Yevamot 186

Chapter 186

א אלא לאו כי האי גוונא אמר ליה והא אקריון בחלמא קנה רצוץ מאי לאו הכי קאמרי לי (מלכים ב יח, כא) הנה בטחת לך על משענת הקנה הרצוץ הזה

1 Consequently1 [it must refer to] an instance like this one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That of R. Jannai; the text indicating that tithe may be given for the redemption of fruit which has not yet come into one's possession, in order that thereby a man's enjoyment on Sabbaths and festivals might not be disturbed by his inability to partake of untithed fruit that arrived too late. Thus it follows that R. Jannai received the tradition from R. Hiyya that a man may legally dispose of that which is not yet in existence. ');">2 Said the first to him, 'But in my dream3 they read to me a Scriptural text on the "bruised reed";4

ב לא הכי קאמרי לך (ישעיהו מב, ג) קנה רצוץ לא ישבור ופשתה כהה לא יכבנה

2 did they not mean to tell me: Behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed'?5 'No'. [the other replied], 'It is this that they meant: A bruised reed shall he not break, and the dimly burning wick shall he not quench'.6 Rabbi?7 — Where it was taught: Thou shalt not deliver unto his master a bondman,8

ג רבי דתניא (דברים כג, טז) לא תסגיר עבד אל אדוניו ר' אומר בלוקח עבד על מנת לשחררו הכתוב מדבר היכי דמי א"ר נחמן בר יצחק דכתב ליה לכשאקחך הרי עצמך קנוי לך מעכשיו

3 Rabbi explained that Scripture speaks here of a man who bought a slave on the condition that he would set him free.9 How is this10 to be understood?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It cannot refer to an undertaking given at, or after the time of purchase. Such an undertaking is obviously binding and the ruling of Rabbi in such a case would he superfluous. ');">11 R. Nahman b. Isaac replied: In the case where [the buyer] gave him12

ד ר' מאיר דתנן האומר לאשה הרי את מקודשת לי לאחר שאתגייר לאחר שתתגיירי לאחר שאשתחרר לאחר שתשתחררי לאחר שימות בעליך לאחר שתמות אחותיך לאחר שיחלוץ לך יבמיך אינה מקודשת ר"מ אומר מקודשת

4 a written declaration, 'Your person shall become yours as from now as soon as I have bought you'.13 R. Meir?14 — Where it was taught:15 If a man said to a woman, 'Be thou betrothed to me after I shall have become a proselyte'. 'after thou shalt have become a proselyte'. 'after I shall have been emancipated'. 'after thou shalt have been emancipated'. 'after thy husband shall have died', 'after thy sister shall have died', or 'after thy brother-in-law shall have submitted to thy halizah', the betrothal is invalid; but R. Meir said that her betrothal is valid.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kid. 63a, Keth. 58b, B.M. 16b, and supra 92b, q.v. for notes. Though at the time of the stipulation the conditions were not yet fulfilled, R. Meir regards the betrothal as valid. Thus it has been shewn that, according to him, one may effect a kinyan of that which is not yet in existence. ');">16

ה ר' אליעזר בן יעקב דתניא יתר על כן אמר ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אפי' אם אמר פירות ערוגה זו תלושים יהו תרומה על פירות ערוגה מחוברים או פירות ערוגה מחוברים על פירות זו תלושין לכשיביאו שליש ויתלשו והביאו שליש ונתלשו דבריו קיימין

5 R. Eliezer b. Jacob?14 — Where it was taught: More than this did R. Eliezer b. Jacob say: Even if a man said, 'The plucked fruit of this bed shall be terumah for the attached fruit of that17 other bed', or 'The attached fruit of this17 bed [shall be terumah] for the plucked fruit of that other bed,17

ו ר' עקיבא דתנן קונם שאני עושה לפיך אינו צריך להפר ר"ע אומר יפר שמא תעדיף עליו יתר מן הראוי לו

6 when it shall have grown<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kid. 63a, Keth. 58b, B.M. 16b, and supra 92b, q.v. for notes. Though at the time of the stipulation the conditions were not yet fulfilled, R. Meir regards the betrothal as valid. Thus it has been shewn that, according to him, one may effect a kinyan of that which is not yet in existence. ');">16 to a third [of its maturity] and been plucked'. his words are valid if the fruit has grown to18 a third [of its maturity] and has been plucked.19 R. Akiba?20

ז בעו מיניה מרב ששת עד אחד ביבמה מהו טעמא דעד אחד משום דמילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי לא משקר והכא נמי לא משקר או דלמא טעמא דעד אחד משום דאיהי דייקא ומינסבא והכא כיון דזימנין דרחמא ליה לא דייקא ומינסבא

7 — Where we learned: [If a woman said to her husband]. 'Konam,21 if I do aught for your mouth',22 he23 need not annul [her vow].24

ח אמר להו רב ששת תניתוה אמרו לה מת בנך ואח"כ מת בעליך ונתייבמה ואחר כך אמרו לה חילוף הדברים תצא והולד ראשון ואחרון ממזר היכי דמי אילימא תרי ותרי מאי חזית דסמכת אהני סמוך אהני

8 R. Akiba, however, said: He23 must annul It, since she might do more [work] than is due25 to him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 632. n. 9. This proves that, according to R. Akiba, one may legally dispose of work even if It is not yet in existence, and the same naturally applies to other things also. ');">26 An enquiry was addressed to R. Shesheth: What is [the law in respect of] one witness27

ט ועוד ממזר ספק ממזר הוא וכ"ת לא דק והא מדקתני סיפא הראשון ממזר והאחרון אינו ממזר ש"מ דוקא קתני

9 in the case of a sister-in- law?28 Is the reason why one witness [is sometimes believed elsewhere]29 because no one would tell a lie which is likely to be exposed. and consequently here also [the witness] would tell no lie;30 or is the reason why one witness [is believed elsewhere]31

י אלא לאו ש"מ חד וטעמא דאתו בי תרי אכחשוה הא לאו הכי מהימן

10 because the woman herself makes careful enquiries and [only then] marries, and consequently here, since she may sometimes be in love with [her brother-in-law]. she might marry him without proper enquiry?32 — R. Shesheth answered them: You have learned it, IF SHE WAS TOLD, 'YOUR SON DIED AND YOUR HUSBAND DIED AFTERWARDS', AND SHE CONTRACTED THE LEVIRATE MARRIAGE, AND LATER SHE WAS TOLD, 'IT WAS OTHERWISE, SHE MUST DEPART; AND ANY CHILD BORN BEFORE OR AFTER IS A BASTARD.33 Now, how is this to be understood? If it be suggested [that there were] two witnesses against two,34 what reason do you see [it may be asked] for relying on the latter? Rely rather on the former! Furthermore. [how could the child be described as] BASTARD [when he is only] an uncertain bastard! And should you reply that he35

יא ואיכא דאמר הא לא תיבעי לך דאפילו איהי נמי מהימנא דתנן האשה שאמרה מת בעלי תנשא מת בעלי תתייבם כי תיבעי לך למישרי יבמה לעלמא

11 was not exact in his expression. surely [it may be pointed out] since in the final clause he35 stated, ANY CHILD BORN BEFORE [THE DEATH OF HER FIRST HUSBAND] IS A BASTARD, BUT ONE BORN AFTER IT IS NO BASTARD,33 it may well be inferred that he was exact In his expressions, Consequently36 it must be concluded [that the first report was that of] one witness, and that the reason [why he is not believed is] because two witnesses came and contradicted his evidence, but had this not been the case37

יב מ"ט דעד אחד משום דמילתא דעבידא לאיגלויי לא משקר הכא נמי לא משקר או דלמא טעמא דעד אחד משום דאיהי דייקא ומינסבא והא לא דייקא ומינסבא דמיסנא הוא

12 he would have been believed.38 Another reading: This question39 does not arise, since even the woman herself is believed.40 For we learned: A woman who stated, 'My husband is dead' may be married again.41 and she may similarly contract levirate marriage [if she stated] 'My husband is dead'.42 The question arises only in respect of permitting a sister-in-law to marry a stranger.43 Is the reason why one witness [is elsewhere sometimes believed]44 because no one would tell a lie which is likely to be exposed, and consequently, here also [the witness] would tell no lie;45 or is the reason why one witness [is elsewhere believed]44 because [the woman] herself makes careful enquiries and [only then] marries, and consequently here she might marry without proper enquiry. since she might fiercely

Previous Chapter Next Chapter