|
|
||
             
|
Women's Defects: Forget the Silicone
ALL DEFECTS WHICH DISQUALIFY.... A Tanna taught: To these [the defects that would disqualify a priest from serving...] were added perspiration, a mole, and smell of the mouth. Is the Tanna saying that a woman with bad breath or body odor can be divorced without her ketubah price? Yep. Do these, then, not cause a disqualification in respect of priests? Surely we have learned, ‘The old, the sick and the filthy' (Bechorot 41a), and we have also learned, ‘These defects whether permanent or transitory, render human beings unfit [for the Temple service] Please note that the Gemara isn't arguing with the Tanna's premise; it just notes that the blemishes of bad breath and body odor already have been listed as defects that disqualify a priest. Why would the Tanna have to mention them as a separate category for women? R. Jose b. Hanina replied: This is no contradiction. The former refers to perspiration that can be removed; the latter, to perspiration that cannot be removed. R.Ashi said: You are pointing out a contradiction between ‘perspiration' and ‘one who is filthy' [which in fact are not alike, for] there, in the case of priests, it is possible to remove the perspiration by the aid of sour wine, and it is also possible [to remove] an offensive breath by holding pepper in one's mouth and thus performing the Temple service, but in the case of a wife [such devices are for all practical purposes] impossible. What kind of a mole is here meant? If one overgrown with hair, it would cause disqualification in both cases; if one with no hair, if it is a large one it causes disqualification in both cases; and if it is a small one it causes no disqualification in either; for it was taught: A mole which is overgrown with hair is regarded as a bodily defect; if with no hair it is only deemed to be a bodily defect when large but when small it is no defect; and what is meant by large? R. Simeon b. Gamaliel explained: The size of an Italian issar. R. Jose the son of R. Hanina said: One which is situated on her forehead. [If it was on] her forehead he must have seen it and acquiesced! R. Papa replied: It is one that was situated under her bonnet and is sometimes exposed and sometimes not. R. Hisda said: I heard the following statement from a great man And who is he? R. Shila If a dog bit her and the spot of the bite turned into a scar [such a scar] is considered a bodily defect. Our sages now provide us with three more disqualifying defects. DON'T KILL THE MESSENGER! R. Hisda further stated: A harsh voice in a woman is a bodily defect since it is said in Scripture, "For sweet is your voice, and your countenance is comely. (Song of Songs 2:14) R. Natan of Bira learned: [The space] of one handbreadth between a woman's breasts. !!!!!!!!!!! Even one of our sages saw this as a bit outrageous. Thus, R. Aha the son of Raba intended to explain in the presence of R. Ashi [that this statement meant that ‘the space of] a handbreadth' is to advantage, but R. Ashi said to him: This was taught in connection with bodily defects. Nice try, R Aha, but no cigar. So what is the "natural" look? And what space? Abaye replied: Three fingers. It was taught: R. Natan said, It is a bodily defect if a woman's breasts are bigger than those of others. By how much? R. Meyasha the grandson of R. Joshua b. Levi replied in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi: By one handbreadth. Note, however, that nowhere do our sages define the "norm." Nor is it clear in what direction or form one must measure the handsbreadth. It's one of those cases where they know what they're talking about, but they're not going to provide us with any specifics. They clearly have an image in mind because they ask, Is such a deformity, however, possible? Yes; for Rabbah b. Bar Hana related, I saw an Arab woman who flung her breasts over her back and nursed her child.
Designed, Developed and Hosted by Efficient Web Solutions, LLC |