Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Responsa for Bava Batra 268:4

אמר רב יוסף אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מפני מה אמרו זה בני נאמן הואיל ובעל שאמר גרשתי את אשתי נאמן

that he had a brother.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Our Mishnah teaches that, even in such a case, where owing to general belief the widow might be assumed to be subject to the laws of levirate marriage, the husband's statement that he has sons exempts her from the levirate marriage (V. infra). The second clause, according to which the statement, 'This is my brother' is not accepted, does not deal with the question of levirate, but with that of inheritance; v. Mishnah and notes a.l. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> R. Joseph said in the name of Rab Judah in the name of Samuel: Why has it been stated [that if a person said], 'This is my son', he is believed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And his widow is, accordingly, exempt from the Ievirate marriage. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>

Teshuvot Maharam

Q. B sent A to betroth Leah as his wife on his (B's) behalf. A came to Leah's town, invited the important persons of the community, showed them proof that he acted as B's agent, and appointed witnesses, but when he came to betroth Leah as B's wife, he said: "You are hereby betrothed to me", instead of "You are hereby betrothed to B." When the witnesses objected, A said that it was a slip of the tongue, that he did not intend to betroth Leah as his wife, especially since he was married already and that he would not violate the prohibition of polygamy by Rabbenu Gershom. He, therefore, repeated the ceremony and betrothed Leah to B. Must A divorce Leah before she may marry B?
A. No, A is to be believed that he did not intend to betroth Leah as his wife, and his unintentional act is not valid.
R. Meir adds: I wrote you my opinion but I do not want you to rely on it to free Leah without a divorce until you have inquired of the Rabbis of the surrounding territory and of the Rabbis of France. If they agree with me you may accept the above decision; but if they do not agree with me, their opinion is to take precedence over mine.
SOURCES: Pr. 586, 1015; Mord. Kidd. 522, 548; Tesh. Maim. to Nashim, 3.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Teshuvot Maharam

Q. B sent A to betroth Leah as his wife on his (B's) behalf. A came to Leah's town, invited the important persons of the community, showed them proof that he acted as B's agent, and appointed witnesses, but when he came to betroth Leah as B's wife, he said: "You are hereby betrothed to me", instead of "You are hereby betrothed to B." When the witnesses objected, A said that it was a slip of the tongue, that he did not intend to betroth Leah as his wife, especially since he was married already and that he would not violate the prohibition of polygamy by Rabbenu Gershom. He, therefore, repeated the ceremony and betrothed Leah to B. Must A divorce Leah before she may marry B?
A. No, A is to be believed that he did not intend to betroth Leah as his wife, and his unintentional act is not valid.
R. Meir adds: I wrote you my opinion but I do not want you to rely on it to free Leah without a divorce until you have inquired of the Rabbis of the surrounding territory and of the Rabbis of France. If they agree with me you may accept the above decision; but if they do not agree with me, their opinion is to take precedence over mine.
SOURCES: Pr. 586, 1015; Mord. Kidd. 522, 548; Tesh. Maim. to Nashim, 3.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse