state derek [way], which is feminine, as it is written, and thou shalt shew them the way wherein[bah] they must walk.
‘If so, when we learnt, a zab
is examined in seven [shiv'ah] ways[derakim.]’:
let him [the Tanna] employ sheva’?
— Because he desires to state derek, which wefind designated as masculine, as it is written, they shall come out against thee in one way [be-derek ehad], and flee before thee seven ways [shiv'ah derakim].
If so, the verses are contradictory, andthe Mishnahs likewise? — The verses are not contradictory: here [the first verse quoted], thereference being to the Torah,
which is a feminine noun, as it is written: The law [torah] of the Lordis perfect [temimah], restoring [meshibath] the soul:
the feminine form is employed. There,however, the reference is to war, and it is the practice of man to wage war, not of woman —therefore the masculine is employed. The Mishnahs are [likewise] not contradictory: here, since thereference is to a woman, It is couched in the feminine form. There, the reference being to a man,since it is the nature of a man to be examined, but not of a woman, for a woman becomes uncleaneven through an accident,
the masculine form is employed. Now, why does he employ shalosh? on account of derakim [ways]! Then let him teach debarim[things] and sheloshah?
— Because he wishes to mention INTERCOURSE, which is designated‘way’, as it is written, and the way of a man with a maid. . . Such is the way of an adulterouswoman.
Now, that answers for intercourse; but what can you say of MONEY AND DEED? —[They are] on account of INTERCOURSE.
And are two taught on account of one?
— These tooare adjuncts of intercourse.
Alternatively I can say: The author of this [Mishnah] is R. Simeon. For it was taught: R. Simeonsaid: Why did the Torah state, If any man take a wife,
and not ‘if a woman be taken to a man’?Because it is the way of a man to go in search of a woman, but it is not the way of a woman to go insearch of a man. This may be compared to a man who lost an article: who goes in search of whom?The loser goes in search of the lost article.
Now, as to what we learnt: ‘a zab is examined in sevenways’: let it state [seven] ‘things’?
— There we are informed this: it is the nature [way] of excessive eating to cause gonorrhoea, and it is the nature [way] of excessive drinking to causegonorrhoea. Further, as to what we learnt: ‘The citron is comparable to a tree in three ways’
— lethim state [in three] things? — Because he wishes to teach the second clause: and to vegetables inone way.
Then in the second clause too’ let him state, [and to vegetables in one] ‘thing’?____________________
Jer. XXXII, 44.
The Heb. mekaddesh literally means ‘consecrates.’ Why is this employed by the Rabbis for betrothal?
V. Glos.; hekdesh is forbidden for secular use.
Granted that Biblical usage demands a verb of acquisition, yet just as the Mishnah on 41a states: ‘a man betroths,’ sohere too it should have been, ‘a man acquires.’
Both clauses referring to his action.
Hence this could not be referred to as his (voluntary) action.
By referring it to her, the Tanna shews that the validity of acquisition is dependent on her consent.
Shalosh (three) is used with fem. substantives; sheloshah with masc. ones, which is the more usual.
Ex. XVIII, 20: bah is feminine (in her), the masc. being bo.
V. Glos, cf. p. 3, n. 1.
Pl. of derek.
Shiv'ah with masc., sheva’ with fem. substantives.
Deut. XXVIII, 27: in both clauses the numerals are masculine.
When Jethro said to Moses, and thou shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, by ‘way’ he meant theTorah.
Ps. XIX, 8; both the adjective and the participle are feminine.
A man is unclean as a zab only if the discharge comes of itself, without being caused by external factors (technicallycalled accidents); e.g., the eating of certain foods, physical overstrain, etc.; seven such factors might have caused the