Study Kiddushin folio 11A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
until she enters the wedding canopy, due to the reason of Ulla, lest she feed her non-priestly family members the teruma that her husband has given her.
The Talmud asks: And ben Bag Bag, what does he say about this a fortiori inference? The Talmud answers that he maintains that this a fortiori inference is invalid because he does not accept that there can be a claim of simfon with regard to the acquisition of slaves. The reason is that if it is an
And even if this slave is discovered to be a thief or a gambler [kuvyustus], which are considered hidden blemishes that affect his work, it has come to him, i.e., the slave is acquired by the one who purchased him and the transaction is non-refundable. The reason is that the buyer should have susp
The Talmud asks: Now, both according to the one Master, Yoḥanan ben Bag Bag, and according to the other Master, R' Yehuda ben Beteira, the daughter of a non-priest betrothed to a priest may not partake of teruma by rabbinic decree. What, then, is the difference between them?
The Talmud answers: The difference between them involves 3 cases. The Talmud elaborates: If the husband initially accepted her blemishes, there is no concern that an annulling factor might lead to the nullification of the betrothal, but there is still concern that she might feed teruma to the member