Jewish%20thought for Yevamot 48:14

רב מוקי לה למתניתין ביש לה בנים ויש לה עדים ומאי דוחקיה דרב לאוקמי למתניתין ביש לה בנים ויש לה עדים וטעמא דאיכא עדים מפקינן ואי ליכא עדים לא מפקינן לוקמה בשאין לה בנים אע"ג דליכא עדים

What, however, impels Rab to explain our Mishnah as dealing with a case where she has children and where witnesses against her are available, and to give as the reason why she is to be taken away, because witnesses are available, and [to imply that] if witnesses are not available she is not taken away; let him rather explain [our Mishnah as dealing with the case] where she has no children [and has to be taken away] even though no witnesses are available! Raba replied: Our Mishnah presented a difficulty to him. What point was there [he argued] for using the expression 'WAS TAKEN AWAY'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], lit., 'they (i.e. Beth din) took her away'. ');">⁴⁷</span> It should have been stated 'he parted from her';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], lit., 'he (i.e., the husband) brought her out'. ');">⁴⁸</span> but any such expression as '<i>was taken</i> away' implies 'by the Beth din' and the <i>Beth din</i> take away only where witnesses are available.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' No wife may be taken away from her husband because of a mere rumour or suspicion. ');">⁴⁹</span> If you prefer I may say that that Baraitha<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which requires a wife who had no children to leave her husband even where no witnesses are available. ');">⁵⁰</span>

Explore jewish%20thought for Yevamot 48:14. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.