Commentary for Yevamot 134:3

לימא דרב נחמן תנאי היא לא דכ"ע אית להו דרב נחמן והכא בחוששין למיעוטא קמיפלגי

Must it be assumed that R. Nahman's ruling is a matter of dispute between Tannaim!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That R. Simeon, who permits the slaves to eat, in the case of sons, by adopting the arrangement mentioned, is of the same opinion as R. Nahman; while R. Jose, who forbids terumah to the slaves, maintaining as he evidently does that the arrangement is of no avail and that the division must be postponed until the heirs reach majority, is in disagreement with R. Nahman. ');">⁷</span> — No; all accept R. Nahman's [arrange. ment],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Wherever such had been made, ');">⁸</span> but the dispute here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Between R. Jose and R. Simeon, supra 6a. ');">⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Yevamot 134:3. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.