Commentary for Yevamot 242:18

ההוא עובד כוכבים דהוה קאמר ליה לישראל קטול אספסתא ושדי לחיואי בשבתא ואי לא קטילנא לך כדקטילנא לפלוני בר ישראל דאמרי ליה בשיל לי קדירה בשבת ולא בשיל לי וקטילתיה שמעה דביתהו ואתאי לקמיה דאביי שהיתא

But according to the ruling in our Mishnah, that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'our Mishnah wherein it was taught'. ');">⁵⁵</span> IN THE CASE OF AN IDOLATER, HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE IS INVALID IF HIS INTENTION WAS [TO ACT AS WITNESS],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From which it follows that if his Intention was not to act as witness his testimony is accepted. ');">⁵⁶</span> how is it possible [for the idolater's testimony ever to be accepted]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How can one make a statement the object of which is not even to affirm (i.e., to give evidence) that a certain thing had happened, and such a statement nevertheless be accepted as legally reliable? ');">⁵⁷</span> — Where he makes a statement at random;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] lit., 'speaks according to his innocence'; he is merely reporting what he had seen. ');">⁵⁸</span> as was the case where one went about saying, 'Who of the family of Hiwai is here? Who is here of the family of Hiwai? Hiwai is dead!', and R. Joseph allowed his<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hiwa's. ');">⁵⁹</span> wife to marry again. A man<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An idolater. ');">⁶⁰</span> once went about saying, 'Alas for the valiant rider who was at Pumbeditha, for he is dead'; and R. Joseph, or it might be said, Raba, allowed his wife to marry again. A man once went about saying, 'Who of the family of Hasa is here? Hasa is drowned!' [On hearing this] R. Nahman exclaimed, 'By God, the fish must have eaten Hasa up!' Relying on R. Nahman's exclamation, Hasa's wife went and married again, and no objection was raised against her action.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and they did not say anything to her'. ');">⁶¹</span> Said R. Ashi: From this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The acquiescence in the action of Hasa's wife. ');">⁶²</span> it may be inferred that the ruling of the Rabbis<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that which the Rabbis said'. ');">⁶³</span> that [if a man had fallen into] water which had no [visible] end, his wife is forbidden [to marry again] applies only ab initio, but if someone had already married her, she is not to be taken away from him. Others read: R. Nahman allowed his<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hasa's ');">⁶⁴</span> wife to marry again; for he said, 'Hasa was a great man, and had he come up [out of the water] his rescue would have become known'. The law, however, is not so. For there is no difference between a great man and one who is not great — [In either case] it is permitted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'yes'. ');">⁶⁵</span> <i>ex post facto</i> and forbidden<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'not'. ');">⁶⁶</span> <i>ab initio</i>. A certain idolater 'once said to an Israelite, 'Cut some grass<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], grass used as fodder for cattle. ');">⁶⁷</span> and throw it to my cattle on the Sabbath; if not, I will kill you as I have killed So-and-so, that son of an Israelite, to whom I said, "Cook for me a dish on the Sabbath", and whom, as he did not cook for me, I killed'. His wife<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The wife of the Israelite whom the idolater claimed to have killed. ');">⁶⁸</span> heard this and came to Abaye.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To obtain his ruling as to whether she may marry again. ');">⁶⁹</span> As he kept her waiting

Explore commentary for Yevamot 242:18. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.