Responsa for Yevamot 211:3
אלא כל שאומרים לו חלוץ לה ע"מ שתתן לך מאתים זוז תניא נמי הכי חליצה מוטעת כשירה אי זו היא חליצה מוטעת כל שאומרים חלוץ לה על מנת שתתן לך מאתים זוז
that both shall at the same time have such intention',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Yeb. XII, supra 102b. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> and you say that her <i>halizah</i> is valid!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even when the levir was misled into thinking that he was performing an act of marriage! ');"><sup>8</sup></span> But [in fact this is the meaning]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of 'halizah under a false assumption'. ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A's heirs demand from B A's Humash (one book of the Pentateuch) which witnesses saw in B's possession. B claims that A deposited the book with him as security for the two marks A owed him. Some of A's heirs admit having heard A say before his death that the book was deposited with B as a pledge. Is a Humash classified as an object which is usually borrowed or hired and regarding which a person is, therefore, not believed when he claims to have received it as a pledge?
A. Throughout the kingdom, Rashi's view is accepted that a Humash is not an object that is usually borrowed or hired. B therefore may take an oath that the book was pledged with him for two marks. However, B should be careful in taking his oath; for, if A did not actually owe him two marks, but promised to give B two marks if the latter effect a reconciliation between A and his son, A became indebted to B only for the latter's wages for the time and effort expended, but not for full two marks.
SOURCES: Pr. 1007.
A. Throughout the kingdom, Rashi's view is accepted that a Humash is not an object that is usually borrowed or hired. B therefore may take an oath that the book was pledged with him for two marks. However, B should be careful in taking his oath; for, if A did not actually owe him two marks, but promised to give B two marks if the latter effect a reconciliation between A and his son, A became indebted to B only for the latter's wages for the time and effort expended, but not for full two marks.
SOURCES: Pr. 1007.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy