Rujukan Talmud untuk Imamat 21:21: Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot & Jerusalem Talmud Sotah

MISHNAH: They came and told her, your son died and after that your husband died, and she was married in levirate. After that, they said to her, the sequence was inverted¹¹⁵The husband had a child at the moment of his death and therefore the levir is forbidden to the widow by an incest prohibition (Lev. 18:16) punishable by divine extirpation (Lev. 21:21), which makes all children of this union bastards, whether conceived before or after the husband’s death.. Then she must leave and the first⁹⁵Everybody agrees that a child conceived while the first husband was still alive is a bastard. and the last⁹⁶Only R. Aqiba holds that a child from a widow remarried without levirate or ḥalīṣah is a bastard. children are bastards.

Would missing limbs disable it? That would not be even like sacrifices of the descendants of Noah¹⁰⁸All of mankind, who have to follow the “natural law” given to Noah. It is accepted both in the Yerushalmi (also Pesaḥim 9:4 36d line 71, Megillah1:13 72b line 39) and in the Babli (Avodah zarah 5b, 51a, Zebaḥim 116a, Temurah 7a) that a Gentile’s sacrifice on his own altar is accepted by Heaven if only the animal is of the pure kinds and not missing anything observable from the outside. Only in the Temple are Gentile sacrifices subject to the rules of Lev. 21:21–25. The same verse is quoted in the Babli as in the Yerushalmi.! Did not Rebbi Yasa say that Rebbi Eleazar explained to the colleagues: “From all living, from all flesh¹⁰⁹Gen. 6:19. The interpretation of the verse is: From all living creatures, each one with his entire flesh, i. e., a whole body.,” that they should be complete in their limbs? There, some were for the altar¹¹⁰Since Noaḥ used some of the animals for elevation sacrifices (Gen. 8:20) it is inferred that all pure animals entering his ark were acceptable sacrifices., but here¹¹¹The calf is buried at the place it is killed., the altar has no part. Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: Since you say, purgation is written there as for sacrifices¹¹²Deut. 21:8; the purpoise of the entire ceremony is to purge the Land from the guilt of innocent blood. The goal of purgation is spelled out for all purification and reparation offerings in Lev. 4 ff., it is as if some of it were for the altar. Does ṭerefa¹¹³Here, the word is used in its original meaning (Ex. 22:30) “Flesh torn on the field you shall not eat,” meaning that a carcass torn by a predator is forbidden as food. From this root, the technical term ṭerefa means that any life-threatening injury forbids the afflicted animal as food. There is no difference whether the injury is caused by outside action or sickness. For example, tuberculous lesions of the lung are a main source of ṭerefa. Obviously there are two kinds of ṭerefa: those that can be observed by outward inspection and those which can only be noted when the animal is cut up after slaughter. Since all animals offered on the altar (except birds) must be offered in pieces, it is clear that all kinds of ṭerefa are forbidden for the altar. But in the case of the calf, only what is verifiable on the living animal is intended. The position of the Babli, Ḥulin 11a, is that most animals do not have life-threatening internal injuries and, therefore, one may assume that a healthy-looking calf is healthy. (The list of what is considered life-threatening is in Mishnah Ḥulin 3:1,3). disable it? Since you say, it is as if some of it were for the altar, in that it should be clear to you that ṭerefa disables it. If its foot was undeveloped, as a donkey’s foot¹¹⁴The calf does not have split hooves., how do you treat that? If you treat it as if missing a limb, can it be enabled¹¹⁵It would seem natural to emend the text by switching the places of “enabled” and “disabled” and consider the text as declarative sentences. That is what all commentators and editors do but it is unacceptable since even the Genizah ms., which derives from an archetype different from the Leiden and Rome mss., does have “enabled” and “disabled” in the positions indicated. It seems necessary to treat the sentences as rhetorical questions.? If you treat it as a bodily defect, can it be disabled¹¹⁶Since it was slated in the Mishnah that bodily defects do not disable.? Does its blood prepare¹¹⁷If some of the killed calf’s blood comes in touch with fresh food, does it make that food susceptible to ritual impurity. For preparation for impurity, cf. Demay 2, Note 141, Terumot 1, Note 9, Mishnah Makhširin 6:4.? Since Rebbi Ḥiyya stated that its blood is impure¹¹⁸Since any impure fluid is impure at least in the first degree, it transmits its impurity and, therefore, does prepare for impurity., its blood prepares.