משנה: הָעֶבֶד פּוֹסֵל מִשּׁוּם בִּיאָה וְאֵינוֹ פוֹסֵל מִשּׁוּם זֶרַע. בְּאֵי זֶה צַד בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לַכֹּהֵן בַּת כֹּהֵן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְיָֽלְדָה מִמֶּנּוּ בֵן וְהָלַךְ הַבֵּן וְנִכְבַּשׁ עַל הַשִּׁפְחָה וְיָֽלְדָה מִמֶּנּוּ בֵן הֲרֵי זֶה עֶבֶד. הָֽיְתָה אֵם אָבִיו בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לַכֹּהֵן לֹא תֹאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה בַּת כֹּהֵן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל תֹּאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה. MISHNAH: A slave disables because of intercourse123Since a free woman cannot marry a slave, her intercourse with him is a form of prostitution. but not because of descendants. How is this? A daughter of an Israel [married] to a Cohen [or] the daughter of a Cohen [married] to an Israel had a son from him. The son went and was pressed on a slave girl who had a son from him; the latter is a slave124He has no legal relationship with his father.. If his father’s mother was a daughter of an Israel [married] to a Cohen, she cannot eat heave125If her husband and all her descendants except that slave had died, she has no descendants in the priesthood and is barred from heave., the daughter of a Cohen [married] to an Israel may eat heave126If her husband and all her descendants except that slave had died, she has no descendants outside the priesthood and may eat heave..
הלכה: הָעֶבֶד פּוֹסֵל מִשּׁוּם בִּיאָה כול׳. הָעֶבֶד מְנַיִין שֶׁבִּיאָתוֹ פוֹסֶלֶת. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר בְּשֶׁם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. וּבַת כֹּהֵן כִּי תִהְיֶה אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה וְזֶרַע אֵין לָהּ. שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ עָלָיו אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין חוֹזֶרֶת. אֶת שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עָלָיו אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין אֵינָהּ חוֹזֶרֶת. הָתִיב רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. הֲרֵי אַלְמָנָה שֶׁזִּינְתָה הֲרֵי אֵין לָהּ אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין וְחוֹזֶרֶת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי לֹא אָמַר כֵּן אֶלָּא מִחְלְפָא שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בְּגִיטִּין הוּא אָמַר. כּוּתִין מִשּׁוּם מַה הֵן פְּסוּלִין. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. מִשּׁוּם גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד הַבָּא עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַװְלָד מַמְזֵר. בְּקִידּוּשִׁין הוּא אָמַר. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ תְּרֵיהוֹן אָֽמְרִין. הַװְלָד מַמְזֵר. הָכָא אָמַר לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם גַּרְמֵיהּ וְהָכָא אָמַר לָהּ מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. שֶׁכֵּן לְדִבְרֵי חֲכָמִים הַװְלָד מַמְזֵר. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה לֹא אָמַר כֵּן אֶלָּא מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָָן. בְּגִיטִּין הוּא אָמַר. כּוּתִין מִשּׁוּם מַה הֵן פְּסוּלִין. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. מִשּׁוּם גּוֹי וְעֶבֶד הַבָּא עַל בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל הַװְלָד מַמְזֵר. בְּקִידּוּשִׁין הוּא רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ תְּרֵיהוֹן אָֽמְרִין. הַװְלָד מַמְזֵר. וְהָכָא הוּא אָמַר. אֶת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ עָלָיו אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין חוֹזֶרֶת וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עָלָיו אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין אֵינָהּ חוֹזֶרֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי מַתַּנְייָה. סְלָקִית לִסְחוֹרָה וּשְׁמָעִית רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנֵי יֵישׁוּעַ. וּבַת כֹּהֵן כִּי תִהְיֶה אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה וְזֶרַע אֵין לָהּ. אֶת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ עָלָיו אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין חוֹזֶרֶת. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עָלָיו אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵירוּשִׁין אֵינָהּ חוֹזֶרֶת. וְאָֽמְרִת יֵאוּת. אֵין מַמְזֵר כְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. שֶׁאֵין מַמְזֵר אֶלָּא מֵאִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה עָלָיו אִיסּוּר עֶרְוָה וְחַייָבִין עָלֶיהָ כָּרֵת. HALAKHAH: “A slave disables because of intercourse,” etc. From where that the intercourse with a slave disables? Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Ismael: “If a Cohen’s daughter becomes a widow or a divorcee without issue,127Lev. 22:13. “If a Cohen’s daughter becomes a widow or a divorcee without issue, when she returns to her father’s house as in her youth, she shall eat from her father’s food.”” from [a man] with whom she has widowhood or divorce she returns, from [a man] with whom she has no relation of widowhood or divorce she does not return. Rebbi Jeremiah objected: But if a widow whored she has no widowhood or divorce and she returns128If she is not married she cannot become a widow or be divorced. The objection is too stupid to deserve an answer since it is only required that she could have a marriage relationship, not that she actually must have had one.! Rebbi Yose did not say so, but [he held] that the argument of Rebbi Joḥanan is reversed. In Giṭṭin he says, why are Samaritans disqualified? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael: Because if a Gentile or a slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is a bastard129In our text, Giṭṭin 1:5, the statement is by R. Joḥanan in the name of R. Eleazar (the Tanna), in Qiddushin 3:14 it is an anonymous baraita. In the Babli, 45a, the statement is by R. Joḥanan and R. Eleazar (the Amora); a parallel statement in the name of Rebbi.
There is no doubt in the Yerushalmi that the original Samaritans were Jews. They consider the children of a Jewish mother from a Gentile as Jewish, as is accepted as practice, under Babylonian influence, in the next Halakhah and as already was decided in Halakhah 4:15.. In Qiddushin one says, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both say, the child is a bastard. Here he says it in his own name but there he says it in the name of Rebbi Ismael! For also according to the words of the Sages the child is a bastard. Rebbi Ḥizqiah did not say so, but: the argument of Rebbi Joḥanan is reversed. In Giṭṭin he says, why are Samaritans disqualified? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael: Because if a Gentile or slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is a bastard. In Qiddushin one says, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both say, the child is a bastard. Here he says, from [a man] with whom she has widowhood or divorce she returns, from [a man] with whom she has no relation of widowhood or divorce she does not return130This implies that the child of a Gentile or a slave is not a bastard since the only person to be affected is the mother who cannot return to her priestly status if she was the daughter of a Cohen.. Rebbi Mattaniah said, I went to Seḥora and heard: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Ismael the sons of Jesua: “If a Cohen’s daughter becomes a widow or a divorcee without issue,127Lev. 22:13. “If a Cohen’s daughter becomes a widow or a divorcee without issue, when she returns to her father’s house as in her youth, she shall eat from her father’s food.”” from [a man] with whom she has widowhood or divorce she returns, from [a man] with whom she has no relation of widowhood or divorce she does not return. And I said, that is correct, there is no bastard, following Rebbi Joshua131It really is following R. Simeon from Timna (Mishnah 4:14), but the more liberal R. Joshua will certainly agree that there is no hint of bastardy attached to the child. If the child is a girl, she will be disqualified from the priesthood, cf. Halakhah 4:15., for a bastard is only from a woman which is for him under an incest prohibition and for whom one is punished by divine extirpation.