Responsa for Bava Metzia 208:10
ולרבא מ"ש מהא דתנן אם אוביר ולא אעביד אשלם במיטבא התם לא קא גזים הכא כיון דקאמר מילתא יתירתא גוזמא בעלמא הוא דקגזים
A certain man once said, 'Give my daughter four hundred <i>zuz</i> as her <i>kethubah</i>.' R. Aba, son of R. Awia, sent an enquiry to R. Ashi: Does it mean, four hundred <i>zuz</i> [as the actual dowry], hence eight hundred [to be written]; or four hundred <i>zuz</i> [as the sum to be recorded], the equivalent of two hundred <i>zuz</i> [the real dowry].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It was in a place where the amount was doubled. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A vowed to quit gambling and promised to give one mark for a holy cause should he break his vow. He subsequently gave money to a friend to gamble for him. Must he pay the promised mark?
A. Vows are interpreted according to common parlance. If the phrase "I will not gamble again" includes, in common parlance, gambling by proxy, he must pay the fine. If, however, the implications of the phrase in common speech can not be determined, we must follow Biblical use of terms. In Biblical law a person is responsible for the acts of his agent unless the agent himself commits a sin by carrying out his mission. Although A's vow was made in the form of Asmakta, it is binding since all promises to a holy cause, even when made in the form of Asmakta, are binding.
SOURCES: Cr. 299, 300; Pr. 493, 494; L. 211, 212; Mordecai Hagadol p. 337b. Cf. Asher, Responsa 13, 2; Agudah B.K. 51.
A. Vows are interpreted according to common parlance. If the phrase "I will not gamble again" includes, in common parlance, gambling by proxy, he must pay the fine. If, however, the implications of the phrase in common speech can not be determined, we must follow Biblical use of terms. In Biblical law a person is responsible for the acts of his agent unless the agent himself commits a sin by carrying out his mission. Although A's vow was made in the form of Asmakta, it is binding since all promises to a holy cause, even when made in the form of Asmakta, are binding.
SOURCES: Cr. 299, 300; Pr. 493, 494; L. 211, 212; Mordecai Hagadol p. 337b. Cf. Asher, Responsa 13, 2; Agudah B.K. 51.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A vowed to quit gambling and promised to give one mark for a holy cause should he break his vow. He subsequently gave money to a friend to gamble for him. Must he pay the promised mark?
A. Vows are interpreted according to common parlance. If the phrase "I will not gamble again" includes, in common parlance, gambling by proxy, he must pay the fine. If, however, the implications of the phrase in common speech can not be determined, we must follow Biblical use of terms. In Biblical law a person is responsible for the acts of his agent unless the agent himself commits a sin by carrying out his mission. Although A's vow was made in the form of Asmakta, it is binding since all promises to a holy cause, even when made in the form of Asmakta, are binding.
SOURCES: Cr. 299, 300; Pr. 493, 494; L. 211, 212; Mordecai Hagadol p. 337b. Cf. Asher, Responsa 13, 2; Agudah B.K. 51.
A. Vows are interpreted according to common parlance. If the phrase "I will not gamble again" includes, in common parlance, gambling by proxy, he must pay the fine. If, however, the implications of the phrase in common speech can not be determined, we must follow Biblical use of terms. In Biblical law a person is responsible for the acts of his agent unless the agent himself commits a sin by carrying out his mission. Although A's vow was made in the form of Asmakta, it is binding since all promises to a holy cause, even when made in the form of Asmakta, are binding.
SOURCES: Cr. 299, 300; Pr. 493, 494; L. 211, 212; Mordecai Hagadol p. 337b. Cf. Asher, Responsa 13, 2; Agudah B.K. 51.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy