Yevamot 185

Chapter 185

א קונם שאני עושה לפיך אין צריך להפר
1 [If a woman said to her husband]. 'Konam,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is one of the expressions of a vow. V. Glos. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> I do aught for your mouth',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., that her husband be forbidden to eat anything made by her or purchased from the proceeds of her work. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The husband who is empowered to annul his wife's vow. Cf. Num. XXX, 7ff. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב ר"ע אומר יפר שמא תעדיף עליו יותר מן הראוי לו
2 need not annul [her vow].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A wife's work belongs to her husband and she has, therefore, no right to dispose of it by vow or otherwise. Her vow is consequently null and void and requires on invalidation. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> R. Akiba, however, said: He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The husband who is empowered to annul his wife's vow. Cf. Num. XXX, 7ff. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> must annul it, since she might do more [work] than is due<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A husband is entitled only to a certain amount of his wife's work (v. Keth. 64b). Any work in excess of that maximum is at the disposal of the wife who, in the opinion of R. Akiba, is entitled to forbid it to her husband by a vow, though that work has not yet been done. ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ג הא איתמר עלה א"ר הונא בריה דרב יהושע באומרת יקדשו ידי לעושיהם דידים איתנהו בעלמא
3 to him!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Keth. 59a, 66a, Ned. 85a, Kid. 63a. V. supra note 3. ');"><sup>6</sup></span> Surely in connection with this it was stated: R. Huna son of R. Joshua said, [This law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a wife may by her vow cause her future work to be forbidden. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> applies only] where she said, 'My hands<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And through them the work they will produce. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ד ופליגא דרב נחמן בר יצחק דאמר רב נחמן בר יצחק רב הונא כרב ורב כרבי ינאי ורבי ינאי כרבי חייא ור' חייא כרבי ורבי כרבי מאיר ור"מ כרבי אליעזר בן יעקב ור' אליעזר בן יעקב כר' עקיבא דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם
4 shall be consecrated to Him who made them', since her hands are in existence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the time she made her vow. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The view presented by R. Huna, according to which R. Akiba maintains that a thing that is not yet in existence may not be legally transferred. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> differs [from the opinion] of R. Nahman b. Isaac. For R. Nahman b. Isaac stated: R. Huna [holds the same opinion] as Rab,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From whom he received it as a tradition from his master, R. Jannai. who in turn, received it from his master, R. Hiyya, and so on to R. Akiba. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ה רב הונא מאי היא דאיתמר המוכר פירות דקל לחברו אמר רב הונא עד שלא באו לעולם יכול לחזור בו משבאו לעולם אין יכול לחזור בו
5 Rab as R. Jannai, R. Jannai as R. Hiyya. R. Hiyya as Rabbi,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Judah I, the Patriarch or Prince, compiler of the Mishnah. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> Rabbi as R. Meir, R. Meir as R. Eliezer b. Jacob. and R. Eliezer b. Jacob as R. Akiba, who stated that a man may transfer possession of a thing that is not yet in existence. What statement is it [that records the opinion of] R. Huna? It was stated: He who sold the fruit of a date-tree<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' During the winter, before they blossomed. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ו ור"נ אמר אף משבאו לעולם יכול לחזור בו אמר רב נחמן מודינא דאי שמיט ואכיל לא מפקינן מיניה
6 to another may. said R. Huna, withdraw from the sale before they come into existence; but after they have come into existence he may no longer withdraw.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because, according to R. Huna, the kinyan that was arranged before they come into existence takes effect as soon as they come into existence. ');"><sup>14</sup></span> R. Nahman, however, stated: He may withdraw even after they have come Into existence.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In his opinion no kinyan is effective unless the object sold is actually in existence at the time of the sale. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> Said R. Nahman: I admit, that if he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The buyer. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>
ז רב דאמר רב הונא אמר רב האומר לחברו שדה זו שאני לוקח לכשאקחנה קנויה לך מעכשיו קנה
7 had already plucked and ate them, [compensation] is not to he extracted from him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.M. 66b. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> As to Rab?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where was his view expressed? ');"><sup>18</sup></span> — [In that] which R. Huna stated in the name of Rab: If a man said to another, 'let this field which I am about to buy be yours as from now the moment I buy it', [the latter] acquires It.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' B.M. 16b; which proves that, in the opinion of Rab, one may transfer possession of a field which one does not yet possess. obviously because he holds that one may transfer possession of that which is not yet in existence. ');"><sup>19</sup></span>
ח רבי ינאי כרבי חייא דרבי ינאי הוה ליה אריסא דהוה מייתי ליה כנתא דפירי כל מעלי שבתא ההוא יומא נגה ליה ולא אתא שקל עשר מפירי דביתיה עלייהו אתא לקמיה דרבי חייא
8 'R. Jannai [is of the same opinion] as R. Hiyya'; for R. Jannai had a tenant<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] cf [G], a tenant of a field who in return for his labour receives a share of the field's produce. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> who used to bring him a basket of fruit every Sabbath Eve. Once as it was growing dark, and [the tenant] did not come, [R. Jannai] took<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before the Sabbath commenced. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> tithe<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An act which In Rabbinic law it is forbidden to perform on the Sabbath. ');"><sup>22</sup></span>
ט א"ל שפיר עבדת דתניא (דברים יד, כג) למען תלמד ליראה את ה' אלהיך כל הימים אלו שבתות ויו"ט למאי הלכתא אילימא לעשורי ומיכל איצטריך קרא למישרי טלטול דרבנן
9 from the fruit which [he had] at home for [the redemption of] those.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The fruit which he expected from the tenant, though at the time the tithe was taken they were still the property of the tenant (v. Tosaf. s.v. [H] a.l.) and not that of R. Jannai. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> When he subsequently came before R. Hiyya [the latter] said to him, 'You have acted well; for it was taught: That thou mayest learn to fear the Lord thy God always<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut.XIV, 23, speaking of the levitical and priestly gifts. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> refers to Sabbaths and festivals'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On which enjoyment should not be marred by failure to set apart the prescribed gifts. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> Now, in 'respect of what law?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Was the Scriptural warning necessary. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> If in respect of giving tithe<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On Sabbath or festivals. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> so that one may be allowed to eat,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of his produce from which tithe was not taken before the holy day set in. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> was it necessary [it may be asked] for a Scriptural text to permit moving,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] moving the fruit before being tithed. The prohibition to set aside on holy days any of the priestly or levitical gifts is due to the Rabbinical ordinance which is in the same category as the moving from its place, on such days, of articles that are unfit for use. (Cf. Bezah 36b). ');"><sup>29</sup></span> [the prohibition of which is only] Rabbinical!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Scripture, surely. could not be referring to a prohibition which was not ordained before the Rabbinical period. ');"><sup>30</sup></span>
Previous ChapterNext Chapter