Bava Batra 269

ההוא דהוה קא שכיב אמרו ליה אתתיה למאן אמר להו חזיא לכהנא רבה

[Once] a certain [man] was dying.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who had brothers but no sons. ');">¹</span> Being asked to whom his wife [was permitted to be married<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., whether she was subject to the laws of levirate marriage. ');">²</span>

אמר רבא מאי ניחוש לה הא אמר רב חייא בר אבא אמר ר' יוחנן בעל שאמר גרשתי את אשתי נאמן א"ל אביי והא כי אתא ר' יצחק בר יוסף אמר ר' יוחנן בעל שאמר גרשתי את אשתי אינו נאמן א"ל ולאו מי לא שנינהו כאן למפרע וכאן להבא

and] he replied to them, 'She is suitable for the High Priest',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., 'she may marry anyone' having been divorced by him. 'High Priest' is thus not to be taken literally, since even a priest is forbidden by law to marry a divorced woman (v. Rashb. and Tosaf.) [Yad Ramah, a.l., explains that the marriage had not been consummated and the husband claimed the annulment thereof because it had been contracted on a certain condition which was not fulfilled, in these circumstances the woman might be allowed to marry even a High Priest.] ');">³</span> [in considering this case], Raba said: What is there to apprehend?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If she is exempted from the levirate marriage. ');">⁴</span>

ואשנויי ניקום ולסמוך א"ל רבא לרב נתן בר אמי חוש לה

Surely R. Hiyya b. Abba said in the name of R. Johanan [that] a husband who said, 'I divorced my wife' is believed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the reason stated supra. Similarly, here, since he said that she may marry anyone, i.e., that he had divorced her (or, owing to the non-fulfilment of the condition on which the marriage was contracted), he is believed. ');">⁵</span> Abaye said to him: But, surely, when R. Isaac b. Joseph came, he said in the name of R. Johanan [that] a husband, who said, 'I divorced my wife', is not believed! — He said to him: Is he not? Surely it has been explained that one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here'. ');">⁶</span>

ההוא דהוה מוחזק לן דלית ליה אחי ואמר בשעת מיתה דלית ליה אחי אמר רב יוסף מאי ליחוש לה חדא דמוחזק לן דלית ליה אחין ועוד הא אמר בשעת מיתה דלית ליה אמר ליה אביי הא אמרי דאיכא עדים במדינת הים דידעי דאית ליה אחי

[report speaks] retrospectively and the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here'. ');">⁶</span> as to the future! Shall we then,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'shall we rise'. ');">⁷</span>

השתא מיהת הא ליתנהו קמן לאו היינו דר' חנינא דאמר רבי חנינא עדים בצד אסתן ותאסר

[came the reply], rely upon an explanation?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is still possible, despite the explanation, that the matter is in dispute between Amoraim, and that according to one opinion the husband's evidence in such a case is not accepted at all. ');">⁸</span> [Thereupon] said Raba to R. Nathan b. Ammi: Take this into consideration.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the widow must not marry without obtaining halizah (v. Glos.) ');">⁹</span>

אמר ליה אביי אם הקלנו בשבויה (משום דמנוולא נפשה לגבי שבאי) נקל באשת איש א"ל רבא לרב נתן בר אמי חוש לה:

A certain [person] was known<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But there was no legal evidence. ');">¹⁰</span> to have no brothers,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It was certain, however, that he had no children. ');">¹¹</span>

זה אחי אינו נאמן: ואידך מאי קאמרי אי קאמרי אחונא הוא אמאי יטול עמו בחלקו ותו לא אלא דקא אמרי לאו אחינו הוא

and at the time of his death he declared that he had no brothers, [in considering the case.] R. Joseph said: What is there here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In allowing the widow to marry. ');">¹²</span> to apprehend? In the first place<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'one'. ');">¹³</span>

אימא סיפא נפלו לו נכסים ממקום אחר יירשו אחיו עמו הא אמרי ליה לאו אחונא הוא

it is known that he has no brothers, and secondly<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and again, surely'. ');">¹⁴</span> he [himself] has declared at the time of his death that he had none. Abaye said to him: But [people] say that in the countries beyond the sea<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'country of the sea'. ');">¹⁵</span>

לא צריכא דקא אמרי אין אנו יודעין

there are witnesses who know that he has brothers! — 'Now, at any rate [replied the other, 'they are not before us'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And one need not go to the ends of the earth to discover witnesses in order to restrict the widows freedom. ');">¹⁶</span> [Is] not [this case] the same as that of R. Hanina? For R. Hanina said: Shall she<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The incident related to the daughters of Samuel, who were in captivity; and when brought to Palestine, declared that their honour was not violated. R. Hanina allowed them to be married to priests, who are forbidden to marry a woman whose chastity had been violated. ');">¹⁷</span>

אמר רבא זאת אומרת מנה לי בידך והלה אומר איני יודע פטור

be forbidden [because there are] witnesses at the North Pole!'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Goldschmidt. Heb., istan, [H] 'the north wind'. Cf. Assyr. is-ta-na-ni ( = north), C. J. Gadd, Tablets from Kirkuk in Revue d'Assyriologie, vol. XXIII, no. 34, line 12, and il-ta-an ( = north) op. cit., no. 2, line 6, and passim. ');">¹⁸</span> Abaye said to him: Shall we relax [the law] in [the case of] a married woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'wife of a man', where the assumption is that she is subject to the laws of the levirate marriage. ');">¹⁹</span>

אביי אמר

because<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'if'. ');">²⁰</span> we relaxed [it] in [the case of] a captive woman?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In this case the captive is entitled to the benefit of the doubt, since there is the assumption that she as a woman protected her chastity and honour. ');">²¹</span> [Thereupon] said Raba to R. Nathan b. Animi: Take this into consideration.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., do not allow her to marry before complying with the laws of halizah. ');">²²</span> THIS IS MY BROTHER', HE IS NOT BELIEVED. And what do the other [brothers] say? If they say. 'He is our brother', why should he [only] take [a share] with him<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With the brother who acknowledged him. ');">²³</span> in his portion and no more?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He should receive all equal share with all the brothers. ');">²⁴</span> [If], however, they say, 'He is not our brother', [how will you] explain the latter [clause]: [IF, HOWEVER,] HE ACQUIRED PROPERTY FROM ANOTHER SOURCE, HIS BROTHERS SHARE THE INHERITANCE WITH HIM. [Why should they inherit?] Surely they had declared of him, 'He is not our brother'! — [This law is] required [in the case] only where they say, 'We do not know'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He cannot claim a share in their portions since he has no legal proof of the brotherhood. They, however, are entitled to be his heirs since both he and the brother who acknowledged him admitted that they were brothers. ');">²⁵</span> Raba said: This implies [that if a person claims from another], 'You owe me a maneh' and the other replies. 'I do not know, he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The defendant. ');">²⁶</span> is exempt.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He need not pay the claim. It is incumbent upon the claimant to produce the proof; v, B.K. 118a; B.M. 97b. ');">²⁷</span> Said Abaye: