits a [married] woman to marry again on the evidence of one witness, except Rabbi Judah ben Bava”. “That is so”, I told him. He said to me, “Tell them in my name: ‘You know that this country is in confusion because of marauders. I have received a tradition from Rabban Gamaliel the Elder: that they allow a [married] woman to remarry on the evidence of one witness’”. And when I came and recounted the conversation in the presence of Rabban Gamaliel he rejoiced at my words and exclaimed, “We have found a match for Rabbi Judah ben Bava!” As a result of this talk Rabban Gamaliel remembered that some men were once killed at Tel Arza, and that Rabban Gamaliel the Elder had allowed their wives to marry again on the evidence of one witness, and the law was established that they allow a woman to marry again on the evidence of one witness, and on the testimony of one [who states that he has heard] from another witness, from a slave, from a woman or from a female slave. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua say: a woman is not be allowed to remarry on the evidence of one witness. Rabbi Akiva ruled: [a woman is not allowed to marry again] on the evidence of a woman, on that of a slave, on that of a female slave or on that of relatives. They said to him: It once happened that a number of Levites went to Tsoar, the city of palms, and one of them became ill on the way, and they left him in an inn. When they returned they asked the [female] innkeeper, “Where is our friend?” And she replied, “He is dead and I buried him”, and they allowed his wife to remarry. Should not then a priest’s wife [be believed at least as much] as an innkeeper!” He answered them: When she will [give such evidence] as the innkeeper [gave] she will be believed, for the innkeeper had brought out to them [the dead man’s] staff, his bag and the Torah scroll which he had with him.

(1) For the leader; on shushan eduth. A michtam of David (to be taught), (2) when he fought with Aram-Naharaim and Aram-Zobah, and Joab returned and defeated Edom—[an army] of twelve thousand men—in the Valley of Salt. (3) O God, You have rejected us, You have made a breach in us; You have been angry; restore us! (4) You have made the land quake; You have torn it open. Mend its fissures, for it is collapsing. (5) You have made Your people suffer hardship; You have given us wine that makes us reel. (6) Give those who fear You because of Your truth a banner for rallying.Selah. (7) That those whom You love might be rescued, deliver with Your right hand and answer me. (8) God promised in His sanctuary that I would exultingly divide up Shechem, and measure the Valley of Sukkoth; (9) Gilead and Manasseh would be mine, Ephraim my chief stronghold, Judah my scepter; (10) Moab would be my washbasin; on Edom I would cast my shoe; acclaim me, O Philistia! (11) Would that I were brought to the bastion! Would that I were led to Edom! (12) But You have rejected us, O God; God, You do not march with our armies. (13) Grant us Your aid against the foe, for the help of man is worthless. (14) With God we shall triumph; He will trample our foes.

(1) Bless the LORD, O my soul; O LORD, my God, You are very great; You are clothed in glory and majesty, (2) wrapped in a robe of light; You spread the heavens like a tent cloth. (3) He sets the rafters of His lofts in the waters, makes the clouds His chariot, moves on the wings of the wind. (4) He makes the winds His messengers, fiery flames His servants. (5) He established the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never totter. (6) You made the deep cover it as a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. (7) They fled at Your blast, rushed away at the sound of Your thunder, (8) —mountains rising, valleys sinking— to the place You established for them. (9) You set bounds they must not pass so that they never again cover the earth. (10) You make springs gush forth in torrents; they make their way between the hills, (11) giving drink to all the wild beasts; the wild asses slake their thirst. (12) The birds of the sky dwell beside them and sing among the foliage. (13) You water the mountains from Your lofts; the earth is sated from the fruit of Your work. (14) You make the grass grow for the cattle, and herbage for man’s labor that he may get food out of the earth— (15) wine that cheers the hearts of men oil that makes the face shine, and bread that sustains man’s life. (16) The trees of the LORD drink their fill, the cedars of Lebanon, His own planting, (17) where birds make their nests; the stork has her home in the junipers. (18) The high mountains are for wild goats; the crags are a refuge for rock-badgers. (19) He made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows when to set. (20) You bring on darkness and it is night, when all the beasts of the forests stir. (21) The lions roar for prey, seeking their food from God. (22) When the sun rises, they come home and couch in their dens. (23) Man then goes out to his work, to his labor until the evening. (24) How many are the things You have made, O LORD; You have made them all with wisdom; the earth is full of Your creations. (25) There is the sea, vast and wide, with its creatures beyond number, living things, small and great. (26) There go the ships, and Leviathan that You formed to sport with. (27) All of them look to You to give them their food when it is due. (28) Give it to them, they gather it up; open Your hand, they are well satisfied; (29) hide Your face, they are terrified; take away their breath, they perish and turn again into dust; (30) send back Your breath, they are created, and You renew the face of the earth. (31) May the glory of the LORD endure forever; may the LORD rejoice in His works! (32) He looks at the earth and it trembles; He touches the mountains and they smoke. (33) I will sing to the LORD as long as I live; all my life I will chant hymns to my God. (34) May my prayer be pleasing to Him; I will rejoice in the LORD. (35) May sinners disappear from the earth, and the wicked be no more. Bless the LORD, O my soul. Hallelujah.

(1) Praise the LORD; call on His name; proclaim His deeds among the peoples. (2) Sing praises to Him; speak of all His wondrous acts. (3) Exult in His holy name; let all who seek the LORD rejoice. (4) Turn to the LORD, to His might; seek His presence constantly. (5) Remember the wonders He has done, His portents and the judgments He has pronounced, (6) O offspring of Abraham, His servant, O descendants of Jacob, His chosen ones. (7) He is the LORD our God; His judgments are throughout the earth. (8) He is ever mindful of His covenant, the promise He gave for a thousand generations, (9) that He made with Abraham, swore to Isaac, (10) and confirmed in a decree for Jacob, for Israel, as an eternal covenant, (11) saying, “To you I will give the land of Canaan as your allotted heritage.” (12) They were then few in number, a mere handful, sojourning there, (13) wandering from nation to nation, from one kingdom to another. (14) He allowed no one to oppress them; He reproved kings on their account, (15) “Do not touch My anointed ones; do not harm My prophets.” (16) He called down a famine on the land, destroyed every staff of bread. (17) He sent ahead of them a man, Joseph, sold into slavery. (18) His feet were subjected to fetters; an iron collar was put on his neck. (19) Until his prediction came true the decree of the LORD purged him. (20) The king sent to have him freed; the ruler of nations released him. (21) He made him the lord of his household, empowered him over all his possessions, (22) to discipline his princes at will, to teach his elders wisdom. (23) Then Israel came to Egypt; Jacob sojourned in the land of Ham. (24) He made His people very fruitful, more numerous than their foes. (25) He changed their heart to hate His people, to plot against His servants. (26) He sent His servant Moses, and Aaron, whom He had chosen. (27) They performed His signs among them, His wonders, against the land of Ham. (28) He sent darkness; it was very dark; did they not defy His word? (29) He turned their waters into blood and killed their fish. (30) Their land teemed with frogs, even the rooms of their king. (31) Swarms of insects came at His command, lice, throughout their country. (32) He gave them hail for rain, and flaming fire in their land. (33) He struck their vines and fig trees, broke down the trees of their country. (34) Locusts came at His command, grasshoppers without number. (35) They devoured every green thing in the land; they consumed the produce of the soil. (36) He struck down every first-born in the land, the first fruit of their vigor. (37) He led Israel out with silver and gold; none among their tribes faltered. (38) Egypt rejoiced when they left, for dread of Israel had fallen upon them. (39) He spread a cloud for a cover, and fire to light up the night. (40) They asked and He brought them quail, and satisfied them with food from heaven. (41) He opened a rock so that water gushed forth; it flowed as a stream in the parched land. (42) Mindful of His sacred promise to His servant Abraham, (43) He led His people out in gladness, His chosen ones with joyous song. (44) He gave them the lands of nations; they inherited the wealth of peoples, (45) that they might keep His laws and observe His teachings. Hallelujah.

And if he brings the water in a consecrated barrel, the water will become disqualified for use in the libation by remaining overnight, just as all consecrated items, e.g., offerings, are rendered unfit after remaining overnight. Ḥizkiya said: Temple vessels consecrate only with specific intent. Therefore, in theory, one could bring water to the Temple in a consecrated vessel, provided he has no intent to consecrate it. And the reason one may not do so is due to a rabbinic decree lest people say, upon seeing the water poured in the morning, that the water was intentionally consecrated. In that case, they might draw the mistaken conclusion that remaining overnight does not disqualify liquids for use in libations. Rabbi Yannai said that Rabbi Zeira said: Even if you say that there is a requisite measure for the water to be poured for libation and no more than three log can be consecrated, and that Temple vessels consecrate only with intent, here there is a rabbinic decree lest they say the barrel was filled with water for sanctifying the hands and the feet of the priest, for which there is no measure. Then, when they see the water poured in the morning, they will draw the mistaken conclusion that remaining overnight does not disqualify liquids for use in libations. § The mishna continues: If the water in the barrel spilled or was exposed overnight, the water is disqualified. The Gemara asks: Why is the water disqualified? Let him pass it through a strainer, eliminating the poison. Let us say that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, as it was taught in a baraita: A vessel covered with a strainer is subject to the halakha of exposure if the vessel is left unsupervised. Rabbi Neḥemya said: When is this so? It is when the lower vessel, in which the liquid collects after passing through the strainer, is exposed. However, if the lower vessel is covered, even if the upper vessel is exposed, it is not subject to the halakha of exposure, because the poison of a snake is like a sponge in that it floats and stays in place. The Gemara answers: Even if you say it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, say that Rabbi Neḥemya said his opinion permitting strained water for a common person. However, did he actually say that strained water is permitted even to be sacrificed to God? Even if it is possible to render this water potable, it is certainly not of the select quality that would render it eligible for use in the Temple service. Isn’t Rabbi Neḥemya of the opinion that it is inappropriate to sacrifice on the altar any item that one would not give to someone of prominent stature? As it is stated: “And when you offer the blind for sacrifice, it is no evil; and when you offer the lame and sick, it is no evil. Present it now unto your governor; will he be pleased with you or will he accept your person, says the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 1:8). May we return to you Chapter: Lulav and Aravah MISHNA: The flute is played on the festival of Sukkot for five or six days. This is the flute of the Place of the Drawing of the Water, whose playing overrides neither Shabbat nor the Festival. Therefore, if the first Festival day occurred on Shabbat, they would play the flute for six days that year. However, if Shabbat coincided with one of the intermediate days of the Festival, they would play the flute for only five days.

If there is uncertainty whether or not a certain liquid has become ritually impure, it is presumed impure. It is an uncertainty with regard to Torah law, and the halakha is stringent in such cases. However, if the uncertainty is with regard to rendering other items impure, they are pure, as liquids transmit impurity by rabbinic law, and the halakha is lenient with regard to uncertainties of that kind. These are the statements of Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Elazar would say likewise in accordance with his statements. Rabbi Yehuda says: When there is uncertainty with regard to these liquids, the item is impure in all cases, even in terms of transmitting impurity to other items, as he maintains that the impurity of liquids is by Torah law. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: In cases of uncertainty as to whether or not these liquids transmitted impurity to foods, the ruling is that the foods are impure, in accordance with the principle that when there is uncertainty in cases of Torah law, the halakha is stringent. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon maintain that liquids transmit impurity to food by Torah law. However, when there is uncertainty as to whether or not these liquids transmitted impurity to vessels, the halakha is lenient, and they are pure. Even Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon concede that liquids transmit impurity to vessels only by rabbinic law. This baraita clearly indicates that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yosei indeed dispute whether or not the impurity of liquids applies by Torah law. With regard to the Tosefta, the Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Elazar maintain that liquids have ritual impurity by Torah law at all? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Elazar says: There is no impurity for liquids at all by Torah law. Know that this is so, as Yosei ben Yo’ezer of Tzereida testified about the grasshopper called eil kamtza that it is kosher and may be eaten; and he testified about liquids in the slaughterhouse in the Temple that they were ritually pure, as there was no decree of impurity issued with regard to them. The fact that these liquids are ritually pure indicates that by Torah law liquids cannot transmit impurity at all. Instead, that type of impurity is by rabbinic law, and rabbinic decrees of impurity were not in effect in the Temple. The Gemara adds: This works out well according to the opinion of Shmuel, who said that in this context the term ritually pure means that they do not transmit impurity to other items; however, they themselves can become impure. If that is Rabbi Elazar’s opinion, he indeed holds in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Meir that liquids transmit impurity by rabbinic law but themselves become impure by Torah law, as stated in the baraita above. However, according to Rav, who said that Yosei ben Yo’ezer holds that the liquids are actually ritually pure and they themselves cannot be rendered impure, what can be said? According to Rav, Rabbi Elazar maintains that there is no impurity at all by Torah law with regard to liquids. In what sense does he hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who said that liquids themselves can become impure by Torah law? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: When the baraita said that Rabbi Elazar agreed with Rabbi Meir, it was with regard to one of Rabbi Meir’s opinions. Rabbi Elazar agrees with Rabbi Meir that in a case where there is uncertainty with regard to rendering other items impure, they are pure, as liquids transmit impurity by rabbinic law. However, Rabbi Elazar maintains that the impurity of liquids themselves is also not by Torah law, and therefore in a case of uncertainty with regard to impurity of the liquids themselves, the ruling is that they are pure. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t the baraita saying: And Rabbi Elazar would say in accordance with Rabbi Meir’s statements, in the plural, indicating that the points of agreement are many? And furthermore, the baraita is teaching: Likewise. This term also indicates that Rabbi Elazar agrees completely with Rabbi Meir. Since no resolution was found for this contradiction, the Gemara concludes that it is indeed difficult to understand the baraita according to Rav. After citing the testimony of Yosei ben Yo’ezer and the associated amoraic dispute, the Gemara analyzes the matter itself. Rav said: Yosei ben Yo’ezer said that the liquids in the Temple are actually ritually pure and neither become impure nor transmit impurity. And Shmuel said that the liquids are ritually pure in the sense that they do not transmit impurity to other items; however, they themselves can become impure. The Gemara elaborates: Rav said that liquids are actually pure, as he maintains that the ritual impurity of liquids is by rabbinic law, and when the Sages issued this decree they did so only with regard to ordinary liquids. However, with regard to the liquids of the slaughterhouse in the Temple, they did not issue the decree. And the Gemara elaborates on the opinion of Shmuel: Shmuel said that the liquids are ritually pure in the sense that they do not transmit impurity to other items; however, they themselves can become impure, as Shmuel maintains that the ritual impurity of liquids themselves is by Torah law, whereas their capacity to transmit impurity to other objects is by rabbinic law. And when the Sages issued this decree, they did so only with regard to ordinary liquids. However, with regard to the liquids of the slaughterhouse in the Temple they did not issue the decree. And when Shmuel said that the Sages did not issue their decree with regard to the liquids of the slaughterhouse, he meant that they did not do so with regard to their capacity to transmit impurity to other items; however, as far as their own impurity is concerned, they become impure like other liquids. Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana said to his son: When you enter before Rav Pappa, raise the following contradiction before him: Did Shmuel actually say that the liquids are ritually pure in the sense that they do not transmit impurity to other items but they themselves are susceptible to impurity? Is there anything that by Torah law can itself become impure but does not transmit impurity to other items? Read here a verse that clearly states that any item that is itself impure, including liquids, transmits impurity to other items: “And the flesh that touches anything impure shall not be eaten; it shall be burnt in fire” (Leviticus 7:19). Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said: The legal status of liquids is just as it is in the case of fourth-degree ritual impurity in a consecrated item, with regard to which everyone agrees that it becomes impure but does not transmit impurity to other items. Rav Ashi strongly objects to this contention: How is it possible to compare these two cases? Fourth-degree impurity in a consecrated item is not called impure; it is disqualified. However, this liquid is called impure. Therefore, the two halakhot are not comparable. No resolution is found for this contradiction, and the Gemara concludes that it is indeed difficult. The Gemara cites several sources to decide the dispute between the tanna’im and between Rav and Shmuel with regard to whether or not the impurity of liquids is by Torah law. Come and hear: “And all drink that may be drunk in any vessel shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:34). This verse clearly indicates that liquids can become impure. The Gemara rejects this contention: What is the meaning of the term: Shall be impure, in this context? It means that the liquid renders produce susceptible to ritual impurity. The Gemara retorts: Does it in fact mean that the liquid renders produce susceptible to ritual impurity? That cannot be as you already learned that from the beginning of this verse: “From all food that may be eaten, on which water has come shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:34). The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, the second part of the verse is also necessary: One part of the verse, the latter part, is referring to water detached from its source, in vessels, and one part, the former part, is referring to water still attached to its source in the ground. And both derivations are necessary, as neither halakha could have been derived from the other. As, had the Torah taught us only about the halakha of water detached from its source, one might have thought that this water renders food susceptible to ritual impurity due to the fact that he ascribed significance to the water by drawing it from its source. However, with regard to water still attached to its source, say that it does not render food susceptible to ritual impurity. And had the Torah taught only the halakha of water still attached to its source, one might have thought that due to the fact that it stands in its place this water is significant; however, with regard to water detached from its source, say no, it does not render food susceptible to ritual impurity, as it is disconnected from its source. It was therefore necessary for the Torah to mention both cases. The Gemara cites another proof. Come and hear: “However, a spring or a cistern, a gathering of water shall be pure, but he who touches their carcass shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:36). It can be inferred from this verse that all water can be rendered impure, with the exception of spring water and water in a cistern, which are in the ground. The Gemara rejects this contention: What is the meaning of the phrase: “Shall be pure”? This phrase means that one who immerses in this water is purified from his ritual impurity, and does not refer to the impurity of liquids at all. The Gemara stated that both water detached from its source and water still attached to its source render food susceptible to ritual impurity. The Gemara asks: And does water detached from its source render food susceptible to contract impurity? Didn’t Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, say: With regard to the liquids of the slaughterhouse in the Temple, not only are they pure, but neither do they render produce susceptible to ritual impurity? Apparently, water detached from its source does not render food susceptible to impurity by Torah law. The fact that the Sages suspend the capacity of certain liquids to render produce susceptible to impurity indicates that the fact that water removed from its source renders food susceptible to impurity must be by rabbinic decree. Otherwise, that capability could not have been suspended in the Temple. The Gemara rejects this contention: Explain this statement as referring to blood. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina was not referring to all liquids in the Temple, but only to blood. As Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: From where is it derived with regard to blood of consecrated offerings that it does not render produce susceptible to impurity? As it is stated: “You shall surely not eat the blood; you shall pour it upon the earth like water” (Deuteronomy 12:16). The Sages derived from this verse: Blood that is poured like water, i.e., blood from a non-sacred domesticated animal that pours out when it is slaughtered and is not received in a vessel as sacrificial blood assumes the legal status of water and renders produce susceptible to ritual impurity. Conversely, blood that is not poured out like water but is received in a vessel to be sprinkled on the altar does not render produce susceptible to contract impurity. Rav Shmuel bar Ami strongly objects to this: There is the blood squeezed from an animal after slaughter once the initial spurt of blood has concluded, which is poured like water, as it is unfit for sprinkling upon the altar. And nevertheless, this blood does not render produce susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Leave aside the blood squeezed after the initial spurt, which is an exceptional case, as even from non-sacred animals it does not render produce susceptible to ritual impurity either. With regard to the halakha that blood renders produce susceptible to ritual impurity, the legal status of blood squeezed after the initial spurt is not that of blood at all. The Gemara comments: Rav Shmuel bar Ami accepted this statement from Rabbi Zeira and cited a verse that supports it. As the Merciful One states: “Only be strong not to eat the blood; for the blood is the soul” (Deuteronomy 12:23). This verse indicates: Blood with regard to which the soul leaves the body when it is spilled is called blood; however, blood with regard to which the soul does not leave the body when it is spilled, but which is squeezed out afterward, is not called blood. The Gemara cites an additional proof that the impurity of liquids is by Torah law. Come and hear: With regard to blood that became ritually impure, and a priest sprinkled it on the altar, the following distinction applies: If he did so unwittingly, the offering is accepted. If he sprinkled the blood intentionally, the offering is not accepted. Apparently, blood becomes ritually impure by Torah law, even if it does not transmit impurity to other items. The Gemara rejects this contention: This impurity is by rabbinic law, and this ruling is not in accordance with Rav’s explanation of the opinion of Rabbi Yosei ben Yo’ezer of Tzereida, as he maintains that sacrificial blood does not become impure at all. The Gemara cites a proof from another mishna. Come and hear: For what does the frontplate of the High Priest atone and thereby allow the blood of the offering to be sprinkled? It atones for the blood, and for the meat, and for the fat that became impure, whether one caused it to become impure unwittingly or intentionally, whether due to circumstances beyond his control or willfully, and whether it is the offering of an individual or that of a community. Apparently, the blood of an offering can become impure. The Gemara rejects this proof: The mishna is referring to blood that is impure by rabbinic law, and here too, it is not in accordance with the opinion of Yosei ben Yo’ezer of Tzereida, who says that consecrated blood does not become impure at all. The Gemara cites an additional proof: Come and hear another verse written about the frontplate: “And it shall be upon Aaron’s forehead, and Aaron shall bear the sin committed with the consecrated objects, which the children of Israel shall hallow, even all their sacred gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before God” (Exodus 28:38). And the Sages expounded: Which sin does it bear? If you say it atones for the sin of piggul, an offering disqualified by the intention to sacrifice or eat the offering after the permitted time, it is already stated: “And if it is eaten at all on the third day, it is piggul; it shall not be accepted” (Leviticus 19:7). If you say it atones for notar, i.e., meat of an offering left after the time that one was permitted to eat it, it is already stated: “And if any of the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace-offerings is eaten on the third day, it shall not be accepted, neither shall it be credited to he who offered it” (Leviticus 7:18). Evidently, the frontplate bears only the sin of impurity in the offering of an individual, as in some circumstances, impurity was exempted from its general prohibition on behalf of the community. It was permitted to sacrifice communal offerings in the Temple in a state of impurity. What, does this not apply to impure blood as well? Apparently, blood can also become impure. Rav Pappa said: No, the reference is not to impure blood but to the impurity of handfuls of flour separated by the priest from a meal-offering. The handful of flour renders the meal-offering permitted to be eaten by the priests, parallel to the blood of an animal offering. The Gemara cites an additional proof. Come and hear that which was said to the prophet Haggai: “Thus said the Lord of Hosts: Ask now the priests with regard to the Torah, saying: If a person bears hallowed flesh in the corner of his garment, and with his garment he touches bread, or stew, or wine, or oil, or any food, shall it be sacred? And the priests answered and said: No” (Haggai 2:11–12). This question is asked with regard to the flesh of a creeping animal and whether or not the substances that come into contact with it become impure.

MISHNA: In the case of three brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters and one who was married to an unrelated woman, the following occurred: The husband of one of the sisters died childless, and the brother who was married to the unrelated woman married, i.e., performed lev irate marriage with, the deceased brother’s wife and later died himself, childless. In this situation, both women happen for levirate marriage before the other, remaining, brother. The first woman is dismissed due to the prohibition proscribing the sister of one’s wife, as she is the sister of this brother’s wife, and the second woman is dismissed due to her status as the first woman’s rival wife. Following the first levirate marriage, this second woman became the rival wife of the sister, and is therefore exempt from levirate marriage as well. If, however, the brother married to the unrelated woman performed only levirate betrothal, but had not yet consummated the levirate marriage with the sister, and he died, the unrelated woman, whose halakhic status with regard to yibbum is similar to that of a sister’s rival wife, must perform ḥalitza and may not enter into levirate marriage. GEMARA: The Gemara deduces the following halakha from the second clause of the mishna: The reason that the mishna requires ḥalitza is specifically because he, the brother who was married to the unrelated woman, performed levirate betrothal with the sister. Consequently, had he not performed levirate betrothal with her, the unrelated woman would be permitted to enter into levirate marriage as well. This is true despite the fact that the levirate bond could potentially render her the rival wife of his wife’s sister. Rav Naḥman said: That is to say, the levirate bond is not substantial; the woman requiring levirate marriage is not considered married to the yavam. And this is true even if the levirate bond was with a single brother, as this widowed sister happened for levirate marriage only before the brother who was married to the unrelated woman; her levirate bond was with him alone. mishna In the case of three brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters and one who was married to an unrelated woman, the following occurred: He who was married to the unrelated woman died, and one of the husbands of the sisters married his wife, and then died childless as well. The first woman, i.e., the sister who was originally married to the brother who performed levirate marriage, is dismissed and is exempt from levirate marriage due to her status as the sister of his wife. And the second woman, i.e., the unrelated woman who had entered into levirate marriage, is dismissed as her rival wife. If, however, he performed levirate betrothal with the unrelated woman, and then died, then this unrelated woman must perform ḥalitza and may not enter into levirate marriage, as levirate betrothal rendered her status with regard to yibbum as similar to the rival wife of his wife’s sister. gemara The Gemara asks: Why do I need this mishna as well? This principle is identical to the principle behind the ruling in the previous mishna, and therefore this ruling can easily be deduced from the previous ruling. Now, just as there, when his wife’s sister became rival wife of the unrelated woman who was already the brother’s wife, you say that the unrelated woman is forbidden despite the fact that the forbidden relative joined later, here, where the unrelated woman became the rival wife of his wife’s sister afterward, is it not all the more so clear that she is exempt as a rival wife? The Gemara answers: This mishna was unnecessary, and this is how the duplication occurred: The tanna taught this mishna at first, and with regard to that previous case saw it fitting to render her permitted, and he permitted her to the brother, for he held that if the forbidden relative joined the man’s household later, then she would not render the first wife prohibited as the rival wife of a forbidden relative. And then the tanna subsequently retracted and saw it fitting to render the woman forbidden. He decided that this woman should be considered the rival wife of a forbidden relative as well, and therefore rendered her forbidden to the brother. And since that case was novel, it was beloved to him and he taught it earlier. In truth, it would have now been possible to eliminate the present mishna, for there was no longer any novelty in it; its ruling could be derived by an a fortiori argument from the previous ruling. However, a mishna does not move from its place. Since this version of the mishna had already been fixed, it was deemed inappropriate to remove it completely, and it remained in place despite the fact that it was no longer necessary. MISHNA: In the case of three brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters and one who was married to an unrelated woman, the following occurred: One of the husbands of the sisters died, and he who was married to the unrelated woman married the deceased husband’s wife, and then the wife of the second brother, the other one of the sisters, died. Afterward, the brother who was married to the unrelated woman died, leaving two women for levirate marriage before the remaining brother: The unrelated woman and the woman who was previously prohibited as the sister of his deceased wife. In this case, the sister is forbidden to him forever. She is not forbidden due to her status as his wife’s sister, as his wife already died and one’s wife’s sister is permitted after the wife’s death. However, since she was already forbidden to him at one time, she is forbidden to him forever. When she first happened before the brothers for levirate marriage, before the third brother married her, she was forbidden to the second brother as his wife’s sister. Therefore, she is forbidden to him forever. In addition, she exempts her rival wife, the unrelated woman, from levirate marriage. GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said that Rav said a principle on this matter: Any yevama to whom the verse “Her brother-in-law will have intercourse with her” (Deuteronomy 25:5) cannot be applied at the time that she happens before him for levirate marriage because she was forbidden to him at that moment, is then forever considered to be like the wife of a brother with whom she has children, and she is forbidden to him. The Gemara asks: What is Rav teaching us with this statement? We already learned this in the mishna: She is forbidden to him forever, since she was forbidden to him at one time. The Gemara answers: This was necessary lest you say that this ruling applies only in cases where she was not eligible at all during the first time that she happened before the brothers for levirate marriage. Such is the case in the mishna, when she was forbidden to the yavam as his wife’s sister the entire time that she was eligible for levirate marriage. Even though his wife died after the other yavam married this woman, because she was forbidden to him that entire time, she is forbidden to him forever. But in cases where she was eligible at some point during the first time she happened before the brothers for levirate marriage, such as in the scenario where the brother’s wife died prior to the time when his other brother married her, one could say that she would be permitted. In that case, since the prohibition had in the meantime been canceled and she was indeed rendered eligible for levirate marriage with him during the period of the first time she happened before him, one might think that she would now be permitted. It is for this reason that Rav teaches us that even in this scenario she would be forbidden to him forever. The Gemara raises an objection: We learned this as well, as a later mishna (32a) states: In the case of two brothers who were married to two sisters, if one of them, i.e., one of the brothers, died and afterward the wife of the second brother died, then she, the surviving wife, is forbidden to him, the surviving brother, forever, since she was forbidden to him during the period she happened before him at one time. The Gemara answers: One cannot learn the halakhic principle from that case. Lest you say that there she is forbidden forever because of the following argument: When she was forbidden to the brother, she was precluded from entering this household completely, i.e., from the entire obligation of levirate marriage. She received total exemption from the mitzva of levirate marriage because this obligation applied only to the one remaining brother, and she was forbidden to him at the time that she happened before him for levirate marriage. But here, however, in the case Rav is referring to, where she was not completely precluded from entering this household because she still required levirate marriage with another brother, one could say: Since she is eligible and permitted to this brother, who was married to the unrelated woman, she is eligible for this second brother following the death of his wife as well, in other words, she was not rendered completely exempt from the obligation of levirate marriage. Lest one make this argument, Rav teaches us that under any circumstances she who was forbidden at one time is forbidden forever. MISHNA: In the case of three brothers, two of whom were married to two sisters and one who was married to an unrelated woman, the following occurred: Shimon, the husband of one of the sisters, divorced his wife, and then Levi, who was married to the unrelated woman, died, and Shimon, the man who divorced his wife, married, i.e., performed levirate marriage with, her, i.e., this unrelated woman. And then Shimon himself later died, so that the unrelated woman happened for levirate marriage before Reuven, the third brother, who is married to the second sister. In this scenario, Reuven is allowed to consummate the levirate marriage with the unrelated woman. This is the case that was referred to when they said: And with regard to all those fifteen forbidden relatives who died or were divorced, their rival wives are permitted to enter into levirate marriage. This is because at the time that they happened before the yavam for levirate marriage they were no longer the rival wives of a forbidden relative. GEMARA: The Gemara deduces from here that the reason for this halakha is specifically that Shimon divorced his wife and after that Levi died and Shimon married the unrelated woman. But if Levi had died first, and later Shimon divorced his wife, then the unrelated woman would be forbidden to Reuven due to the levirate bond that existed between her and Shimon prior to the latter’s divorce. She would be considered the rival wife of the divorced woman who is the sister of Reuven’s wife. Rav Ashi said: That is to say, the levirate bond is substantial, even with two brothers. Although the unrelated woman required levirate marriage with two brothers, the levirate bond is substantial enough to create a relationship between the unrelated woman and Shimon such that the unrelated woman is considered the rival wife of the divorced woman, i.e., the sister of Reuven’s wife. The Gemara asks: And according to Rav Ashi, that which Rav Naḥman said is difficult, as Rav Naḥman deduced from the earlier mishna that the levirate bond is not substantial even in the case of a single brother. The Gemara answers: Rav Ashi could have said to you: Rav Naḥman’s deduction in the first mishna was not logically necessary. With regard to that mishna, one could have said that when the mishna requires ḥalitza in the case of levirate betrothal, the same is true even in the case where he who was married to the unrelated woman did not perform levirate betrothal with her. In that case as well, the unrelated woman must perform ḥalitza and may not enter into levirate marriage since she was the rival wife of his wife’s sister by levirate bond. And the reason that it teaches the ruling in the case of levirate betrothal was not in order to inform us that she was forbidden due to levirate betrothal, but rather to exclude the statement of Beit Shammai, who say that through the act of levirate betrothal one acquires the yevama as a full-fledged acquisition. According to that opinion, the unrelated woman does not even require ḥalitza, since she is considered to be a rival wife of a forbidden relative. This mishna teaches us that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai. The Gemara raises a question from the opposite perspective: And according to Rav Naḥman, who deduced from the earlier mishna that the levirate bond is not substantial, the deduction of Rav Ashi that the levirate bond is substantial is difficult. And if you would try to resolve this in a similar manner and say: With regard to the ruling in the present mishna, which states that the sister’s rival wife, i.e., the unrelated woman, is permitted, the same is true even if Levi had died and then afterward the brother married to the other sister divorced his wife, there is a difficulty. If that is the case, then what does the phrase this is, cited at the end of the mishna, come to exclude? If we follow this explanation then the same ruling would hold true in all cases. The Gemara responds: It excludes the case where Shimon first married the unrelated woman and only afterward divorced the sister, as in such circumstances the unrelated woman is most certainly a rival wife of Reuven’s wife’s sister and is therefore not permitted. The Gemara states: This works out well if he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yirmeya, who said with regard to a seeming contradiction between this mishna and an earlier mishna (13a): The mishnayot are disjointed; he who taught this mishna did not teach that mishna. The earlier mishna established the principle that if a man was married to two women, one of whom was a forbidden relative, and he divorced the forbidden relative before he died, then the rival wife is no longer prohibited to the brothers. This dispute is based upon the following: This tanna from the earlier mishna holds that death determines her status when she happens before the brothers, i.e., the crucial moment for determining whether the prohibition relating to rival wives applies is the moment at which the brother dies. In other words, whether the yevama is permitted to the yavam is determined by the status of the yevama at that given moment. Therefore, in the case where he had married a forbidden relative and later divorced her, the rival wife would be permitted. And this tanna of our present mishna holds that the original marriage determines her status when she happens before the brothers. If, at the time the woman was married to the deceased brother she was forbidden as a close relative, and her rival wife was likewise forbidden as the rival wife of a forbidden relative, then even though the status of the relative had changed at the time of the death of the brother, both she and her rival wife remain forbidden. According to this opinion, it is indeed possible to state that the phrase this is comes to exclude the case where he married one woman and ultimately divorced the other. According to this mishna, in that case, the rival wives would be prohibited. However, if he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rava, who said: Actually, understand this to be the opinion of a single tanna, and he teaches the mishna employing the style: This, and it is unnecessary to say that, a difficulty remains. According to Rava, both mishnayot maintain the position that in the case where the yavam married one woman and ultimately divorced the other, the rival wife would be permitted. If that is the case, what does the phrase this is come to exclude? In what case would the rival wife be prohibited to the yavam? The Gemara responds: Perforce Rav Naḥman holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yirmeya with regard to his interpretation of the mishnayot. The Gemara raises a question from a different perspective: And according to Rava, who maintains that in both cases the rival wife is permitted, this works out well if he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ashi that the levirate bond is substantial. In that case the phrase this is comes to exclude the case where he died without divorcing his wife. In this case the rival wife is forbidden because the entire time she was the rival wife of a forbidden relative by levirate bond. If, however, he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rav Naḥman in this matter, what does the phrase this is come to exclude? The Gemara answers: Perforce Rava holds in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ashi. Accordingly, with regard to this halakha there is a connection between the various opinions as to how to interpret the mishnayot and the dispute. MISHNA: And if any of these fifteen women who are prohibited as forbidden relatives had undergone a betrothal or divorce whose status is uncertain with the deceased brother, then those women who were their rival wives must perform ḥalitza and may not enter into levirate marriage since they are possibly the rival wives of forbidden relatives. The mishna elaborates: How could there be a situation of uncertainty with regard to betrothal? If in the public domain he threw her an item for the purpose of betrothal and there were eight cubits between them, and the item was possibly closer to him and did not enter into her domain, and possibly closer to her, i.e., within four cubits of her, whereby she could acquire the object, this is a case of uncertainty with regard to betrothal. Uncertainty with regard to divorce occurs when, for instance, he wrote a bill of divorce in his handwriting but there are no signatures of witnesses on the document, or there are the signatures of witnesses on the document but there is no date written in it, or the date is written in it but there is only the signature of a single witness. Since there is doubt as to whether these three kinds of bills of divorce are valid, a woman who was divorced through them is only possibly divorced, and so this case is called uncertainty with regard to divorce. GEMARA: The Gemara remarks: But yet when discussing divorce, it does not teach the case where it is uncertain if the bill of divorce is closer to him, and uncertain if it is closer to her. It would have been appropriate to describe this case, as it parallels the case involving the object of betrothal. He could have tossed it in such a way that it was not clear to whom the bill was closer. The Gemara asks: What is the reason the mishna did not present this situation as well? Rabba said: When this type of uncertainty exists, the performance of ḥalitza is not mandatory, as this woman, the rival wife, has the presumptive status of being permitted to marry a man from the general public. At the time of her marriage she was rendered a rival wife of a forbidden relative. And due to an uncertainty alone would you render her forbidden to the general public until she performs ḥalitza, simply because it is unclear to us whether or not the forbidden relative had indeed been divorced? Do not render her forbidden due to an uncertainty. This is not, however, the case with the various bills of divorce mentioned in the mishna, for they are all certainly considered effective bills of divorce, even if the circumstances involved raise some questions or doubts. Abaye said to him: If that is so, let us say in the case of betrothal as well that this woman, the rival wife, has the presumptive status of being permitted to the yavam before he betrothed the forbidden relative, and due to the uncertainty whether she is the rival wife of a forbidden relative would you come and render her forbidden? Do not render her forbidden due to an uncertainty. Consequently, you should permit her to enter into levirate marriage. The Gemara explains: There, with regard to betrothal, the halakha follows the stringent ruling, because the rival wife is certainly his wife and requires levirate marriage. As there is uncertainty with regard to the betrothal with the forbidden relative, the ruling is stringent; she may not enter into levirate marriage and must only perform ḥalitza. The Gemara objects: Yet this is a stringency that might bring about a leniency in another scenario. How so? Sometimes that same man who betrothed the forbidden relative might go and betroth her sister with a betrothal whose status is certain. If one says that due to a stringency the rival wife may not enter into levirate marriage due to her possible status as the rival wife of a forbidden relative, people might come to assume that the betrothal with the forbidden relative was a valid betrothal, and that the subsequent betrothal with her sister was not valid, since she is his wife’s sister. This would be assumed because they would not know that the status of the first betrothal was itself uncertain and that only due to a stringent ruling is the rival wife not allowed to enter into levirate marriage. In fact, the status of the betrothal with the sister of the forbidden relative is also uncertain. As a result of this ruling, however, people might be led to think that a man’s wife, i.e., the sister of the forbidden relative, is in fact permitted. Alternatively, sometimes another man might come and betroth the forbidden relative herself with a betrothal whose status is certain, and since the Master rendered it prohibited for the rival wife to enter into levirate marriage, people would say that the betrothal of the first man, i.e., the deceased brother, was a fully effective betrothal, and that the betrothal of the latter man was not a valid betrothal. If she was married to the first man, then she is forbidden to the second as the man’s wife, and betrothal cannot take effect with her. However, since the status of her betrothal to the first man was uncertain, then she is also considered possibly betrothed to the second man and would require a divorce from him as well. As a result, one can find a situation that would lead people to think that a man’s wife is in fact permitted.

(27) The lifebreath of man is the lamp of the LORD Revealing all his inmost parts.