Yevamot 93

Chapter 93

א אין לי אלא בארץ בח"ל מנין תלמוד לומר אתך בכל מקום שאתך אם כן מה ת"ל בארץ בארץ צריך להביא ראיה בח"ל אין צריך להביא ראיה דברי ר' יהודה וחכמים אומרים בין בארץ בין בחוצה לארץ צריך להביא ראיה
1 From this I only know [that the law is applicable] within the Land of Israel, whence is it inferred [that it is also applicable] within the countries outside the Land? — It was specifically stated in Scripture, With thee, i.e., 'wherever he is with thee'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even outside the Land of Israel. This exposition is discussed infra. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> If so, why was the Land of Israel specified? — In the Land of Israel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where it is an advantage to be a proselyte. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> proof must be produced;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the proselyte, that his circumcision was duly performed at the Beth din for the specific purpose of his initiation. Otherwise he is not to be trusted. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב בא הוא ועדיו עמו קרא למה לי אמר רב ששת דאמרי שמענו שנתגייר בב"ד של פלוני סד"א לא ליהמנייהו קמ"ל
2 outside the Land of Israel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where no material advantage is to be gained in claiming to be a proselyte. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> no such proof need be produced; these are the words of R. Judah. But the Sages said: Proof must be produced both within the Land of Israel and outside the Land. 'If he came and had witnesses with him,' what need is there for a Scriptural text?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To prove that the proselyte is accepted. ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ג בארץ אין לי אלא בארץ בח"ל מנין ת"ל אתך בכל מקום שאתך והא אפיקתיה חדא מאתך וחדא מעמך
3 R. Shesheth replied: Where they<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The witnesses. ');"><sup>6</sup></span> state, 'We heard that he be came a proselyte at a certain particular court'. As It might have been taught that we are not to believe them,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they were not eye witnesses. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> we were taught [that we do believe them].
ד וחכ"א בין בארץ בין בח"ל צריך להביא ראיה ואלא הא כתיב בארץ
4 'In your land;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. BaH. Cur. edd., 'in the land'. ');"><sup>8</sup></span> from this I only know [that the law is applicable] within the Land of Israel, whence is it inferred [that it is also applicable] within the countries outside the Land? — It was specifically stated in Scripture, With thee, i.e., wherever he is with thee'. But this,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Scriptural expression, with thee. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> surely, had been expounded already!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'thou hast brought it out', supra, to exclude the acceptance of a proselyte when not well known. How then could the same phrase be used for two different expositions? ');"><sup>10</sup></span>
ה ההוא מיבעי ליה דאפילו בארץ מקבלים גרים דסד"א משום טיבותא דארץ ישראל קמגיירי והשתא נמי דליכא טיבותא איכא לקט שכחה ופאה ומעשר עני קמ"ל
5 — One is derived from With thee<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] Lev. XIX, 33. ');"><sup>11</sup></span> and the other from With you.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] ibid. 34. V. [H] a.l. and Torath Kohanim. Cur. edd. read, [H] 'from with thee' which occurs in Lev, XXV, 47. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> 'But the Sages said: Proof must be produced both within the Land of Israel and outside the Land'. But, it is written, surely, in your land!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 33. (Cf. BaH. Cur. edd., 'in the land') which excludes other countries. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ו א"ר חייא בר אבא אמר ר' יוחנן הלכה בין בארץ בין בח"ל צריך להביא ראיה פשיטא יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים מהו דתימא מסתבר טעמא דרבי יהודה דקמסייעי ליה קראי קמ"ל
6 — That expression is required [for the deduction] that proselytes may be accepted even in the Land of Israel. As it might have been assumed that there they become proselytes only on account of the prosperity of the Land of Israel, and at the present time also, when there is no prosperity, they might still be attracted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'there is'. ');"><sup>14</sup></span> by the Gleanings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] 'gleaning': the gleanings of the harvest which must be left for the poor. V. Lev. XIX, 9, XXIII, 22, Peah IV, 10f. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> the Forgotten Sheaf,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] 'forgetting'; any sheaf forgotten when a field is reaped belongs to the pour. V. Deut. XXIV, 19, Peah V, 7f, VIf. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>
ז ת"ר (דברים א, טז) ושפטתם צדק בין איש ובין אחיו ובין גרו מכאן א"ר יהודה גר שנתגייר בב"ד הרי זה גר בינו לבין עצמו אינו גר
7 the Corner<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H], 'corner', sc. of the field, the produce of which most nut be harvested by the owner, it being the portion of the poor. V. Lev. XIX, 9, XXIII, 22, Peah 1ff. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> and the Poor Man's Tithe,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] given to the poor in the third and sixth years of the septennial cycle. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> hence we were taught [that they may nevertheless be accepted].
ח מעשה באחד שבא לפני רבי יהודה ואמר לו נתגיירתי ביני לבין עצמי א"ל רבי יהודה יש לך עדים אמר ליה לאו יש לך בנים א"ל הן א"ל נאמן אתה לפסול את עצמך ואי אתה נאמן לפסול את בניך
8 R. Hiyya b. Abba stated in the name of R. Johanan, 'The <i>halachah</i> is that proof must be produced<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By a man who claims to have been properly initiated as a proselyte. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> both in the Land of Israel and outside the Land'. Is this not obvious? [In a dispute between] an individual and a majority the <i>halachah</i> is, of course, in agreement with the majority!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the law under discussion the Sages are in the majority against R. Judah's individual opinion. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> — It might have been suggested that R. Judah's view is more acceptable since he is supported by Scriptural texts,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'With thee' and 'In your land'. V. supra. ');"><sup>21</sup></span>
ט [ומי] א"ר יהודה אבנים לא מהימן והתניא (דברים כא, יז) יכיר יכירנו לאחרים מכאן א"ר יהודה נאמן אדם לומר זה בני בכור וכשם שנאמן לומר זה בני בכור כך נאמן לומר בני זה בן גרושה הוא או בן חלוצה הוא וחכ"א אינו נאמן
9 hence we were taught [that the <i>halachah</i> is in agreement with the Sages]. Our Rabbis taught: And judge righteously between a man and his brother, and the proselyte that is with him;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. I, 16. [H] 'proselyte' (E.V. 'stranger'). ');"><sup>22</sup></span> from this text<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since 'proselyte' was mentioned in the same context as 'judge'. ');"><sup>23</sup></span>
י א"ר נחמן בר יצחק ה"ק ליה לדבריך עובד כוכבים אתה ואין עדות לעובד כוכבים רבינא אמר הכי קאמר ליה יש לך בנים הן יש לך בני בנים הן א"ל נאמן אתה לפסול בניך ואי אתה נאמן לפסול בני בניך
10 did R. Judah deduce that a man who becomes a proselyte<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., who had been circumcised and performed the prescribed ablution. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> in the presence of a <i>Beth din</i> is deemed to be a proper proselyte; but he who does so privately is no proselyte.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a judicial matter requires a Beth din so does the initiation of a proselyte. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> It once happened that a man came before R. Judah and told him, 'I have become a proselyte privately'. 'Have you witnesses'? R. Judah asked. 'No', the man replied. 'Have you children'? — 'Yes', the man replied. 'You are trusted', the Master said to him, 'as far as your own disqualification is concerned but you cannot be relied upon to disqualify your children.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [As children of a heathen father they would be disqualified, even if the mother was a Jewess, R. Judah being of the opinion that the offspring of the union of a heathen with a Jewess is mamzer, v. Tosaf. s.v. intb. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
יא תניא נמי הכי ר' יהודה אומר נאמן אדם לומר על בנו קטן ואין נאמן על בנו גדול ואמר ר' חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן לא קטן קטן ממש ולא גדול גדול ממש אלא קטן ויש לו בנים זהו גדול גדול ואין לו בנים זהו קטן
11 Did R. Judah, however, state that a proselyte is not trusted in respect of his children? Surely it was taught: He shall acknowledge<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the firstborn (Deut. XXI, 17). ');"><sup>27</sup></span> implies, 'he shall be entitled to acknowledge him before others?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [H] E.V., he shall acknowledge, being a Hif., may also be rendered as here, 'he shall make known', viz., to others. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> From this did R. Judah deduce that a man is believed when he declares, 'This son of mine is firstborn',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though another was hitherto reputed to be his firstborn son. ');"><sup>29</sup></span>
יב והלכתא כוותיה דרב נחמן בר יצחק והתניא כוותיה דרבינא ההוא לענין יכיר איתמר
12 And as a man is believed when he declares, 'This son of mine is firstborn' so is he believed when he declares, 'This son of mine is the son of a divorced woman' or 'the son of a haluzah'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> But the Sages say: He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If another son of his was reputed to be the firstborn. ');"><sup>31</sup></span> is not believed!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kid. 74a. 78b, B.B. 127b. Thus it has been shown that, according to R. Judah, a father's word is accepted in respect of the status of his children. How, then, could it be stated here that the word of a proselyte was not to be relied upon as far as the eligibility of his children is concerned? ');"><sup>32</sup></span>
יג תנו רבנן גר שבא להתגייר בזמן הזה אומרים לו מה ראית שבאת להתגייר אי אתה יודע שישראל בזמן הזה דוויים דחופים סחופים ומטורפין ויסורין באין עליהם אם אומר יודע אני ואיני כדאי מקבלין אותו מיד
13 — R. Nahman b. Isaac replied: It is this that he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Judah. ');"><sup>33</sup></span> really told him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The proselyte. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> 'According to your own statement you are an idolater, and no idolater is eligible to tender evidence'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As his children have hitherto been reputed to be legitimate, his ineligible evidence cannot disqualify them. ');"><sup>35</sup></span>
יד ומודיעין אותו מקצת מצות קלות ומקצת מצות חמורות ומודיעין אותו עון לקט שכחה ופאה ומעשר עני ומודיעין אותו ענשן של מצות אומרים לו הוי יודע שעד שלא באת למדה זו אכלת חלב אי אתה ענוש כרת חללת שבת אי אתה ענוש סקילה ועכשיו אכלת חלב ענוש כרת חללת שבת ענוש סקילה
14 Rabina said: It is this that he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Judah. ');"><sup>36</sup></span> really told him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The proselyte. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> 'Have you children'? [And when the other replied] 'Yes' [he asked] 'Have you grandchildren'. [The reply being again] 'Yes', he told him 'You are trusted so far as to disqualify your own children<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with the deduction from 'He shall acknowledge' in the Baraitha cited from Kid. and B.B. supra. ');"><sup>38</sup></span>
טו וכשם שמודיעין אותו ענשן של מצות כך מודיעין אותו מתן שכרן אומרים לו הוי יודע שהעולם הבא אינו עשוי אלא לצדיקים וישראל בזמן הזה אינם יכולים לקבל
15 but you cannot be trusted so far as to disqualify your grandchildren'. Thus it was also taught elsewhere: R. Judah said, 'A man is trusted in respect [of the status of] his young son but not in respect of that of his grown-up son; and R. Hiyya b. Abba explained in the name of R. Johanan that 'young' does not mean actually a minor and 'grown-up' does not mean one who is actually 'of age', but any young son who has children is regarded as of age while any grown-up son who has no children is deemed to be a minor. And the law is in agreement with R. Nahman b. Isaac.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who regarded the proselyte, on the strength of his own testimony, as an idolater whose evidence is inadmissible even in the case of his own children. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> But, surely, [a Baraitha] was taught in agreement with Rabina!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That a father is to be trusted in respect of a son of his who has no children. The assumption at the moment is that this referred to the case of a proselyte. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> — That statement was made with reference to the law of acknowledgement.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he shall acknowledge' (Deut. XXI, 17), i.e., the reference is nut to a proselyte but to an Israelite whose word is accepted when he testifies that his sun is either a firstborn, or the sun of a divorced woman or the son of a haluzah. It is in connection with this only that it was stated that the father, being believed in respect of his children, but not his grandchildren, is trusted in the case of his son who has no children, but not in the case of one who has children. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> Our Rabbis taught: If at the present time a man desires<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'who comes'. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> to become a proselyte, he is to be addressed as follows: 'What reason have you for desiring<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what have you seen that you came'. ');"><sup>43</sup></span> to become a proselyte; do you not know that Israel at the present time are persecuted and oppressed, despised, harassed and overcome by afflictions'? If he replies, 'I know and yet am unworthy',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the privilege of membership of Israel. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> he is accepted forthwith, and is given instruction in some of the minor and some of the major commandments. He is informed of the sin [of the neglect of the commandments of] Gleanings,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra p. 308. n. 8. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> the Forgotten Sheaf,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. loc. cit. n. 9. ');"><sup>46</sup></span> the Corner<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. loc. cit. n. 10. ');"><sup>47</sup></span> and the Poor Man's Tithe.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. loc. cit. n. 11. ');"><sup>48</sup></span> He is also told of the punishment for the transgression of the commandments. Furthermore, he is addressed thus: 'Be it known to you that before you came to this condition, if you had eaten suet<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., forbidden fat. ');"><sup>49</sup></span> you would not have been punishable with <i>kareth</i>, if you had profaned the Sabbath you would not have been punishable with stoning; but now were you to eat suet<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., forbidden fat. ');"><sup>49</sup></span> you would be punished with <i>kareth</i>; were you to profane the Sabbath you would be punished with stoning'. And as he is informed of the punishment for the transgression of the commandments, so is he informed of the reward granted for their fulfilment. He is told, 'Be it known to you that the world to come was made only for the righteous, and that Israel at the present time are unable to bear