Let's finish Mishnayos in memory of those who were murdered in Israel.
Pledge Mishnayos
Mishnah.org Logo

Mishnayos Yevamos Perek 7 Mishnah 3

יבמות פרק ז׳ משנה ג׳


With regard to an Israelite woman who married a priest and he died and left her pregnant, her slaves of guaranteed investment may not partake of teruma during her pregnancy, due to the share of the fetus, as an inheritor of his father, in the ownership of the slaves. In the opposite case, where the Israelite husband of a priest’s daughter died and left her pregnant, the fetus disqualifies her from partaking of teruma. However, in the current case, the fetus does not enable its mother or the slaves to partake of teruma, despite the fact that it is the child of a priest. This is the statement of Rabbi Yosei. The Rabbis said to him: Since you testified before us about the case of an Israelite woman who was married to a priest, in the case of the daughter of a priest who was married to a priest and he died and left her pregnant, her slaves should not partake of teruma either, due to the fetus’s share. The same halakha should apply whether the woman is an Israelite or the daughter of a priest.

בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנִּסֵּת לְכֹהֵן, וּמֵת, וְהִנִּיחָהּ מְעֻבֶּרֶת, לֹא יֹאכְלוּ עֲבָדֶיהָ בַּתְּרוּמָה, מִפְּנֵי חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל עֻבָּר, שֶׁהָעֻבָּר פּוֹסֵל וְאֵינוֹ מַאֲכִיל, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מֵאַחַר שֶׁהֵעַדְתָּ לָנוּ עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְכֹהֵן, אַף בַּת כֹּהֵן לְכֹהֵן, וּמֵת, וְהִנִּיחָהּ מְעֻבֶּרֶת, לֹא יֹאכְלוּ עֲבָדֶיהָ בַתְּרוּמָה, מִפְּנֵי חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל עֻבָּר:


והניחה מעוברת – even though she has children from him and she consumes Terumah, the slaves of her mort-main do not eat Terumah because they belong to the heirs, and the fetus has a portion in them and the fetus does not have the ability to provide them with Terumah either because he holds that a fetus in a foreign womb (of a non-Kohen), he is a foreigner or because he holds that someone born can feed; someone who is not born cannot feed, as it is written (Leviticus 22:11): “and those that are born into his household may eat [of his food],” and we call him they who will feed.

שהעובר פוסל – if the daughter of a Kohen is married to an Israelite [male], and she was left pregnant (because her husband died), and she has no other son, it disqualifies her from returning to her father’s home.

ואינו מאכיל – if she was the daughter of an Israelite married to a Kohen and she was left pregnant (because her husband died), the fetus does not have the strength to sustain her and the same law applies to his slaves.

אף בת כהן לכהן כו' – since you said that he is not born, he does not sustain, even the daughter of a Kohen who is married to a Kohen, the slaves don’t consume Terumah because of the fetus’ portion because they are his slaves and they don’t consume, other than for him, and he lacks the strength to sustain them, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yosi.

והניחה מעוברת. אע״פ שיש לה בנים ממנו והיא אוכלת בתרומה, לא יאכלו עבדי צאן ברזל בתרומה, לפי שהן של יורשין ויש לעובר חלק בהן ואין לעובר כח להאכילם בתרומה, אי משום דקסבר עובר במעי זרה זר הוא, אי משום דקסבר ילוד מאכיל, שאינו ילוד אינו מאכיל, דכתיב (ויקרא כ״ב:י״א) ויליד ביתו הם יאכלו וקרי ביה הם יאכילו:

שהעובר פוסל. אם בת כהן לישראל היא והניחה מעוברת ואין לה בן אחר פוסלה מלשוב לבית אביה:

ואינו מאכיל. שאם היתה בת ישראל לכהן והניחה מעוברת אין בעובר כח להאכילה, והוא הדין לעבדיו:

אף בת כהן לכהן כו׳ כיון דאמרת שאינו ילוד אינו מאכיל, אף בת כהן לכהן אין העבדים אוכלים בתרומה מפני חלקו של עובר, שהרי עבדיו הן ואינן אוכלין אלא בשבילו והוא אין בו כח להאכיל. ואין הלכה כר׳ יוסי: