Talmud su Salmi 125:78

Rebbi Jeremiah and Rebbi Ammi asked¹⁶³The text is impossible as it stands. It must have been either “R. Jeremiah (fourth generation) said that R. Immi (second generation) asked” or “R. Yasa and R. Immi asked”. The sequel would support both versions.: What is the difference between her¹⁶⁴The woman whose hymen was impaired by a mechanical accident, who is declared eligible to marry a High Priest. and one who had sex with a finger¹⁶⁵Either she or another person perforated her hymen with his finger in sexual activity without penetration by a penis.? Is the one who had sex with a finger not disabled for priesthood¹⁶⁶The high priesthood. Only the High Priest is required to marry a virgin.? Rebbi Haggai said, explain it that there was no penetration¹⁶⁷If the girl had sexual experience without any penetration, she will qualify for a virgin’s ketubah.. Rebbi Haggai wanted to change his mind; Rebbi Abba said to him, do not change your mind. Why did Rebbi Haggai want to change his mind? Because of the verse¹⁶⁸Lev. 21:13, speaking of the high priest. The complicated expression אִשָּׁהבִבְתוּלֶיהָ “a woman in her virginities” instead of simpy בְּתוּלָה “a virgin” calls for an explanation.: “But he shall marry a wife in her virginities,” only if she is a virgin in both respects¹⁶⁹She must be a virgin without any sexual experience; cf. Babli Yebamot 59a.. Similarly, “a virgin and no man had known her.¹⁷⁰Gen. 24:16; here again the double expression calls for an explanation. In Gen.rabba 60(5), the explanation is ascribed to R. Simeon ben Laqish.” A virgin, with respect to penetration. No man had known her, without penetration. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar said, [no man] ever had wanted to touch her hand, for it was said¹⁷¹Ps. 125:3. In Gen.rabba 60(5), this explanation is ascribed to R. Joḥanan.: “The staff of evil shall not rest on the just’s lot.” Why did Rebbi Haggai want to change his mind? He could explain it by “touching”. Why does (Rav Yosef) [Rebbi Yasa]¹⁷²Since the author here cannot be the fourth generation Babylonian Rav Joseph (bar Ḥiyya), most likely he is Rebbi Yasa (cf. Note 163). not explain it by “touching”? Rebbi Mana said, because it presented a problem for him: Rebbi Yasa asked: What is the legal status of “touching”¹⁷³The touching of the genitals of two persons, whether there was penetration or emission or not. “Touching” is the legal definition of the sex act both for marriage (cf. Yebamot4:2, Note 59; Mishnah 6:1) and for criminal law (Mishnah Keritut 2:4; cf. Soṭah 1:2, Notes 97,98). The same question is asked in Qiddušin 1:1 (59c 1. 14). with a male? “Touching” with an animal? When Rebbi Jeremiah heard that of Rebbi Haggai, he said, that was not Rebbi Ammi’s problem¹⁷⁴That solution is too obvious not to have occured to R. Ammi, and it does not address his question which asks for the difference between a hymen split by mechanical means or by the girl’s own finger. In both cases, no male was involved..