Yevamot 74

הלכתא אהלכתא

between one <i>halachah</i> and the other. Said Abaye: Whence do I infer that R. Eliezer b. Jacob treats any doubtful case as a certainty? — [From] what was taught: R. Eliezer b. Jacob said, 'Behold, when a man has intercourse with many women and does not know with which particular woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Among those who had issue from their unlawful connection. ');">¹</span>

אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דכל ספיקא לר' אליעזר בן יעקב כודאי משוי ליה

he had intercourse, and, similarly, when a woman with whom many men had intercourse does not know to which particular man her conception is due, the consequences are that a father will be marrying his daughter and a brother his sister, and the whole world will be filled with bastards,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus it has been shewn that, according to R. Eliezer b. Jacob, even persons of doubtful illegitimacy are described as 'bastards'. ');">²</span> and concerning this it was said, And the land became full of lewdness'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] Lev. XIX, 29, Tosef. Kid. I. ');">³</span>

דתניא ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר הרי שבא על נשים הרבה ואין יודע על איזהו מהן בא וכן היא שבאו עליה אנשים הרבה ואינה יודעת מאיזה מהן קבלה נמצא אב נושא את בתו ואח נושא את אחותו ונתמלא כל העולם כולו ממזרין ועל זה נאמר (ויקרא יט, כט) ומלאה הארץ זמה

And Raba?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How could he maintain a ruling which is contrary to the statement of R. Eliezer b. Jacob just quoted? ');">⁴</span> — He can answer you: It is this that was meant, 'What might be the result'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] Lit., 'this, what is it', a play on the word [H] (cf. Ned. 51a), i.e., R. Eliezer b. Jacob implies the possibility that the consequences might be the bringing of bastards into the world; not that all the issue would be deemed confirmed bastards. ');">⁵</span>

ורבא אמר לך הכי קאמר זו מה היא

More than that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., not only did he denounce indiscriminate intercourse, as has just been shewn, but he also forbade lawful marriage wherever its consequences might lead to moral chaos. ');">⁶</span> was said by R. Eliezer b. Jacob: A man shall not marry a wife in one country and then proceed to marry one in another country, since [their children]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Born in different parts of the world and knowing nothing of each other's parentage. ');">⁷</span>

יתר על כן אמר ר' אליעזר בן יעקב לא ישא אדם אשה במדינה זו וילך וישא אשה במדינה אחרת שמא יזדווגו זה לזה ונמצא אח נושא את אחותו

might marry one another and the result might be that a brother would marry his sister.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yoma 18b. ');">⁸</span> But, surely, this could not be [the accepted ruling], for Rab, whenever he happened to visit Dardeshir,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Ardashir, a town near Mahuza. V. Obermeyer pp. 164ff and 175, n, 1.]. ');">⁹</span>

איני והא רב כי איקלע לדרדשיר [מכריז] ואמר מאן הויא ליומא ורב נחמן כי איקלע לשכנציב [מכריז] ואמר מאן הויא ליומא

used to announce, 'Who would be mine<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By marriage. ');">¹⁰</span> for the day'! So also R, Nahman, whenever he happened to visit Shekunzib,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [A town on the eastern bank of the Tigris, v. op. cit. p. 190]. ');">¹¹</span>

שאני רבנן דפקיע שמייהו

used to announce, 'Who would be mines for the day'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yoma l.c. [Rashi: 'for the days' (plur.). He was anxious to establish a home in Shekunzib which he often visited on business affairs and consequently wished to secure a wife to bless his home whenever he would stay there, v. Obermeyer, p. 191]. ');">¹²</span> — The Rabbis came under a special category since they are well known.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Should there be any issue from their marriages, in whatever part of the world this might happen, it will be well known to everybody who the father is. ');">¹³</span>

והאמר רבא תבעוה לינשא ונתפייסה צריכה לישב שבעה נקיים

But did not Raba say: A woman who had an offer of marriage and accepted must allow a period of seven ritually clean days to pass!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Nid. 662; because it is possible that the excitement of the proposal and its acceptance has produced menstrual flow, and the woman has thus become levitically unclean. How, then, could the Rabbis mentioned marry on the very day on which their announcements were made? ');">¹⁴</span> — The Rabbis sent their representatives and these presented the announcements to the women.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Seven days prior to the Rabbis' arrival. ');">¹⁵</span>

רבנן שלוחייהו הוו משדרי ומודעי להו ואיבעית אימא לרבנן יחודי בעלמא הוא דמייחדי להו דאמר מר אינו דומה מי שיש לו פת בסלו למי שאין לו פת בסלו

And if you prefer I might say: The Rabbis only had them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The women they married for the day. ');">¹⁶</span> in their private rooms;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rt. [H] B.H. [H], 'to be alone with one other person'; but no connubial intercourse took place. ');">¹⁷</span>

תנא רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר לא ישא אדם אשתו ודעתו לגרשה משום שנאמר (משלי ג, כט) אל תחרש על רעך רעה והוא יושב לבטח אתך:

for the Master said, 'He who has bread in his basket cannot be compared to him who has no bread in his basket'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yoma loc. cit., Keth. 62b. The consciousness of having no bread at all intensifies the pangs of hunger, while the presence of bread in the basket, and the knowledge that it may be enjoyed at any moment, mitigates the craving. Similarly, the consciousness of the presence of one's own wife mitigates the sensual desires. ');">¹⁸</span> A Tanna taught: R. Eliezer b. Jacob said: A man must not marry a woman if it is his intention to divorce her, for it is written, Devise not evil against thy neighbour, seeing he dwelleth securely by thee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. III, 29; v. Git. 90a. ');">¹⁹</span>

ספק ויבם שבאו לחלוק בנכסי מיתנא

If the 'doubtful son'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A son of whom it is not known whether he was a nine-months child of the deceased, or a seven-months one of the levir. (V. our Mishnah). ');">²⁰</span> and the levir came to claim a share<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to divide', or 'to dispute'. ');">²¹</span>

ספק אמר אנא בר מיתנא הוא ונכסי דידי הוא ויבם אמר את בראי דידי את ולית לך ולא מידי בנכסי הוי ממון המוטל בספק וממון המוטל בספק חולקין

in the estate of the deceased,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who died without issue and whose expectant wife had married the levir and bore this 'doubtful son'. ');">²²</span> the 'doubtful son' pleading, 'I am the son of the deceased and the estate is mine', while the levir pleads, 'You are my son and you have no claim whatsoever upon the estate', it is a case of money of doubtful ownership,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'which is thrown into doubt'; none of the disputants has any claim superior to that of the other. ');">²³</span>

ספק ובני יבם שבאו לחלוק בנכסי מיתנא ספק אמר ההוא גברא בר מיתנא הוא ונכסי דידי הוא בני יבם אמרי את אחינו את ומנתא הוא דאית לך בהדן

and money the ownership of which is doubtful must be divided.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Between the claimants. ');">²⁴</span> Where the 'doubtful son'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A son of whom it is not known whether he was a nine-months child of the deceased, or a seven-months one of the levir. (V. our Mishnah). ');">²⁰</span>

סבור רבנן קמיה דרב משרשיא למימר מתניתין היא דתנן הוא אינו יורש אותם והם יורשין אותו

and the sons of the levir came to claim their share<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to divide', or 'to dispute'. ');">²¹</span> in the estate of the deceased, the 'doubtful son' pleading, 'I<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that man'. ');">²⁵</span>

והכא איפכא התם אמרי ליה אייתי ראיה ושקול

am the son of the deceased and the estate is mine while the sons of the levir plead, 'You are our brother and you have only a share equal to ours', it was the intention of the Rabbis to submit to R. Mesharsheya that this was a case [identical with that] of a Mishnah wherein we learned, 'He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The son concerning whom it is uncertain whether he was a nine months child of his mother's first, or a seven-months child of her second husband. Cf. supra n. 2. ');">²⁶</span> does not inherit from them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Neither from the sons of his mother's first, nor from those of her second husband. As his claim is indefinite, since he cannot possibly know who his father really was, each group of heirs, whose claim to the estate of their respective fathers is definite and certain, can plead that he is not the son of their father. ');">²⁷</span>

הכא אמר להו אייתו ראיה ושקולו

but they inherit from him',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 100b. When he dies, the two groups of brothers, since they have exactly equal claims upon his estate, are entitled to equal shares in it. ');">²⁸</span> since here the case is just the reverse:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While in the Mishnah cited their claim is certain and his is not, in this case his claim is certain while theirs is not. His claim is certain since at all events he is entitled either to all the estate (if he is the son of the deceased) or to a part at least (if he is the son of the levir), their claim, however, is doubtful since it is possible that he is the son of the deceased and they, as the sons of the levir, have no claim whatsoever upon the estate. ');">²⁹</span>

אמר להו רב משרשיא מי דמי התם אינהו ודאי ואיהו ספק הכא אידי ואידי ספק

There they tell him, 'produce proof and take [your share]'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra note 9. ');">³⁰</span> while here he tells them, 'produce proof and take your share'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 236, n. 11. ');">³¹</span>

אלא אי דמיא למתני' [להא] דמיא לספק ובני יבם שבאו לחלוק בנכסי יבם גופיה דהתם אמרי ליה אייתי ראיה דאחונא את ושקול

R. Mesharsheya, however, said to them, 'Are [the two cases] equal? There, their claim is a certainty<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They know exactly whose children they are and by virtue of whose rights they advance their claims. ');">³²</span> while his is doubtful,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He is not sure whose son he is. ');">³³</span>

ספק ובני יבם שבאו לחלוק בנכסי יבם לבתר דפלג יבם בנכסי מיתנא

while here both are doubtful!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He himself whose claim to heirship is certain is also in doubt as to who exactly his father was and by virtue of whose rights he is entitled to the estate. ');">³⁴</span> If, however, a case is to be compared to a Mishnah it is to the following: That of a 'doubtful son'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 236, n. 2. ');">³⁵</span>

בני יבם אמרי אייתי ראיה דאחונא את ושקול אמר להו ספק מה נפשייכו אי אחוכון אנא הבו לי מנתא בהדייכו ואי בר מיתנא אנא הבו לי פלגא דפלג אבוכון בהדאי

and the sons of the levir who came to claim<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. loc. cit. n. 3. ');">³⁶</span> shares in the estate of the levir himself, where they can say to him: produce proof that you are our brother and take your share'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here, as in the Mishnah, one claim is a certainty (that of the sons of the levir) while the other (that of the 'doubtful son') is not. ');">³⁷</span>

ר' אבא אמר רב קם דינא ר' ירמיה אמר הדר דינא

If a 'doubtful son'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 236, n. 2. ');">³⁵</span> and the sons of the levir came to claim<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. loc. cit. n. 3. ');">³⁶</span>

לימא בפלוגתא דאדמון ורבנן קמיפלגי דתנן מי שהלך למדינת הים ואבדה לו דרך שדהו אדמון אמר ילך בקצרה וחכ"א יקח לו דרך במאה מנה או יפרח באויר

their shares in the estate of the levir after the levir had received his share in the estate of the deceased, the sons of the levir pleading, 'produce proof that you are our brother and you will receive [your share]', the 'doubtful son' can tell them, 'Whatever you wish: If I am your brother, give me a share among you;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the half he already received he would return. This, of course, applies to the case only where one share in the levir's estate exceeds half the estate of the first deceased brother. ');">³⁸</span> and if I am the son of the deceased, return to me the half which your father received when he shared the estate with me'.

והוינן בה לרבנן שפיר קאמר אדמון ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שהקיפוה ארבעה בני אדם מארבע רוחות

Said R. Abba in the name of Rab: The judgment must stand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Once the levir received a half of the estate of his deceased brother it cannot again be taken away from his heirs. The second claim of the 'doubtful son' is, therefore, invalid. ');">³⁹</span> R. Jeremiah said: The judgment is to be reversed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sons of the levir must either return to the 'doubtful son' the half which their father had received or allow him in their father's estate a share equal to theirs. ');">⁴⁰</span>

א"ה מ"ט דאדמון ואמר רבא בארבעה דאתו מכח ארבעה וארבעה דאתו מכח חד כולי עלמא לא פליגי דמצו מדחי ליה

May it be suggested that they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Abba and R. Jeremiah. ');">⁴¹</span> differ on the same principle as that which underlies the dispute between Admon and the Rabbis? For we learned: If a man went to a country beyond the sea and [in his absence] the path to his field was lost,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It being unknown in which of the surrounding fields it lay. ');">⁴²</span>

כי פליגי בחד דאתי מכח ארבעה אדמון סבר מצי א"ל מכל מקום דרכי גבך הוא ורבנן סברי דא"ל אי שתקת שתקת ואי לא מהדרנא שטרא למרייהו ולא מצית לאשתעויי דינא בהדייהו

he shall, Admon said, use the shortest cut;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He must be allowed a short path through one of the surrounding fields. V. infra for further explanation. ');">⁴³</span> but the Sages said: He must purchase a path even though it will cost him a hundred <i>maneh</i> or else fly in the air.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Keth. 109b. ');">⁴⁴</span>

לימא ר' אבא דאמר כרבנן

And in discussing this [Mishnah it was pointed out] against the Rabbis that Admon was perfectly right; and Rab Judah replied in the name of Rab that here it is a case where [the fields of] four persons surrounded it on its four sides.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that each person can plead that it was not in his field, but in one of the others, that the lost path lay. ');">⁴⁵</span> But [it was asked] what is Admon's reason? And Raba replied: Where four persons<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The respective owners of the four surrounding fields. ');">⁴⁶</span>

ור' ירמיה דאמר כאדמון

derive their rights of possession from four persons<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who presented or sold the fields to them. ');">⁴⁷</span> or where four persons derive it from one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that each person can plead that it was not in his field, but in one of the others, that the lost path lay. ');">⁴⁵</span>

אמר לך ר' אבא אנא דאמרי אפילו כאדמון עד כאן לא קאמר אדמון התם אלא משום דא"ל ממה נפשך

all agree that these<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The present four owners. ');">⁴⁸</span> can refuse<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'reject'. ');">⁴⁹</span> him; the dispute only concerns one person who derived his rights from four. Admon is of the opinion that he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose path was lost. ');">⁵⁰</span> can tell him, 'At all events<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In whichever field it was lost, ');">⁵¹</span> my path is in your fields',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence he is entitled to the short cut. ');">⁵²</span> while the Rabbis hold that the other can answer him, 'If you will keep quiet, well and good;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'you will keep quiet'. He will sell him a path at a reasonable price (Rashi). Cf., however, Tosaf. s.v. [H]. ');">⁵³</span> and if not, I will return the deeds to their original owners whom you will have no chance to call to law'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and you will not be able to talk law with them'. V. supra note 3. ');">⁵⁴</span> May it, then, be suggested that R. Abba<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who does not allow the alternative claim of the 'doubtful son'. ');">⁵⁵</span> holds the view of the Rabbis<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who also disallow the alternate claim of the loser of the field. ');">⁵⁶</span> and R. Jeremiah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who admits the alternative claim of the 'doubtful son'. ');">⁵⁷</span> that of Admon?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who also admits the alternative claim in the case of the lost path. ');">⁵⁸</span> R. Abba can tell you: I may even hold the view of Admon; he made his ruling there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The case of the lost path. ');">⁵⁹</span> only because he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The loser of the path. ');">⁶⁰</span> can say to him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The present owner of the fields. ');">⁶¹</span> 'Whatever you wish to plead,