If a woman was married twice to two different men, each for ten years, and did not bear children, she should not marry a third (if he does not have children), as she is presumed to not be able to bear children. And if she does, he can divorce her without having to give her the money from her ketuba. If she married a third and did not have children, can the first two husbands claim that they want the ketuba money back – is it clear now that it was she who couldn’t bear children and not the first husbands? No, as one can always claim that she got weaker now and previously was able to conceive. If she married a fourth and gave birth to children, can she claim her ketuba money from the third? No, because if she makes an issue, the third can claim they were never divorced as he divorced her under false pretenses (he thought she could not conceive) and that would make her child a mamzer. Rav Papa suggests that the court should intervene and cancel the previous get, however, they explain that perhaps she was cured in the meantime but actually couldn’t conceive at the time she was married. If the wife claims the husband is infertile and the husband claims the wife is infertile, she is believed – why? If the husband wishes to marry another wife to prove that he is not the one who is infertile, can he do that? And if so, if he proves her wrong, he can then divorce her without having to pay the ketuba money. Other cases of opposite or different claims made by each side (husband and wife) are brought – who is believed and why? There is a tannaitic debate about whether or not a woman is obligated to have children. What is the source for each approach? As one of the sources was brought by Rabbi Elazar b’Rabbi Shimon, other statements of his on other topics are brought as well regarding the mitzva of reproaching one who won’t accept it and lying for the sake of keeping peace. Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi disagreed regarding which opinion to hold by regarding women and the mitzva to have children. They try to determine who held which opinion. They are able to prove it from one story, but they attempt to bring a second proof, but it is rejected. Relating to the rejection of the second proof, several stories are brought regarding women who want to divorce their husbands on grounds that they were unable to conceive with that husband, and in each case the woman makes a claim that she needs children, despite the fact that she has no obligation. Her claim is accepted and the court issues a ruling to force the husband to divorce her. A final story is told of the wife of Rabbi Chiya who struggled in labor with twins and disguised herself before her husband to ask if she was obligated to have children as she did not want to go through labor again. When he told her she was not obligated, she drank a substance that made her infertile. When he heard, he was disappointed that she wasn’t able to bring him more children.
Yevamot 65
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Yevamot 65
קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת, עַד שֶׁתִּקְבָּעֶנָּה שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים. וְאֵין מִטַּהֶרֶת מִן הַוֶּסֶת, עַד שֶׁתֵּעָקֵר מִמֶּנָּה שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים. וְשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד — דִּתְנַן: אֵין הַשּׁוֹר נַעֲשֶׂה מוּעָד, עַד שֶׁיָּעִידוּ בּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה פְּעָמִים.
establish a set pattern of menstrual bleeding for herself, so that it can be assumed that she will start bleeding at a particular time, until she has established it three times. Similarly, she is not purified from her set pattern until it is uprooted from her three times, i.e., until she did not experience menstrual bleeding at the expected time according to her pattern on three occasions. And the case of a forewarned ox is as we learned in a mishna (Bava Kamma 23b): An ox does not become forewarned until witnesses testify that it has gored three times. Consequently, in the cases of set patterns and a forewarned ox, a legal presumption is created only after three occurrences, in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: נִיסֵּת לָרִאשׁוֹן וְלֹא הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, לַשֵּׁנִי וְלֹא הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, לַשְּׁלִישִׁי לֹא תִּנָּשֵׂא אֶלָּא לְמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים. נִישֵּׂאת לְמִי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָּנִים — תֵּצֵא בְּלֹא כְּתוּבָּה.
The Sages taught: If a woman was married to her first husband and she did not have children, and then she was married to her second husband and she did not have children, she may not get married to a third husband unless it is to one who already has children and has fulfilled the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, as it is presumed that she is unable to have children. If she got married to one who does not have children and he had been unaware of her presumptive status, she is divorced without receiving payment for her marriage contract, as he married her erroneously.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: נִישֵּׂאת לַשְּׁלִישִׁי וְלֹא הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, מַהוּ דְּלִיתְבְּעוּהָ הָנָךְ קַמָּאֵי? מִי מָצוּ אָמְרִי לַהּ: אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא דְּאַתְּ הוּא דִּגְרַמְתְּ. אוֹ דִלְמָא מָצֵית אֲמַרָה לְהוּ: הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דִּכְחַשִׁי. מִסְתַּבְּרָא מָצְיָא אֲמַרָה לְהוּ הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דִּכְחַשִׁי.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If she was married to a third husband and she did not have children for ten years, what is the halakha with regard to whether those first husbands can demand the return of the money they paid for her marriage contracts? Can they say to her: It has been revealed retroactively that it was you who caused our inability to have children, and therefore we entered our marriages erroneously, or perhaps she can say to them: It is now that I am older that I have become weak, but in my youth I could have had children with a different husband. The Sages answer: It is reasonable that she can say to them: It is now that I have become weak.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: נִישֵּׂאת לָרְבִיעִי וְהָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, מַהוּ דְּתִיתְבְּעֵיהּ לִשְׁלִישִׁי! אָמְרִינַן לַהּ: שְׁתִיקוּתִיךְ יָפָה מִדִּיבּוּרִיךְ. דְּמָצֵי אָמַר לַהּ: אֲנָא אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי לָא גָּרֵשְׁתִּיךְ.
Another dilemma was raised before the Sages: If she was married to a fourth husband and she had children with him, what is the halakha with regard to whether she can demand the payment of her marriage contract from her third husband by claiming that it is now evident that she was capable of having children? The Gemara answers: We say to her: Your silence is preferable to your speech, i.e., you are better off not making this claim, as he can say to her: I did not divorce you with this understanding, and now that I know you are capable of having children, I regret divorcing you. This would invalidate her divorce and, consequently, her marriage to her fourth husband, and would render her child a mamzer.
מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב פָּפָּא: אִי אִיהִי שָׁתְקָא, אֲנַן מִי שָׁתְקִינַן?! נִמְצָא גֵּט בָּטֵל, וּבָנֶיהָ מַמְזֵרִין! אֶלָּא אָמְרִינַן: הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דִּבְרִיַּית.
Rav Pappa strongly objects to this: If she was silent do we remain silent? If there is room for concern that the divorce might be invalid, the concern exists regardless of her claim, and therefore the bill of divorce should be found invalid and her children from her fourth husband should be rendered mamzerin. Rather, we say that it is now that she has become healthy. In other words, she was previously incapable of bearing children, but she has since recovered from that disability.
הוּא אָמַר מִינַּהּ, וְהִיא אָמְרָה מִינֵּיהּ, אֲמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: דְּבָרִים שֶׁבֵּינוֹ לְבֵינָהּ — נֶאֱמֶנֶת, וְטַעְמָא מַאי? הִיא (קַיְימָא) [קִים] לַהּ בְּיוֹרֶה כְּחֵץ, הוּא לָא קִים לֵיהּ בְּיוֹרֶה כְּחֵץ.
§ The Gemara addresses a related case. If he said that the cause for their failure to have children is from her, i.e., it is she who is infertile, and she said it is from him, Rabbi Ami said: With regard to such matters between him and her, she is believed. The Gemara inquires: What is the reason for this ruling? She is certain whether his semen shoots like an arrow, whereas he is not certain whether his semen shoots like an arrow.
אֲמַר אִיהוּ: אֵיזִיל אִינְּסִיב אִיתְּתָא וְאֶיבְדּוֹק נַפְשַׁאי. אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: אַף בָּזוֹ יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתוּבָּה. שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הַנּוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ — יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתוּבָּה. רָבָא אָמַר: נוֹשֵׂא אָדָם כַּמָּה נָשִׁים עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְהוּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ לְמֵיזַיְינִינְהִי.
If he says: I will go and marry a different woman and examine myself to see if I am indeed the cause, Rabbi Ami said: Even in this case he must divorce his first wife and give her the payment for her marriage contract, as I say that whoever marries a woman in addition to his first wife must divorce his first wife and give her the payment for her marriage contract. Conversely, Rava said that a man may marry several women in addition to his first wife, and there is nothing wrong with this practice as long as he has enough to support them all.
הוּא אָמַר: אַפִּלַת בְּגוֹ עֲשַׂר. וְהִיא אָמְרָה: לָא אַפֵּלִית. אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: אַף בְּזוֹ הִיא נֶאֱמֶנֶת. דְּאִם אִיתָא דְּאַפִּלָה — נַפְשַׁהּ בְּעַקְרְתָה לָא מַחְזְקָה.
The Gemara addresses another case in which the court forces a man to divorce his wife who has not had children after ten years. If he said: You miscarried within the ten years of our marriage, and since less than ten years have elapsed since that time he should not have to divorce her, and she said: I did not miscarry, Rabbi Ami said: Even in this case she is believed, because if it is so that she miscarried she would not establish herself as barren through denying his claim.
הִפִּילָה, וְחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה, וְחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה — הוּחְזְקָה לִנְפָלִים. הוּא אָמַר: אַפִּילָה תְּרֵי, וְהִיא אָמְרָה: תְּלָת, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: עוֹבָדָא הֲוָה בֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא, וַאֲמַרוּ: הִיא מְהֵימְנָא, דְּאִם אִיתָא דְּלָא אַפִּלָה — נַפְשַׁהּ בְּנִיפְלֵי לָא מַחְזְקָה.
If she miscarried, and then miscarried again, and miscarried again, she has been established to be a woman who is prone to miscarriages, and her husband must divorce her so that he can have children with another woman. If he said she miscarried twice, and she said it occurred three times, Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Elazar said: There was an incident of this kind that was adjudicated in the study hall and they said that she is believed, because if it is so that she had not miscarried a third time she would not establish herself as one who is prone to miscarriages.
מַתְנִי׳ הָאִישׁ מְצֻוֶּוה עַל פְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה, אֲבָל לֹא הָאִשָּׁה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר: עַל שְׁנֵיהֶם הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַיְבָרֶךְ אוֹתָם אֱלֹהִים וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם [אֱלֹהִים] פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ״.
MISHNA: A man is commanded with regard to the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, but not a woman. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says that a woman is also commanded, as the verse states with regard to both of them: “And God blessed them, and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28).
גְּמָ׳ מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אָמַר קְרָא: ״וּמִלְאוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְכִבְשׁוּהָ״. אִישׁ דַּרְכּוֹ לְכַבֵּשׁ, וְאֵין אִשָּׁה דַּרְכָּהּ לְכַבֵּשׁ.
GEMARA: From where are these matters derived, that a woman is not obligated in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply? Rabbi Ile’a said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: The verse states: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the land and conquer it” (Genesis 1:28). It is the manner of a man to conquer and it is not the manner of a woman to conquer. Consequently, it is evident that the entire command, including the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, was given only to men and not to women.
אַדְּרַבָּה: ״וְכִבְשׁוּהָ״ תַּרְתֵּי מַשְׁמַע! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: ״וְכׇבְשֶׁהָ״ כְּתִיב. רַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר, מֵהָכָא: ״אֲנִי אֵל שַׁדַּי פְּרֵה וּרְבֵה״, וְלָא קָאָמַר ״פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ״.
The Gemara raises a difficulty. On the contrary, the plural term: “And conquer it [vekhivshuha],” indicates that the two of them are included. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is written in the Torah without the letter vav, so that it can be read: And conquer it [vekhivsha], in the singular. Rav Yosef said: The proof is from here: “And God said to him: I am God Almighty, be fruitful and multiply [perei urvei]” (Genesis 35:11), which is in singular, and it does not state: Be fruitful and multiply [peru urvu] in the plural.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּצְוָה עַל אָדָם לוֹמַר דָּבָר הַנִּשְׁמָע — כָּךְ מִצְוָה עַל אָדָם שֶׁלֹּא לוֹמַר דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ נִשְׁמָע. רַבִּי אַבָּא אוֹמֵר: חוֹבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אַל תּוֹכַח לֵץ פֶּן יִשְׂנָאֶךָּ הוֹכַח לְחָכָם וְיֶאֱהָבֶךָּ״.
The Gemara cites other statements made by Rabbi Ile’a in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. And Rabbi Ile’a said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: Just as it is a mitzva for a person to say that which will be heeded, so is it a mitzva for a person not to say that which will not be heeded. One should not rebuke those who will be unreceptive to his message. Rabbi Abba says: It is obligatory for him to refrain from speaking, as it is stated: “Do not reprove a scorner lest he hate you; reprove a wise man and he will love you” (Proverbs 9:8).
וְאָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: מוּתָּר לוֹ לָאָדָם לְשַׁנּוֹת בִּדְבַר הַשָּׁלוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אָבִיךְ צִוָּה וְגוֹ׳ כֹּה תֹאמְרוּ לְיוֹסֵף אָנָּא שָׂא נָא וְגוֹ׳״.
And Rabbi Ile’a further said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: It is permitted for a person to depart from the truth in a matter that will bring peace, as it is stated: “Your father commanded before he died, saying: So you shall say to Joseph: Please pardon your brothers’ crime, etc.” (Genesis 50:16–17). Jacob never issued this command, but his sons falsely attributed this statement to him in order to preserve peace between them and Joseph.
רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: מִצְוָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל אֵיךְ אֵלֵךְ וְשָׁמַע שָׁאוּל וַהֲרָגָנִי וְגוֹ׳״.
Rabbi Natan says: It is a mitzva to depart from the truth in order to preserve peace, as it is stated: “And Samuel said: How can I go, and Saul will hear and kill me” (I Samuel 16:2). God responded in the next verse that Samuel should say he went to sacrifice an offering, indicating that God commands one to lie in order to preserve peace.
דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל תָּנָא: גָּדוֹל הַשָּׁלוֹם, שֶׁאַף הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שִׁינָּה בּוֹ, דְּמֵעִיקָּרָא כְּתִיב: ״וַאֲדוֹנִי זָקֵן״, וּלְבַסּוֹף, כְּתִיב: ״וַאֲנִי זָקַנְתִּי״.
It was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: Great is peace, as even the Holy One, Blessed be He, departed from the truth for it. As, initially it is written that Sarah said of Abraham: “And my lord is old” (Genesis 18:12), and in the end it is written that God told Abraham that Sarah said: “And I am old” (Genesis 18:13). God adjusted Sarah’s words in order to spare Abraham hurt feelings that might lead Abraham and Sarah to quarrel.
רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר. אִתְּמַר, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, חַד אָמַר: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה, וְחַד אָמַר: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה.
§ It is taught in the mishna that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says that women are also included in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. It was stated that two amora’im, Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, disagreed concerning this matter. One said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, and one said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka.
תִּסְתַּיַּים דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הוּא דְּאָמַר אֵין הֲלָכָה: דִּיתֵיב רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ וְקָאָמַר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה, וְאַהְדְּרִינְהוּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי לְאַפַּיְיהוּ.
The Gemara comments: Conclude that it was Rabbi Yoḥanan who said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, as Rabbi Abbahu sat and said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, and Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, who were sitting across from him, turned their faces as an indication that they disagreed with this report of Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion, but did not want to explicitly contradict Rabbi Abbahu’s statement out of respect for him.
וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר, וְאַהְדְּרִינְהוּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי לְאַפַּיְיהוּ. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אַמְרַהּ, מִשּׁוּם כְּבוֹד בֵּי קֵיסָר לָא אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ וְלָא מִידֵּי. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אַמְרַהּ — לֵימְרוּ לֵיהּ: לָא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הָכִי.
And some say a different version of the incident, that it was Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who said this statement, and Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi turned their faces. Rav Pappa said: Granted, according to the one who said that Rabbi Abbahu said it, it makes sense that due to the honor of Caesar’s court, where Rabbi Abbahu maintained close ties, Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi did not say anything to him and merely hinted at their disagreement. However, according to the one who said that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said it, let them say to him explicitly: Rabbi Yoḥanan did not say this. In any event, it is clear that according to Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, Rabbi Yoḥanan disagreed with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka.
מַאי הֲוָה עֲלַהּ? תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא בַּר חֲנִינָא אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: עוֹבָדָא הֲוָה קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בִּכְנִישְׁתָּא דְקֵיסָרִי, וַאֲמַר: יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתוּבָּה. וְאִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ לָא מְפַקְּדָה — כְּתוּבָּה מַאי עֲבִידְתַּהּ?
The Gemara asks: What conclusion was reached about this issue? The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina said that Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Asi said: There was an incident that came before Rabbi Yoḥanan in the synagogue of Caesarea involving a woman who wanted a divorce from her husband after ten years of childless marriage, and he said that the husband must divorce her and give her the payment for her marriage contract. If it enters your mind to say that she is not commanded to be fruitful and multiply, what is payment for a marriage contract doing here? Why does she have a right to demand to be divorced and to receive the payment for her marriage contract?
דִּלְמָא בְּבָאָה מֵחֲמַת טַעֲנָה.
The Gemara responds: Perhaps that was in a case when she came to demand a divorce due to another claim, i.e., she wanted children for a reason other than the fulfillment of the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. Since this claim has merit, her husband must divorce her and pay her marriage contract.
כִּי הַהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: הַב לִי כְּתוּבָּה! אֲמַר לַהּ: זִיל, לָא מִיפַּקְּדַתְּ! אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: מִסֵּיבוּ דִּילַהּ מַאי תֶּיהְוֵי עֲלַהּ דְּהָךְ אִתְּתָא? אָמַר: כִּי הָא — וַדַּאי כָּפֵינַן.
This is like the case of a certain woman who came before Rabbi Ami and requested a divorce due to her husband’s inability to father children. She said to him: Give me the payment for my marriage contract. He said to her: Go away, as you are not commanded to be fruitful and multiply and have no right to demand a divorce. She said to him: In her old age, what will be with this woman, i.e., if I have no children, who will take care of me when I grow old? Rabbi Ami said: In a situation such as this, we certainly force the husband to divorce her and pay her marriage contract.
הָהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן. אֲמַר לַהּ: לָא מִיפַּקְּדַתְּ. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: לָא בָּעֲיָא הָךְ אִתְּתָא חוּטְרָא לִידָה וּמָרָה לִקְבוּרָה? אֲמַר: כִּי הָא וַדַּאי כָּפֵינַן.
The Gemara relates a similar incident: A certain woman came before Rav Naḥman and requested a divorce due to her husband’s inability to father children. He said to her: You are not commanded to be fruitful and multiply. She said to him: Does this woman not require a staff for her hand and a hoe for her burial? In other words, the woman said that she wanted children so that they could care for her in her old age and bury her when she would die. Rav Naḥman said: In a case such as this, we certainly force the husband to divorce her.
יְהוּדָה וְחִזְקִיָּה תְּאוֹמִים הָיוּ, אֶחָד נִגְמְרָה צוּרָתוֹ לְסוֹף תִּשְׁעָה, וְאֶחָד נִגְמְרָה צוּרָתוֹ לִתְחִלַּת שִׁבְעָה. יְהוּדִית, דְּבֵיתְהוּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא, הֲוָה לַהּ צַעַר לֵידָה. שַׁנַּאי מָנַהּ, וַאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא, אֲמַרָה: אִתְּתָא מְפַקְּדָא אַפְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה? אֲמַר לַהּ: לָא. אֲזַלָא אִשְׁתְּיָא סַמָּא דַעֲקַרְתָּא.
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ḥiyya’s sons, Yehuda and Ḥizkiyya, were twins, but one of them was fully developed after nine months of pregnancy and one was fully developed at the beginning of the seventh month, and they were born two months apart. Yehudit, the wife of Rabbi Ḥiyya, had acute birthing pain from these unusual deliveries. She changed her clothes to prevent Rabbi Ḥiyya from recognizing her and came before Rabbi Ḥiyya to ask him a halakhic question. She said: Is a woman commanded to be fruitful and multiply? He said to her: No. She went and drank an infertility potion.
לְסוֹף אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא. אֲמַר לַהּ: אִיכּוֹ יְלַדְתְּ לִי חֲדָא כַּרְסָא אַחְרִיתָא, דְּאָמַר מָר: יְהוּדָה וְחִזְקִיָּה אַחֵי, פַּזִּי וְטָוִי
Eventually the matter was revealed, and Rabbi Ḥiyya found out about what Yehudit had done. He said to her: If only you had given birth to one more belly for me, i.e., another set of twins. As the Master said: Yehuda and Ḥizkiyya were twin brothers and became prominent Torah scholars, and Pazi and Tavi, Rabbi Ḥiyya’s daughters,
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Minnesota, United States
I am grateful for the structure of the Daf Yomi. When I am freer to learn to my heart’s content, I learn other passages in addition. But even in times of difficulty, I always know that I can rely on the structure and social support of Daf Yomi learners all over the world.
I am also grateful for this forum. It is very helpful to learn with a group of enthusiastic and committed women.
Beit Shemesh, Israel
A beautiful world of Talmudic sages now fill my daily life with discussion and debate.
bringing alive our traditions and texts that has brought new meaning to my life.
I am a מגילת אסתר reader for women . the words in the Mishna of מסכת megillah 17a
הקורא את המגילה למפרע לא יצא were powerful to me.
I hope to have the zchut to complete the cycle for my 70th birthday.
Jerusalem, Israel
The first month I learned Daf Yomi by myself in secret, because I wasn’t sure how my husband would react, but after the siyyum on Masechet Brachot I discovered Hadran and now sometimes my husband listens to the daf with me. He and I also learn mishnayot together and are constantly finding connections between the different masechtot.
Silver Spring, Maryland, United States
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
NJ, United States
I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!
Riverdale, NY, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi in January 2020 after watching my grandfather, Mayer Penstein z”l, finish shas with the previous cycle. My grandfather made learning so much fun was so proud that his grandchildren wanted to join him. I was also inspired by Ilana Kurshan’s book, If All the Seas Were Ink. Two years in, I can say that it has enriched my life in so many ways.
New York, United States
Since I started in January of 2020, Daf Yomi has changed my life. It connects me to Jews all over the world, especially learned women. It makes cooking, gardening, and folding laundry into acts of Torah study. Daf Yomi enables me to participate in a conversation with and about our heritage that has been going on for more than 2000 years.
Skokie, IL, United States
I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!
California, United States
Ontario, Canada
Los Angeles, United States
After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.
London, United Kingdom
I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.
Irvine, United States
In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.
San Francisco, CA , United States
I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.
Houston, United States
Philadelphia, United States
Tel Aviv, Israel
It happened without intent (so am I yotzei?!) – I watched the women’s siyum live and was so moved by it that the next morning, I tuned in to Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur, and here I am, still learning every day, over 2 years later. Some days it all goes over my head, but others I grasp onto an idea or a story, and I ‘get it’ and that’s the best feeling in the world. So proud to be a Hadran learner.
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
The first month I learned Daf Yomi by myself in secret, because I wasn’t sure how my husband would react, but after the siyyum on Masechet Brachot I discovered Hadran and now sometimes my husband listens to the daf with me. He and I also learn mishnayot together and are constantly finding connections between the different masechtot.
Silver Spring, Maryland, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Yevamot 65
קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת, עַד שֶׁתִּקְבָּעֶנָּה שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים. וְאֵין מִטַּהֶרֶת מִן הַוֶּסֶת, עַד שֶׁתֵּעָקֵר מִמֶּנָּה שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים. וְשׁוֹר הַמּוּעָד — דִּתְנַן: אֵין הַשּׁוֹר נַעֲשֶׂה מוּעָד, עַד שֶׁיָּעִידוּ בּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה פְּעָמִים.
establish a set pattern of menstrual bleeding for herself, so that it can be assumed that she will start bleeding at a particular time, until she has established it three times. Similarly, she is not purified from her set pattern until it is uprooted from her three times, i.e., until she did not experience menstrual bleeding at the expected time according to her pattern on three occasions. And the case of a forewarned ox is as we learned in a mishna (Bava Kamma 23b): An ox does not become forewarned until witnesses testify that it has gored three times. Consequently, in the cases of set patterns and a forewarned ox, a legal presumption is created only after three occurrences, in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: נִיסֵּת לָרִאשׁוֹן וְלֹא הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, לַשֵּׁנִי וְלֹא הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, לַשְּׁלִישִׁי לֹא תִּנָּשֵׂא אֶלָּא לְמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ בָּנִים. נִישֵּׂאת לְמִי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ בָּנִים — תֵּצֵא בְּלֹא כְּתוּבָּה.
The Sages taught: If a woman was married to her first husband and she did not have children, and then she was married to her second husband and she did not have children, she may not get married to a third husband unless it is to one who already has children and has fulfilled the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, as it is presumed that she is unable to have children. If she got married to one who does not have children and he had been unaware of her presumptive status, she is divorced without receiving payment for her marriage contract, as he married her erroneously.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: נִישֵּׂאת לַשְּׁלִישִׁי וְלֹא הָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, מַהוּ דְּלִיתְבְּעוּהָ הָנָךְ קַמָּאֵי? מִי מָצוּ אָמְרִי לַהּ: אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא דְּאַתְּ הוּא דִּגְרַמְתְּ. אוֹ דִלְמָא מָצֵית אֲמַרָה לְהוּ: הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דִּכְחַשִׁי. מִסְתַּבְּרָא מָצְיָא אֲמַרָה לְהוּ הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דִּכְחַשִׁי.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If she was married to a third husband and she did not have children for ten years, what is the halakha with regard to whether those first husbands can demand the return of the money they paid for her marriage contracts? Can they say to her: It has been revealed retroactively that it was you who caused our inability to have children, and therefore we entered our marriages erroneously, or perhaps she can say to them: It is now that I am older that I have become weak, but in my youth I could have had children with a different husband. The Sages answer: It is reasonable that she can say to them: It is now that I have become weak.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: נִישֵּׂאת לָרְבִיעִי וְהָיוּ לָהּ בָּנִים, מַהוּ דְּתִיתְבְּעֵיהּ לִשְׁלִישִׁי! אָמְרִינַן לַהּ: שְׁתִיקוּתִיךְ יָפָה מִדִּיבּוּרִיךְ. דְּמָצֵי אָמַר לַהּ: אֲנָא אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי לָא גָּרֵשְׁתִּיךְ.
Another dilemma was raised before the Sages: If she was married to a fourth husband and she had children with him, what is the halakha with regard to whether she can demand the payment of her marriage contract from her third husband by claiming that it is now evident that she was capable of having children? The Gemara answers: We say to her: Your silence is preferable to your speech, i.e., you are better off not making this claim, as he can say to her: I did not divorce you with this understanding, and now that I know you are capable of having children, I regret divorcing you. This would invalidate her divorce and, consequently, her marriage to her fourth husband, and would render her child a mamzer.
מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב פָּפָּא: אִי אִיהִי שָׁתְקָא, אֲנַן מִי שָׁתְקִינַן?! נִמְצָא גֵּט בָּטֵל, וּבָנֶיהָ מַמְזֵרִין! אֶלָּא אָמְרִינַן: הַשְׁתָּא הוּא דִּבְרִיַּית.
Rav Pappa strongly objects to this: If she was silent do we remain silent? If there is room for concern that the divorce might be invalid, the concern exists regardless of her claim, and therefore the bill of divorce should be found invalid and her children from her fourth husband should be rendered mamzerin. Rather, we say that it is now that she has become healthy. In other words, she was previously incapable of bearing children, but she has since recovered from that disability.
הוּא אָמַר מִינַּהּ, וְהִיא אָמְרָה מִינֵּיהּ, אֲמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: דְּבָרִים שֶׁבֵּינוֹ לְבֵינָהּ — נֶאֱמֶנֶת, וְטַעְמָא מַאי? הִיא (קַיְימָא) [קִים] לַהּ בְּיוֹרֶה כְּחֵץ, הוּא לָא קִים לֵיהּ בְּיוֹרֶה כְּחֵץ.
§ The Gemara addresses a related case. If he said that the cause for their failure to have children is from her, i.e., it is she who is infertile, and she said it is from him, Rabbi Ami said: With regard to such matters between him and her, she is believed. The Gemara inquires: What is the reason for this ruling? She is certain whether his semen shoots like an arrow, whereas he is not certain whether his semen shoots like an arrow.
אֲמַר אִיהוּ: אֵיזִיל אִינְּסִיב אִיתְּתָא וְאֶיבְדּוֹק נַפְשַׁאי. אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: אַף בָּזוֹ יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתוּבָּה. שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הַנּוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ — יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתוּבָּה. רָבָא אָמַר: נוֹשֵׂא אָדָם כַּמָּה נָשִׁים עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְהוּא דְּאִית לֵיהּ לְמֵיזַיְינִינְהִי.
If he says: I will go and marry a different woman and examine myself to see if I am indeed the cause, Rabbi Ami said: Even in this case he must divorce his first wife and give her the payment for her marriage contract, as I say that whoever marries a woman in addition to his first wife must divorce his first wife and give her the payment for her marriage contract. Conversely, Rava said that a man may marry several women in addition to his first wife, and there is nothing wrong with this practice as long as he has enough to support them all.
הוּא אָמַר: אַפִּלַת בְּגוֹ עֲשַׂר. וְהִיא אָמְרָה: לָא אַפֵּלִית. אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: אַף בְּזוֹ הִיא נֶאֱמֶנֶת. דְּאִם אִיתָא דְּאַפִּלָה — נַפְשַׁהּ בְּעַקְרְתָה לָא מַחְזְקָה.
The Gemara addresses another case in which the court forces a man to divorce his wife who has not had children after ten years. If he said: You miscarried within the ten years of our marriage, and since less than ten years have elapsed since that time he should not have to divorce her, and she said: I did not miscarry, Rabbi Ami said: Even in this case she is believed, because if it is so that she miscarried she would not establish herself as barren through denying his claim.
הִפִּילָה, וְחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה, וְחָזְרָה וְהִפִּילָה — הוּחְזְקָה לִנְפָלִים. הוּא אָמַר: אַפִּילָה תְּרֵי, וְהִיא אָמְרָה: תְּלָת, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: עוֹבָדָא הֲוָה בֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא, וַאֲמַרוּ: הִיא מְהֵימְנָא, דְּאִם אִיתָא דְּלָא אַפִּלָה — נַפְשַׁהּ בְּנִיפְלֵי לָא מַחְזְקָה.
If she miscarried, and then miscarried again, and miscarried again, she has been established to be a woman who is prone to miscarriages, and her husband must divorce her so that he can have children with another woman. If he said she miscarried twice, and she said it occurred three times, Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Elazar said: There was an incident of this kind that was adjudicated in the study hall and they said that she is believed, because if it is so that she had not miscarried a third time she would not establish herself as one who is prone to miscarriages.
מַתְנִי׳ הָאִישׁ מְצֻוֶּוה עַל פְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה, אֲבָל לֹא הָאִשָּׁה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר: עַל שְׁנֵיהֶם הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַיְבָרֶךְ אוֹתָם אֱלֹהִים וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם [אֱלֹהִים] פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ״.
MISHNA: A man is commanded with regard to the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, but not a woman. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says that a woman is also commanded, as the verse states with regard to both of them: “And God blessed them, and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28).
גְּמָ׳ מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: אָמַר קְרָא: ״וּמִלְאוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְכִבְשׁוּהָ״. אִישׁ דַּרְכּוֹ לְכַבֵּשׁ, וְאֵין אִשָּׁה דַּרְכָּהּ לְכַבֵּשׁ.
GEMARA: From where are these matters derived, that a woman is not obligated in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply? Rabbi Ile’a said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: The verse states: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the land and conquer it” (Genesis 1:28). It is the manner of a man to conquer and it is not the manner of a woman to conquer. Consequently, it is evident that the entire command, including the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, was given only to men and not to women.
אַדְּרַבָּה: ״וְכִבְשׁוּהָ״ תַּרְתֵּי מַשְׁמַע! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: ״וְכׇבְשֶׁהָ״ כְּתִיב. רַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר, מֵהָכָא: ״אֲנִי אֵל שַׁדַּי פְּרֵה וּרְבֵה״, וְלָא קָאָמַר ״פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ״.
The Gemara raises a difficulty. On the contrary, the plural term: “And conquer it [vekhivshuha],” indicates that the two of them are included. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is written in the Torah without the letter vav, so that it can be read: And conquer it [vekhivsha], in the singular. Rav Yosef said: The proof is from here: “And God said to him: I am God Almighty, be fruitful and multiply [perei urvei]” (Genesis 35:11), which is in singular, and it does not state: Be fruitful and multiply [peru urvu] in the plural.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּצְוָה עַל אָדָם לוֹמַר דָּבָר הַנִּשְׁמָע — כָּךְ מִצְוָה עַל אָדָם שֶׁלֹּא לוֹמַר דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ נִשְׁמָע. רַבִּי אַבָּא אוֹמֵר: חוֹבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אַל תּוֹכַח לֵץ פֶּן יִשְׂנָאֶךָּ הוֹכַח לְחָכָם וְיֶאֱהָבֶךָּ״.
The Gemara cites other statements made by Rabbi Ile’a in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. And Rabbi Ile’a said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: Just as it is a mitzva for a person to say that which will be heeded, so is it a mitzva for a person not to say that which will not be heeded. One should not rebuke those who will be unreceptive to his message. Rabbi Abba says: It is obligatory for him to refrain from speaking, as it is stated: “Do not reprove a scorner lest he hate you; reprove a wise man and he will love you” (Proverbs 9:8).
וְאָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: מוּתָּר לוֹ לָאָדָם לְשַׁנּוֹת בִּדְבַר הַשָּׁלוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אָבִיךְ צִוָּה וְגוֹ׳ כֹּה תֹאמְרוּ לְיוֹסֵף אָנָּא שָׂא נָא וְגוֹ׳״.
And Rabbi Ile’a further said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: It is permitted for a person to depart from the truth in a matter that will bring peace, as it is stated: “Your father commanded before he died, saying: So you shall say to Joseph: Please pardon your brothers’ crime, etc.” (Genesis 50:16–17). Jacob never issued this command, but his sons falsely attributed this statement to him in order to preserve peace between them and Joseph.
רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: מִצְוָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל אֵיךְ אֵלֵךְ וְשָׁמַע שָׁאוּל וַהֲרָגָנִי וְגוֹ׳״.
Rabbi Natan says: It is a mitzva to depart from the truth in order to preserve peace, as it is stated: “And Samuel said: How can I go, and Saul will hear and kill me” (I Samuel 16:2). God responded in the next verse that Samuel should say he went to sacrifice an offering, indicating that God commands one to lie in order to preserve peace.
דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל תָּנָא: גָּדוֹל הַשָּׁלוֹם, שֶׁאַף הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שִׁינָּה בּוֹ, דְּמֵעִיקָּרָא כְּתִיב: ״וַאֲדוֹנִי זָקֵן״, וּלְבַסּוֹף, כְּתִיב: ״וַאֲנִי זָקַנְתִּי״.
It was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: Great is peace, as even the Holy One, Blessed be He, departed from the truth for it. As, initially it is written that Sarah said of Abraham: “And my lord is old” (Genesis 18:12), and in the end it is written that God told Abraham that Sarah said: “And I am old” (Genesis 18:13). God adjusted Sarah’s words in order to spare Abraham hurt feelings that might lead Abraham and Sarah to quarrel.
רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה אוֹמֵר. אִתְּמַר, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, חַד אָמַר: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה, וְחַד אָמַר: אֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה.
§ It is taught in the mishna that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka says that women are also included in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. It was stated that two amora’im, Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, disagreed concerning this matter. One said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, and one said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka.
תִּסְתַּיַּים דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הוּא דְּאָמַר אֵין הֲלָכָה: דִּיתֵיב רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ וְקָאָמַר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה, וְאַהְדְּרִינְהוּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי לְאַפַּיְיהוּ.
The Gemara comments: Conclude that it was Rabbi Yoḥanan who said that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, as Rabbi Abbahu sat and said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, and Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, who were sitting across from him, turned their faces as an indication that they disagreed with this report of Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion, but did not want to explicitly contradict Rabbi Abbahu’s statement out of respect for him.
וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר, וְאַהְדְּרִינְהוּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי לְאַפַּיְיהוּ. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אַמְרַהּ, מִשּׁוּם כְּבוֹד בֵּי קֵיסָר לָא אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ וְלָא מִידֵּי. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אַמְרַהּ — לֵימְרוּ לֵיהּ: לָא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הָכִי.
And some say a different version of the incident, that it was Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who said this statement, and Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi turned their faces. Rav Pappa said: Granted, according to the one who said that Rabbi Abbahu said it, it makes sense that due to the honor of Caesar’s court, where Rabbi Abbahu maintained close ties, Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi did not say anything to him and merely hinted at their disagreement. However, according to the one who said that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said it, let them say to him explicitly: Rabbi Yoḥanan did not say this. In any event, it is clear that according to Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, Rabbi Yoḥanan disagreed with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka.
מַאי הֲוָה עֲלַהּ? תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא בַּר חֲנִינָא אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: עוֹבָדָא הֲוָה קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בִּכְנִישְׁתָּא דְקֵיסָרִי, וַאֲמַר: יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתוּבָּה. וְאִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ לָא מְפַקְּדָה — כְּתוּבָּה מַאי עֲבִידְתַּהּ?
The Gemara asks: What conclusion was reached about this issue? The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina said that Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Asi said: There was an incident that came before Rabbi Yoḥanan in the synagogue of Caesarea involving a woman who wanted a divorce from her husband after ten years of childless marriage, and he said that the husband must divorce her and give her the payment for her marriage contract. If it enters your mind to say that she is not commanded to be fruitful and multiply, what is payment for a marriage contract doing here? Why does she have a right to demand to be divorced and to receive the payment for her marriage contract?
דִּלְמָא בְּבָאָה מֵחֲמַת טַעֲנָה.
The Gemara responds: Perhaps that was in a case when she came to demand a divorce due to another claim, i.e., she wanted children for a reason other than the fulfillment of the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. Since this claim has merit, her husband must divorce her and pay her marriage contract.
כִּי הַהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: הַב לִי כְּתוּבָּה! אֲמַר לַהּ: זִיל, לָא מִיפַּקְּדַתְּ! אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: מִסֵּיבוּ דִּילַהּ מַאי תֶּיהְוֵי עֲלַהּ דְּהָךְ אִתְּתָא? אָמַר: כִּי הָא — וַדַּאי כָּפֵינַן.
This is like the case of a certain woman who came before Rabbi Ami and requested a divorce due to her husband’s inability to father children. She said to him: Give me the payment for my marriage contract. He said to her: Go away, as you are not commanded to be fruitful and multiply and have no right to demand a divorce. She said to him: In her old age, what will be with this woman, i.e., if I have no children, who will take care of me when I grow old? Rabbi Ami said: In a situation such as this, we certainly force the husband to divorce her and pay her marriage contract.
הָהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן. אֲמַר לַהּ: לָא מִיפַּקְּדַתְּ. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: לָא בָּעֲיָא הָךְ אִתְּתָא חוּטְרָא לִידָה וּמָרָה לִקְבוּרָה? אֲמַר: כִּי הָא וַדַּאי כָּפֵינַן.
The Gemara relates a similar incident: A certain woman came before Rav Naḥman and requested a divorce due to her husband’s inability to father children. He said to her: You are not commanded to be fruitful and multiply. She said to him: Does this woman not require a staff for her hand and a hoe for her burial? In other words, the woman said that she wanted children so that they could care for her in her old age and bury her when she would die. Rav Naḥman said: In a case such as this, we certainly force the husband to divorce her.
יְהוּדָה וְחִזְקִיָּה תְּאוֹמִים הָיוּ, אֶחָד נִגְמְרָה צוּרָתוֹ לְסוֹף תִּשְׁעָה, וְאֶחָד נִגְמְרָה צוּרָתוֹ לִתְחִלַּת שִׁבְעָה. יְהוּדִית, דְּבֵיתְהוּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא, הֲוָה לַהּ צַעַר לֵידָה. שַׁנַּאי מָנַהּ, וַאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא, אֲמַרָה: אִתְּתָא מְפַקְּדָא אַפְּרִיָּה וּרְבִיָּה? אֲמַר לַהּ: לָא. אֲזַלָא אִשְׁתְּיָא סַמָּא דַעֲקַרְתָּא.
The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ḥiyya’s sons, Yehuda and Ḥizkiyya, were twins, but one of them was fully developed after nine months of pregnancy and one was fully developed at the beginning of the seventh month, and they were born two months apart. Yehudit, the wife of Rabbi Ḥiyya, had acute birthing pain from these unusual deliveries. She changed her clothes to prevent Rabbi Ḥiyya from recognizing her and came before Rabbi Ḥiyya to ask him a halakhic question. She said: Is a woman commanded to be fruitful and multiply? He said to her: No. She went and drank an infertility potion.
לְסוֹף אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא. אֲמַר לַהּ: אִיכּוֹ יְלַדְתְּ לִי חֲדָא כַּרְסָא אַחְרִיתָא, דְּאָמַר מָר: יְהוּדָה וְחִזְקִיָּה אַחֵי, פַּזִּי וְטָוִי
Eventually the matter was revealed, and Rabbi Ḥiyya found out about what Yehudit had done. He said to her: If only you had given birth to one more belly for me, i.e., another set of twins. As the Master said: Yehuda and Ḥizkiyya were twin brothers and became prominent Torah scholars, and Pazi and Tavi, Rabbi Ḥiyya’s daughters,
