Responsa for Bava Batra 306:2

אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע כמאן אזלא הא שמעתא דרבה כר' נתן דתניא מי מוציא מיד מי הוא מוציא מידיהן בלא ראיה והן אין מוציאין מידו אלא בראיה דברי רבי יעקב

men and the restrictions of dead<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a priest who had married the daughter of an Israelite (and who had, thereby. conferred upon her the right of eating of the heave-offering) was among the passengers, it is assumed that he is dead, and his wife is henceforth deprived of the privilege he had conferred upon her (cf. Git. ibid.). ');">5 men, how much more [ought we to do] so6 [in the case of] sick men, of whom most do recover. R. Huna, the son of R. Joshua. said: In accordance with whose [view] may that reported statement of Rabbah be justified?7

Teshuvot Maharam

Q. B engaged A as tutor to his son. B said to A that since he, B, was unlearned and did not know whether or not A had sufficient knowledge to tutor his son, A must go to his (B's) relative C to be examined before entering upon his duties. A came to B's house and began to tutor B's son. Subsequently B discovered that A had never been examined by C. He, therefore, summoned A to court. A now declares himself ready to be examined, but B argues that A's present knowledge is no proof of his previous fitness for his position. Moreover, one witness testifies that at the time A undertook to teach B's son, he was not qualified to do so because of insufficient knowledge.
A. If A has now sufficient knowledge to teach B's son, the burden of proof lies on B that A did not have such knowledge at the time he was engaged. However, since B has one witness to support his claim, A must take an oath to the effect that he had sufficient knowledge at the time of the agreement. If A takes such oath, he will be entitled to collect his full wages from B.
SOURCES: Cr. 3; Pr. 488; Mord. B. B. 621. Cf. Agudah B. M. 172.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse