Concealing or Revealing Ones Non-Halachic Flaw In Yichus

Note: Not halacha lemaaseh. I am just discussing one source, and an alternative way of reading it, but actual pesak halacha involves many more sources and greater analysis.

In Yevamot 45a we encounter the following:

ואף רב מורה בה היתירא דההוא דאתא לקמיה דרב אמר ליה ►עובד כוכבים◄ {גוי} ועבד הבא על בת ישראל מהו אמר לו הולד כשר אמר ליה הב לי ברתך לא יהיבנא לך אמר שימי בר חייא לרב אמרי אינשי גמלא במדי אקבא רקדא הא קבא והא גמלא והא מדי ולא רקדא א"ל אי ניהוי כיהושע בן נון לא יהיבנא ליה ברתי א"ל אי הוה כיהושע בן נון אי מר לא יהיב ליה אחריני יהבי ליה האי אי מר לא יהיב ליה אחריני לא יהבי ליה לא הוה קאזיל מקמיה יהיב ביה עיניה ושכיב ואף רב מתנה מורה בה להיתירא ואף רב יהודה מורה בה להיתירא דכי אתא לקמיה דרב יהודה א"ל זיל איטמר או נסיב בת מינך וכי אתא לקמיה דרבא א"ל או גלי או נסיב בת מינך

And Rab also ruled that the child is legitimate. For once a man appeared before Rab and asked him, 'What [is the legal position of the child] where an idolater or a slave had intercourse with the daughter of an Israelite'? 'The child is legitimate', the Master replied. 'Give me then your daughter' said the man. 'I will not give her to you' [was the Master's reply]. Said Shimi b. Hiyya to Rab. 'People say that in Media a camel can dance on a kab; here is the kab, here is the camel and here is Media, but there is no dancing'! 'Had he been equal to Joshua the son of Nun I would not have given him my daughter', the Master replied. 'Had he been like Joshua the son of Nun', the other retorted, 'others would have given him their daughters, if the Master had not given him his; but with this man, if the Master will not give him, others also will not give him'. As the man refused to go away he fixed his eye upon him and he died. R. Mattena also ruled that the child is legitimate. Rab Judah also ruled that the child is legitimate. For when one came before Rab Judah, the latter told him, 'Go and conceal your identity or marry one of your own kind'. When such a man appeared before Raba he told him, 'Either go abroad or marry one of your own kind'.

In this instance, the child of such a union is valid {kasher} to marry an Israelite, but it is a dispute among post-Talmudic authorities whether the child has a pegam {flaw in lineage} which would still prevent marriage to a kohen. Some say there is none and some have a doubt about it. See e.g. the Rif for more details on this score.

But an interesting point in play here is that in terms of marrying an Israelite, the child is certainly valid, yet there is this instruction to conceal. This would seem to be because of prejudices of those other people, or wariness as to the actual validity of the lineage, despite this ruling. And concealing this information is not geneivas daas, and is not a basis for declaring the marriage a mekach taus.

There is one thing I would like to discuss regarding this. And that is:

ואף רב יהודה מורה בה להיתירא דכי אתא לקמיה דרב יהודה א"ל זיל איטמר או נסיב בת מינך וכי אתא לקמיה דרבא א"ל או גלי או נסיב בת מינך

Soncino agrees with Rashi here, translating:

Rab Judah also ruled that the child is legitimate. For when one came before Rab Judah, the latter told him, 'Go and conceal your identity or marry one of your own kind'. When such a man appeared before Raba he told him, 'Either go abroad or marry one of your own kind'.

In a footnote explaining "conceal your identity," he paraphrases Rashi, writing

I.e., 'go to a place where you are unknown and where you might in consequence pass as a legitimate Israelite and be allowed to marry a Jewess'. Since Rab Judah counselled him to marry a Jewess if he could, by concealing his origin, it is obvious that in his opinion the man was legitimate. A bastard would not have been allowed marriage with a Jewess under any circumstances.

and then he translates או גלי as "go abroad." Thus, Rav Yehuda and Rava are saying the same thing.

This is how Rashi explains both זיל איטמר and it או גלי:


I would suggest a different interpretation of או גלי. For גלי can either mean go into exile (thus "abroad" here) or "reveal." As such, and as it stands in the same place in Rava's statement as זיל איטמר, "go conceal" did in Rav Yehuda's statement, I would suggest that Rava meant "either reveal, or marry one of your own kind."

That is, while both agree the man is valid to marry an Israelite woman, they disagree as to whether one may conceal this information from one's prospective spouse and his or her family. Rabbi Yehuda held that since there was nothing to the matter, one could conceal it, or else marry someone with the same status (of valid, from such a union). Rava held that even though there was nothing halachic to the matter, one should not conceal it. Therefore, the choices are (a) to reveal it, together with the fact that halachically it is no impediment to marriage, and hope people get over their hangups, or (b) to not reveal it, but to marry someone of the same status.

This is a potentially important alternative reading, since this gemara is a source for the question of whether one may conceal certain types of flaws, which may or may not constitute flaws, from one's spouse.