Study Kiddushin folio 68A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אפילו נדה נמי! אלמה אמר אביי: הכל מודים בבא על הנדה ועל הסוטה, שאין הולד ממזר? אמר חזקיה: אמר קרא ״ותהי נדתה עליו״, אפילו בשעת נדתה – תהא בה הויה.
then even if he betrothed a menstruating woman as well, his betrothal should not be effective and the offspring should be a mamzer, as a menstruating woman is included in the list in that chapter of those with whom sex is forbidden. If so, why did Abaye say: All concede with regard to one who has sex with a menstruating woman or with a sota, a woman forbidden to her husband on suspicion of being unfaithful to him, that the offspring is not a mamzer? Ḥizkiyya said: In the case of a menstruating woman, the verse states: “And her impurity be [ut’hi] upon him” (Leviticus 15:24), from which it is derived that even at the time of her impurity, the type of becoming [havaya] stated with regard to betrothal (see Deuteronomy 24:2) should apply to her. The Talmud is interpreting the connection between the words ut’hi and havaya, as both share the same Hebrew root.
The Talmud asks: After all, there is the possibility of juxtaposing all other forbidden relatives to a menstruating woman, and there is also the possibility of juxtaposing them to a wife’s sister. What did you see that you juxtaposed them to a wife’s sister? Why not juxtapose them instead to a menstruating woman? The Talmud answers: When there is an option of juxtaposing a case in a manner that leads to a leniency, or juxtaposing it to a halakha that entails a stringency, we juxtapose it in a fashion that leads to a stringency.