וּֽבְשִׁלְיָתָ֞הּ הַיּוֹצֵ֣ת ׀ מִבֵּ֣ין רַגְלֶ֗יהָ וּבְבָנֶ֙יהָ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר תֵּלֵ֔ד כִּֽי־תֹאכְלֵ֥ם בְּחֹֽסֶר־כֹּ֖ל בַּסָּ֑תֶר בְּמָצוֹר֙ וּבְמָצ֔וֹק אֲשֶׁ֨ר יָצִ֥יק לְךָ֛ אֹיִבְךָ֖ בִּשְׁעָרֶֽיךָ׃
jusqu’au nouveau-né sorti de ses flancs, jusqu’aux jeunes enfants dont elle est la mère, car, dénuée de tout, elle se cachera pour les dévorer! Telle sera la détresse où te réduira ton ennemi, t’assiégeant dans tes murs.
Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot
So is the Mishnah: “If he ties41The shoelaces. lower than the knee, it is valid, above the knee it is invalid.” It is written: “Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and feet from it42Ex. 30:19..” It was stated about this: The hand up to the wrist, the foot up to the calf; and here you say so43The “foot” of the priests refers only to the calf (in another interpretation to the shinbone) but not to the knee, but for the widow it extends up to the knee!? There is a difference, since it is written “from above his foot”. In that case, even higher than the knee should be valid! There is a difference, since it is written “from above his foot”, and not from higher than above his foot44The Babli agrees, 103a.. Cahana objected: Is it not written, “and the afterbirth which comes out from between her feet45Deut. 28:57. Usually, one translates “between her legs”; then one also should translate that the widow has to remove the levir’s shoe “from his leg” and shoelaces bound above the knee should be permissible. The same question is quoted in the Babli, 103a.;” does it come out from between her feet? It looks as if it was between her feet; as we have stated there: “The water pit was between the Temple hall and the alter drawn towards the South.46Mishnah Middot 3:6. It was between the Southern edge of the hall and the altar.” Was it put between the hall and the altar? Only it looked as if between hall and altar.