61a
{Ketubot 101b continues}
Gemara:
איתמר האומר לחבירו חייב אני לך מנהGemara:
רבי יוחנן אמר חייב וריש לקיש אמר פטור
היכי דמי אי דא"ל אתם עידי מ"ט דר"ל דפטר
ואי דלא אמר להו אתם עידי מ"ט דרבי יוחנן דמחייב
It was stated {by Amoraim}: A man who said to his fellow: I owe you 100:
Rabbi Yochanan said he is obligated. And Resh Lakish said he is exempt.
How so? If he said to them {witnesses present}, "You are my witnesses," why should Resh Lakish exempt? And if he did not say to them, "You are my witnesses," why should Rabbi Yochanan obligate?
לעולם דלא א"ל אתם עידיRabbi Yochanan said he is obligated. And Resh Lakish said he is exempt.
How so? If he said to them {witnesses present}, "You are my witnesses," why should Resh Lakish exempt? And if he did not say to them, "You are my witnesses," why should Rabbi Yochanan obligate?
והכא במאי עסקינן דא"ל חייב אני לך מנה בשטר
ר' יוחנן אמר חייב אלימא מילתא דשטרא כמאן דאמר להו אתם עידי
וריש לקיש אמר פטור לא אלימא מילתא דשטרא
והלכתא כר' יוחנן
In truth, he did not say to them, "You are my witnesses." And what is the case? That he said to him, "I am obligated to you 100" by handing him a document.
Rabbi Yochanan said he is obligated, for the document is strong, like one who said to them, "you are my witnesses." And Resh Lakish said he is exempt, for the matter on the document is not strong.
And the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan.
ומדמקשינן עליה דר"ל ממתני' הנושא את האשה ופסקה עמו שיהא זן את בתה ה' שנים דלית לה גביה מעיקרא ולא מידי אלא איהו חייב נפשיה במילתא דלא הוה מיחייב ביהRabbi Yochanan said he is obligated, for the document is strong, like one who said to them, "you are my witnesses." And Resh Lakish said he is exempt, for the matter on the document is not strong.
And the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan.
ותוב אקשינן עליה מהא כתב לכהן שהוא חייב לו ה' סלעים חייב ליתן לו ה' סלעים ובנו אינו פדוי דלית ליה לכהן מעיקרא גביה ולא מידי
ואוקימנא לר' יוחנן כר' שמעון דאמר ערב היוצא לאחר חיתום שטרות גובה מנכסים בני חורין דלית ליה גביה ולא מידי אלא איהו חייב ליה לנפשיה
And from the fact that we ask on Resh Lakish from the Mishna, "if one married a woman and she made a stipulation with him that he would maintain her daughter for 5 years," where there was not this obligation by him initially at all, except that he obligated himself in a matter that he was not obligated in.
{Ketubot 102a}
And we further ask upon him from this, "if he wrote to a kohen that he is obligated to him 5 sela, he is obligated to give him 5 sela, and his son is not redeemed, for the kohen does not have initially by him anything at all."
And we establish that Rabbi Yochanan is like Rabbi Shimon, who said that if a guarantor {'s signature} appears below the signatures to bonds of indebtedness, he {=the creditor} may collect from free assets, for there was no obligation for him at all {at first}, and he obligated himself.
שמעינן מהני כולהי דפלוגתא דר' יוחנן וריש לקיש במאן דקביל על נפשיה מילתא דלא הוה מיחייב בה וכיון דהילכתא כרבי יוחנן דאמר חייב אני לך מנה בשטר חייב ואפילו לא אמר אתם עידי כל שכן אי אמר אתם עידי דבהא אפי' ריש לקיש מודה וכל שכן אי קנו מיניה{Ketubot 102a}
And we further ask upon him from this, "if he wrote to a kohen that he is obligated to him 5 sela, he is obligated to give him 5 sela, and his son is not redeemed, for the kohen does not have initially by him anything at all."
And we establish that Rabbi Yochanan is like Rabbi Shimon, who said that if a guarantor {'s signature} appears below the signatures to bonds of indebtedness, he {=the creditor} may collect from free assets, for there was no obligation for him at all {at first}, and he obligated himself.
We derive from all these {three points} that the argument between Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish is by someone who accepted upon himself a matter to which he was not originally obligated in. And since the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan, who said that one who said "I am obligated 100 to you" via a document, he is obligated, and even where he did not say {to witnesses present} "you are my witnesses," all the more so if he did say "you are my witnesses," that in this even Resh Lakish would admit. And all the more so if they made a formal transaction from him.
והא דאמרי' בגמ' דבני מערבא אהא מתני' במה הוא מתחייב לזון בת אשתו
לא כן אמר רבי יוחנן ור"ל הכותב שטר חוב לחברו בחזקת שחייב לו ונמצא שאינו חייב אינו חייב ליתן לו כלום
דלאמא רבי יוחנן ור"ל לא אפליגו בהא מילתא כל עיקר אלא תרוייהו סבירא להו דאינו חייב
לא חיישינן לה אלא אגמרא דילן סמכינן דסבר בהא מילתא דפלוגתא דרבי יוחנן ור"ל היא וקי"ל דהלכה כר' יוחנן:
And this that we say in the Yerushalmi on this Mishna of "with what is he obligated to maintain his wife's daughter," that Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish did not say so -- One who wrote a document of obligation to his fellow on the presumption that he is obligated to him, and found that he was not obligated, he is not now obligated {because of this document} to give him anything.
Thus it is evident that Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish do not argue in this matter at all, but rather both of them maintain that he is not obligated.
{About this, we say:} We are not worried about it, but rather we rely upon our own gemara, which holds in this matter that it is an argument between Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish. And we establish that the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan.
{Ketubot 102b}
א"ר גידל אמר רב כמה אתה נותן לבנך כך וכך ואתה לבתך כך וכך עמדו וקדשו קנו הן הן דברים הנקנים באמירהThus it is evident that Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish do not argue in this matter at all, but rather both of them maintain that he is not obligated.
{About this, we say:} We are not worried about it, but rather we rely upon our own gemara, which holds in this matter that it is an argument between Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish. And we establish that the halacha is like Rabbi Yochanan.
{Ketubot 102b}
אמר רבה מסתברא מילתיה דרב בבתו נערה דקא מטי הנאה לידיה בכסף קדושיה אבל בתו בוגרת דכסף קדושיה לעצמה לא והאלהים אמר רב אפילו בוגרת דאי לא תימא הכי אבי הבן מאי הנאה אית ליה אלא בההיא הנאה דקא מחתני אהדדי גמרי ומקני אהדדי וכן הלכתא.
Rav Gidel cited Rav: {If the following conversation takes place:} "How much are you giving to your son?" "Such and such. And you to your daughter?" "Such and such." {And based on this} they arose and betrothed, this is regarded as a transaction {such that the money is owed}. These are the things which are acquired with speech.
Rabba {our gemara: Rava} said: It is logical that the matter of Rav was where his daughter was a naarah {young girl}, such that the benefit goes to his his hands in terms of the money of her kiddushin. But his adult daughter, whose money for kiddushin is for herself, no.
But by God! Rav said {=meant} that even an adult woman, for if you do not say this, the father of the son, what benefit does he have. Rather, it is for the benefit in they are making a familial relationship with one another, that they decide to allow one another the full rights of kinyan.
And so is the halacha.
Rabba {our gemara: Rava} said: It is logical that the matter of Rav was where his daughter was a naarah {young girl}, such that the benefit goes to his his hands in terms of the money of her kiddushin. But his adult daughter, whose money for kiddushin is for herself, no.
But by God! Rav said {=meant} that even an adult woman, for if you do not say this, the father of the son, what benefit does he have. Rather, it is for the benefit in they are making a familial relationship with one another, that they decide to allow one another the full rights of kinyan.
And so is the halacha.
ירושלמי אבל לא האח ע"י אחותו ולא אשה ע"י בתה ואפילו היא קטנה וגרסי' נמי התם ובלבד מן הנישואים הראשונים.
Yerushalmi:
But not the brother for his sister nor the woman for her daughter, and even if she is a minor.
And we learn as well over them: And only for the first marriage.
אמר ליה רבינא לרב אשי דברים הללו ניתנו ליכתב או לא ניתנו ליכתבBut not the brother for his sister nor the woman for her daughter, and even if she is a minor.
And we learn as well over them: And only for the first marriage.
אמר ליה לא ניתנו ליכתב
ואי קשיא לך הא דתנן מתו בנותיהן ניזונות מנכסים בני חורין והיא ניזונית מנכסים משועבדים מפני שהיא כבעלת חוב דשמעת מינה דניתנו ליכתב
התם בשקנו מידו דסתם קנין לכתיבה עומד:
Ravina said to Rav Ashi: Are these {verbal} matters given over to be written or are they not given over to be written?
He said to him: They are not given over to be written.
And if it is difficult for you this which we learnt {in a Mishna}: If they {=the serial husbands of this wife} died, their daughters are maintained from the free assets, while she {=the woman's daughter} is maintained from the assigned assets, for she is like a creditor," from which we would derive that they are given over to be written -- well, there, where they acquired it from his hand, for a plain acquisition stands to be written.
He said to him: They are not given over to be written.
And if it is difficult for you this which we learnt {in a Mishna}: If they {=the serial husbands of this wife} died, their daughters are maintained from the free assets, while she {=the woman's daughter} is maintained from the assigned assets, for she is like a creditor," from which we would derive that they are given over to be written -- well, there, where they acquired it from his hand, for a plain acquisition stands to be written.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment