Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Responsa for Bava Batra 258:11

והלכתא כל תוך כדי דבור כדבור דמי לבר מעבודת כוכבים

— [This is] no difficulty, [for] here,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the Baraitha; according to which possession is acquired when the expression 'gift' was used in the case of one and that of 'inheritance' in the case of the other. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> [the expressions of 'gift' and 'inheritance' may have been uttered] one immediately after the other;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], lit., 'within as much (time) as is required for an utterance', i.e., the time needed to utter a short greeting such as, 'Peace be upon thee my master', represented by the three words, [H] ');"><sup>31</sup></span> there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the statement of Resh Lakish. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> [the two expressions] may not have been uttered one immediately after the other.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'after the time required for an utterance. ');"><sup>33</sup></span> And the law is that [expressions uttered] immediately after one another<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], lit., 'within as much (time) as is required for an utterance', i.e., the time needed to utter a short greeting such as, 'Peace be upon thee my master', represented by the three words, [H] ');"><sup>31</sup></span> [are] always [regarded] as having been uttered simultaneously, except, [in the case of] idolatry<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if one set aside an object for idol worship, though he withdrew immediately, the object remains prohibited. [Or, according to Tosaf. if a man proclaims an idol as his god, his immediate retraction does not save him from the death penalty. (V. Ned. 87a.)] ');"><sup>34</sup></span>

Teshuvot Maharam

Q. In the presence of witnesses Leah asked A to betroth her. While she was in a yard not owned by her, A threw a ring into her lap for the purpose of betrothal. The witnesses, although they saw Leah shake her dresses in order to brush the ring away, did not see whether or not the ring actually fell into her lap. Does Leah need a divorce from A?
A. Had the witnesses seen the ring fall into Leah's lap, she would need a divorce in spite of her claim that she never intended to become A's wife and that she was joking when she asked him to betroth her. For we would, then, be concerned only with facts and not with her thoughts and unexpressed intentions. But, since the witnesses did not see the ring fall into Leah's lap, and the yard where the incident took place did not belong to Leah, she needs no divorce, for no betrothal took place. R. Meir adds: If my teachers agree with my decision, all will be well. But if they do not agree I shall subscribe to whatever they decide to do. However, I should prefer not to be strict in this matter and not to require Leah to obtain a divorce, lest A become rebellious and refuse to divorce her, and lest he travel to a distant land and thus render it impossible for the unfortunate woman ever to marry again.
This Responsum is addressed to: "My teacher Rabbi Haim and his court."
SOURCES: Pr. 993: Mord. Git. 451; ibid. Kid. 548: Tesh. Maim. to Nashim. 1.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull Chapter