The Talmud on the Status of Samaritans

b. Kiddushin 75b–76a

R. Ishmael holds [that] Samaritans [Heb., Cutheans—Ed.] are lion converts [i.e., forced converts—Ed.], and the priests who assimilated among them were unfit priests, as it is stated: And made unto them from among themselves priests of the high places (2 Kings 17:32). And Rabbah bar Bar Ḥanah says [that] R. Yoḥanan says: [What is the meaning of from among themselves?] From the thorns that are among the [Jewish] people, [meaning those of flawed lineage]. And [it was] due to that [reason that the sages] disqualified them.

And R. Akiva holds: Samaritans are true converts, and the priests who assimilated among them were fit priests, as it is stated: And made unto them from among themselves priests of the high places (2 Kings 17:32). And Rabbah bar Bar Ḥanah says [that] R. Yoḥanan says: [From among themselves means] from the chosen ones, [the upper echelon] of the [Jewish] people. And for what [reason] did [the sages] prohibit them [from entering into the congregation? It is] because they would perform levirate marriage with betrothed women, and [they would] exempt married women.¹ [In] what [way would they] expound [the verse to lead them to this conclusion? The verse states:] The wife of the dead man shall not be married outside of the family to one not of his kin; [her brother-in-law will have intercourse with her and take her to him to be his wife, and consummate the levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5). They understood the word outside to be a description of the woman:] She who sits outside, [i.e., one who is only betrothed;] she shall not be married to one not of his kin. But she who is not sitting outside, [but who has already married,] shall marry one not of his kin. And R. Akiva [conforms] to his [standard line of] reasoning, as he says: [The offspring of intercourse] for which [one] is liable [for violating] a prohibition is a mamzer.

And some say [the sages disqualified Samaritans for marriage] because they are not well versed in the details of mitzvot. Who [is the one indicated by the phrase:] Some say? R. Idi bar Avin said: It is [the opinion of] R. Eliezer. As it is taught [in a baraita (t. Pesaḥim 2:2)]: The matzah of a Samaritan is permitted [to be eaten on Passover and is not considered to be leavened bread], and a person can fulfill his obligation [to eat matzah on the first night] of Passover with it; but R. Eliezer prohibits [it], since [Samaritans] are not well versed in the details of mitzvot, [and there is concern that their matzah might be leavened]. R. Simeon ben Gamaliel says [that this is not a concern, as with regard to] any mitzvah that Samaritans embraced [and accepted], they are more exacting in its [observance] than [are] Jews. But here, [with regard to marriage, in] what [details are] they not well versed? [It is] because they are not well versed with regard to the laws of betrothal and divorce.

b. Avodah Zarah 15b

Rabbah sold a certain donkey to a Jew who was suspected of selling [large livestock] to a gentile. Abaye said to [Rabbah], “What is the reason [that] the Master acted in this manner?” [Rabbah] said to him, “I sold [the donkey] to a Jew.” [Abaye] said to him, “But he will go and sell it to a gentile.” [Rabbah responded, “Is the only possibility that] he will sell to a gentile, [and] he will not sell it to a Jew?”

[Abaye] raised an objection to [Rabbah’s opinion from a baraita: In] a place where [the people] were accustomed to sell small livestock to Samaritans, one may sell [the animals to them; in a place] where [the people were] not [accustomed] to sell [them] one may not sell [the animals to them]. What is the reason [that the sale of small livestock to Samaritans is prohibited]? If we say [that it is] because [Samaritans] are suspected of [engaging in] bestiality, are they suspected [of this practice]? But isn’t it taught [in a baraita]: One may not keep an animal in the inns of gentiles. Male [animals may not be placed] with men, [as they are suspected of engaging in bestiality,] and female [animals may not be left] with women, [despite the fact that there is no concern that they may engage in bestiality].¹ And needless to say, [it is prohibited to leave] female [animals] with men, and male [animals] with women. And one may not entrust an animal to [a gentile] shepherd, and one may not seclude oneself with [gentiles, due to the danger that this entails]. And one may not entrust a child to them to teach him [how to read] books or to teach him a craft. But one may keep an animal in the inns of Samaritans, [as they are not suspected of violating a Torah prohibition and engaging in bestiality]. Male [animals may be placed] with women and female [animals may be left] with men, and needless to say, [it is permitted to leave] male [animals] with men and female [animals] with women. And one may entrust an animal to [a Samaritan] shepherd, and one may seclude oneself with [Samaritans,] and one may entrust a child to them to teach him [how to read] books and to teach him a craft. [The Gemara infers from the baraita:] Evidently, [Samaritans are] not suspected [of engaging in bestiality, yet livestock may not be sold to them, as they are suspected of selling it to gentiles].

And furthermore, it is taught [in a baraita]: One may not sell weapons to [gentiles] or [the auxiliary] equipment of weapons, and one may not sharpen weapons for them. And one may not sell them stocks [used for fastening the feet of prisoners], or [iron] neck chains, or foot chains, or iron chains. [This prohibition applies equally to] both a gentile and a Samaritan. [Abaye analyzes this baraita:] What is the reason [for the prohibition against selling these items to Samaritans]? If we say that they are suspected of bloodshed, [that is difficult:] But are they suspected [of this]? Didn’t you say [that] one may seclude oneself with them, [which indicates that they are not suspected of bloodshed]? Rather, [it is prohibited to sell these items to Samaritans] because they will come to sell them to a gentile. [According to this reasoning, it should likewise be prohibited to sell a donkey to a Jew who is suspected of selling animals to gentiles.] And if you would say [that there is a difference between a Jew and a Samaritan, as] a Samaritan will [likely] not repent [and will sell to a gentile, whereas] a Jew will [likely] repent [and not sell these items, this reasoning is incorrect]. But doesn’t R. Naḥman say [explicitly that] Rabbah bar Avuha says: Just as [the sages] said [that] it is prohibited to sell to a gentile, so too it is prohibited to sell to a Jew who is suspected of selling to a gentile?

[When Rabbah heard this and realized that Abaye was correct,] he ran three parasangs [a distance of three to three and a half miles] after [the buyer who purchased his donkey to revoke the sale, as the Jew was suspected of selling to gentiles]; and some say [that he ran] one parasang through sand. But he did not [succeed in] overtaking him.

b. Gittin 45a

Rav Ḥisda’s slave escaped to Bei Kutai, [i.e., Cuthea—Ed.]. He sent [a request] to [the residents of that place]: “Return him to me.” They sent [a response] to him: “[The verse states:] You shall not deliver to his master a slave (Deuteronomy 23:16), [so we will not return this slave to you].” He sent [a response] to them: “[The verse also states with regard to lost items: And you shall restore it to him . . .] and so you shall do for his donkey and so you shall do for his garment and so you shall do for anything your brother has lost (Deuteronomy 22:2–3).” They sent [a response] to him [again]: “But isn’t it written: You shall not deliver to his master a slave?” [Rav Ḥisda] sent [a response] to them: “That [verse is referring] to a slave who escaped from outside of Erets [Yisrael] to Erets [Yisrael], and in accordance with [the explanation] of R. Aḥai son of R. Yoshiyah, [and my slave escaped from one location outside of Erets Yisrael to another location outside of Erets Yisrael].” And what is different [about this case] that [led him to] send [a response] to them [specifically] in accordance with [the explanation] of R. Aḥai son of R. Yoshiyah? Because that is [how the Samaritans would] understand the verse.

Abaye lost a donkey [among the Samaritans in] Bei Kutai. He sent [a request] to them: “Send it to me.” They sent [a response] to him: “Send a distinguishing mark [and we will return it to you].” He sent [the following distinguishing mark] to them: “That its belly is white.” They sent [a response] to him: “If not [for the fact] that you are Naḥmani, we would not send it to you. Is that to say [that] bellies of all donkeys aren’t white?”