Bava Batra 95

Chapter 95

א (ויקרא א, ג) יקריב אותו מלמד שכופין אותו יכול בעל כרחו תלמוד לומר לרצונו הא כיצד כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני
1 [From the superfluous words], he shall offer it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. 1, 3; If his oblation be a burnt offering&nbsp;… he shall offer it a male without blemish; he shall offer it at the door etc. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> we learn that a man can be forced to bring an [offering which he has vowed]. Does this mean, even in his own despite? — [This cannot be] because it says. Of his own free will.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A possible rendering of the word lirzono (E.V. that he nay be accepted). ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב ודלמא שאני התם דניחא ליה דתיהוי ליה כפרה ואלא מסיפא וכן אתה אומר בגיטי נשים כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני
2 How then [are we to say]? Force is applied to him until he says, 'I consent.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This shows that if a man says 'I consent' under duress, the consent is valid. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> But perhaps there is a special reason in this case, viz. that he may be well satisfied [to do so retrospectively], so as to have atonement made for his sins?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By bringing the offering. Hence we cannot reason from the offering to the sale. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ג ודלמא שאני התם דמצוה לשמוע דברי חכמים אלא סברא הוא אגב אונסיה גמר ומקנה
3 — We must therefore [look for the reason in] the next passage [of the Baraitha quoted]: 'Similarly in the case of divorces, [where the Rabbis have said that the husband can be forced to give a divorce]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if he suffers from a loathsome disease. ');"><sup>5</sup></span> we say [that what is meant is that] force is applied to him till he says, I consent.' But there too perhaps there is a special reason, viz. that it is a religious duty to listen to the word of the Sages?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Viz., to their injunction to him to grant a divorce. Hence we cannot reason from divorce to sale. ');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ד מותיב רב יהודה גט המעושה בישראל כשר ובעכו"ם פסול ובעכו"ם חובטין אותו ואומרין לו עשה מה שישראל אומר לך ואמאי התם נמי נימא אגב אונסיה גמר ומגרש
4 — What we must say therefore is that it is reasonable to suppose that under the pressure he really made up his mind to sell.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., make a complete transfer, since we may well assume that he is now content as after all he loses nothing. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> Rab Judah questioned this [on the ground of the following Mishnah]: 'A get [bill of divorce] extorted by pressure applied by an Israelite<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a Jewish court. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ה הא איתמר עלה אמר רב משרשיא דבר תורה אפילו בעכו"ם כשר ומה טעם אמרו בעכו"ם פסול כדי שלא תהא כל אחת ואחת הולכת ותולה עצמה ביד עכו"ם ומפקעת עצמה מיד בעלה
5 is valid, but if the pressure is applied by a non-Jew<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a non-Jewish court. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> It is invalid. A non-Jew also, however, may be commissioned [by the <i>Beth din</i>] to flog the husband and say to him, Do what the Israelite<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the Rabbis who commission the non-Jew to flog the husband. ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ו מותיב רב המנונא לקח מסיקריקון וחזר ולקח מבעל הבית מקחו בטל ואמאי התם נמי נימא אגב אונסיה גמר ומקני
6 bids you.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Git. 88b. ');"><sup>11</sup></span> Now why [should the get be invalid if extorted by the non-Jew]? Cannot we say that in that case also the man makes up his mind under pressure to grant the divorce?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because when all is said and done he may be glad to get rid of a wife who hates him. ');"><sup>12</sup></span>
ז הא אתמר עלה אמר רב לא שנו אלא דאמר ליה לך חזק וקני אבל בשטר קנה
7 — This rule must be understood in the light of the statement made by R. Mesharsheya regarding it: According to the Torah itself, the get is valid even if extorted by a non-Jew, and the reason why the Rabbis [on their own authority] declared it invalid was so as not to give an opportunity to any Jewish woman to keep company with a non-Jew and so release herself from her husband.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By inducing the non-Jew to go and extort a get from him. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> R. Hamnuna questioned [the rule on the ground of the following Mishnah]: 'If a man buys a field from a sicarius<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 199, n. 6. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ח ולשמואל דאמר אף בשטר נמי לא קנה מאי איכא למימר מודה שמואל היכא דיהב זוזי
8 and then buys it again from the original owner, the purchase is void.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Git. 55b. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> Why so? Cannot we say here too that under pressure the owner makes up his mind to sell [the field]? — We must understand this statement in the light of the gloss added by Rab: This rule was meant to apply only if the owner [merely] said to the purchaser, Go and take possession and acquire ownership, but if he gives him a written deed, he becomes the legal owner.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 199, n. 8. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>
ט ולרב ביבי דמסיים בה משמיה דרב נחמן קרקע אין לו מעות יש לו מאי איכא למימר רב ביבי מימרא הוא ומימרא לרב הונא לא סבירא ליה
9 But if we take the view of Samuel, that even if he gives him a deed he does not become the owner, what are we to reply [to R. Hamnuna]? — Samuel admits [that the sale is valid] if the purchaser actually pays the owner. But if we take the view of R. Nahman as completed by the statement of R. Bibi, that though the robber has no title to the land he has a title to the payment he made,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which shows that a proof brought by a robber is valid. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> what reply can be made [by R. Huna]? — R. Bibi adduced a mere statement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the individual opinion of an Amora. ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
י אמר רבא הלכתא תליוהו וזבין זביניה זביני ולא אמרן אלא
10 and such an opinion R. Huna did not feel bound to accept.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas if R. Bibi had been able to quote a Mishnah or a Baraitha, R. Huna would have felt constrained to bow to it. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> Raba said: The law is that if a man sells a thing under pressure of physical violence, the sale is valid. This is only the case, however,