יבמות ט״וYevamot 15

Mishnah

משנה: הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעֲלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם שָׁלוֹם בֵּינוֹ לְבֵינָהּ וְשָׁלוֹם בָּעוֹלָם וּבָאת וְאָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי תִּינָּשֵׂא מֵת בַּעֲלִי תִּתְיַיבֵּם. אֵין שָׁלוֹם בֵּינוֹ לְבֵינָהּ וְשָׁלוֹם בָּעוֹלָם וּבָאת וְאָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר לְעוֹלָם אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן בָּאת בּוֹכָה וּבְגָדֶיהָ קְרוּעִין. אָמְרוּ לוֹ אַחַת זוֹ וְאַחַת זוֹ תִּינָּשֵׂא.

MISHNAH: A woman went overseas with her husband. If there was peace between him and her and there was peace in the world and came and said, “my husband died”, she can remarry, “my husband died”, she can marry in levirate. If there was no peace between him and her but there was peace in the world, she cannot be believed. Rebbi Jehudah says, she is never believed unless she comes crying with torn clothes. They said to him, in any case she can remarry.

Halakhah

הלכה: הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעֲלָהּ כול׳. כְּמָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר. אִם יֵשׁ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ. וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת. גְּרוּשָׁה אֲנִי. אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְאָמַר אַף הָכָא כֵן. שַׁנְיָיה הִיא בְעֵידֵי מִיתָה. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאִם יָבוֹא הוּא מַכְחִישׁ. וּתְהֵא נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר. מֵת יְבָמִי. לֵית יְכִיל. דְּתַנִּינָן שֶׁאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר. מֵת יְבָמִי. שֶׁתִּינָּשֵׂא. וְלֹא. מֵתָה אֲחוֹתִי. שֶׁתִּיכָּנֵס לְבֵיתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא. בַּעֲלָהּ שֶׁנִּישֵּׂאת לוֹ לִרְצוֹנָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. יְבָמָהּ שֶׁנָּפְלָה לוֹ עַל כָּרְחָהּ אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה בָּעֵי. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁנִּישֵּׂאת לוֹ עַל כָּרְחָהּ מֵעַתָּה לֹא תְהֵא נֶאֱמֶנֶת.

HALAKHAH: “A woman went with her husband,” etc. Just as you say, “if there are witnesses that she is a married woman and she says, I was divorced, she is not trustworthy;” would I say it is the same here? There is a difference for witnesses of death since if he comes he disproves [the testimony]. Then she should be trustworthy to say: “my levir died”! That is impossible since we have stated: “A woman is not trustworthy if she says ‘my levir died’ to remarry, or ‘my sister died’ to enter her house.” Rebbi Abba said, she is trustworthy for her husband whom she married out of her free will; she is not trustworthy about her levir on whom she was thrown against her will. Rebbi Hoshaia asked, think of it, then she should not be trustworthy if she was forced to marry him!

לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר כַּמִּשְׁנָה הָאַחֲרוֹנָה שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד מַתִירָהּ. וַאֲפִילוּ כַמִּשְׁנָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁאֵין עֵד אֶחָד מַתִירָהּ הִיא מַתֶּרֶת עַצְמָהּ. מַה בֵּינָהּ לְעֵד אֶחָד. עֵד אֶחָד חָשׁוּד לְקַלְקְלָהּ. וְהִיא אֵינָהּ חֲשּׁוּדָה לְקַלְקֵל אֶת עַצְמָהּ.

Not only according to the current Mishnah that a single witness can permit her, but even according to the earlier Mishnah that a single witness cannot permit her, she permits herself. What is the difference between herself and a single witness? A single witness is suspected to want to cause trouble to her; she is not suspected to want to cause trouble to herself.

עֵד אֶחָד מָהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא נֶאֱמָן בִּשְׁעַת מִלְחָמָה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. חַד בַּר נַשׁ בְּיוֹמוֹי דְּרִבִּי אָמַר לֵיהּ. הֵן הַהוּא פַּלָּן. אָמַר לוֹן. מִית. הֵן הַהוּא פַּלָּן. אָמַר לוֹן. מִית. אָמַר לֵיהּ. וְכוּלְּהוֹן מֵתִים. אָמַר לוֹן. וְאִילּוּ הַוְיָין בַּחַיִין לָא הֲווֹן מֵייתֵי. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. מַעֲשֵׂה בָא לִפְנֵי רִבִּי וְאָמַר. מָאן דְּנִישֵּׂאת נִישֵּׂאת. מָאן דְּלָא נִישֵּׂאת לָא נִישֵּׂאת. רִבִּי אַיְיבוֹ בָּר נַגָּרִי. בִּשְׁעַת מִלְחָמָה הֲוָות. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד נֶאֱמָן בִּשְׁעַת מִלְחָמָה.

Is a single witness trustworthy in wartime? Let us hear from the following: A person was living in the times of Rebbi. They asked him about X; he said, he died. They asked him about Y; he said, he died. They asked him, are they all dead? He answered, if they were alive would they not have come? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: The case came before Rebbi and he said, the ones married should stay married, the ones not married should not marry. Rebbi Ayvo bar Naggari said, it happened in wartime. That implies that a single witness is trustworthy in wartime.

מַה בֵין שָׁלוֹם לְעוֹלָם לְבֵין מִלְחָמָה לְעוֹלָם. מִלְחָמָה בָעוֹלָם סְבוּרָה בוֹ שֶׁמֵּת וְלֹא מֵת. עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁהָיְתָה מִלְחָמָה בַצָּפוֹן וּבָאת מִן הַצָּפוֹן. בַּדָּרוֹם וּבָאת מִן הַדָּרוֹם. הָיְתָה מִלְחָמָה בַצָּפוֹן וּבָאת מִן הַדָּרוֹם. וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת. מִן הַצָּפוֹן בָּאתִי. וַאֲנִי אוֹמֵר. מִן הַדָּרוֹם בָּאת. וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶֶת. מִן הַדָּרוֹם בָּאתִי. סְבוּרָה לְהַתִּיר אֶת עַצְמָהּ. הִיא אָמְרָה. עַל מִיטָּתוֹ מֵת. וַאֲנִי אוֹמֵר. לַמִּלְחָמָה הָלַךְ. הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת. עַל מִיטָּתוֹ מֵת. סְבוּרָה לְהַתִּיר אֶת עַצְמָהּ.

What is the difference whether peace is in the world or war is in the world? If war is in the world, she might think that he died although he is not dead. So far if war was in the North and she came from the North, in the South and she came from the South. If there was war in the North and she came from the South; she says I am coming from the North, but I am arguing that you came from the South. If she says, I am coming from the South, it is because she thinks to free herself. If she says, he died on his bed, I am arguing that he went to war; it is because she thinks to free herself.

אֵי זוֹ הִיא קְטָטָה. רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רַב חִיָיה בַּר אַשִּׁי. לֹא קִידַּשְׁתָּנִי וְלֹא גֵירַשְׁתָּנִי וְלֹא הָיִיתִי אִשְׁתְּךָ מִיָּמַיי. אֵין זֶה קְטָטָה. קִידַּשְׁתָּנִי וְגֵירַשְׁתָּנִי אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא נָתַתָּה לִי כְּתוּבָתִי. הֲרֵי זֶה קְטָטָה. אָמְרָהּ רִבִּי בָּא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר אַבָּא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. בְּנִי. אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ הִיא תוֹבַעַת בְּוַדַּאי לְהִתְגָּרֵשׁ.

What is a quarrel? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi. “You never gave me qiddušin, you did not divorce me, I never was your wife,” that is not a quarrel. “You gave me qiddušin, you divorced me, but you never paid me what is owed me under my ketubah,” that is a quarrel. When Rebbi Abba said this before Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, he said to him, my son, even if she clearly requests to be divorced.

רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר לְעוֹלָם אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן בָּאָה בוֹכָה וּבְגָדֶיהָ קְרוּעִים. מְתִיבִין לְרִבִּי יְהוּדָה. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁהָיְתָה אַחַת בּוֹכָה וְאַחַת שֶׁאֵינָהּ בּוֹכָה. לְזוֹ אַתְּ אוֹסֵר וּלְזוֹ אַתְּ מַתִּיר. הָתִיב רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה חֲבֵרוֹן דְּרַבָּנִין. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁיָּצָא בְנָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וּמֵת שָׁם. אֲנִי אוֹמֵר. שֶׁמָּא הִיא מַזְכֶּרֶת וּבוֹכָה.

“Rebbi Jehudah says, she is never believed unless she comes crying with torn clothes.” They objected to Rebbi Jehudah: Think of it, if one came crying, the other did not cry. To this one you forbid, to that one you permit. Rebbi Ḥananiah, the colleague of the rabbis, objected: Think of it, maybe her son went overseas and died there, she remembers that and cries.

Mishnah

משנה: בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ אֶלָּא בְּבָאָה מִן הַקָּצִיר בִּלְבַד. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אֶחָד הַבָּאָה מִן הַקָּצִיר וְאֶחָד הַבָּאָה מִן הַזֵּיתִים וְאֶחָד הַבָּאָה מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם לֹא דִבְּרוּ חֲכָמִים בַּקָּצִיר אֶלָּא בַהוֹוֶה. חָזְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְהוֹרוֹת כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי.

MISHNAH: The House of Hillel say, we heard only about one who came from the grain harvest. The House of Shammai said to them, it makes no difference whether she comes from the grain harvest, or from the olive harvest, or from overseas. The Sages spoke about the grain harvest only because of what happened. The House of Hillel reversed themselves and taught following the House of Shammai.

Halakhah

הלכה: בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים לֹא שָׁמַעְנוּ כול׳. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּי. וַהֲלֹא כַּל הַשָּׁנָה כוּלָּהּ קָצִיר. הָא כְּאֵי זֶה צַד. יָצָא קְצִיר שְׂעוֹרִים וְנִכְנַס קְצִיר חִטִּים. יָצָא קָצִיר וְנִכְנַס בָּצִיר. יָצָא בָּצִיר וְנִכְנַס מָסִיק. נִמְצֵאת כָּל הַשָּׁנָה כוּלָּהּ קָצִיר. וְקִיְימוּ אֶת דִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְלָמָּה קָצִיר. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. דְּאוֹנְסָא שָּׁכִיחַ. שֶׁאֵין הַחַמָּה קוֹפַחַת עָל רֹאשׁוֹ שֶׁלָּאָדָם אֶלָּא בִשְׁעַת הַקָּצִיר. הָדָא הִיא דִכְתִיב וַיִּגְדַּל הַיֶּלֶד וַיְהִי הַיּוֹם וַיֵּצֵא אֶל אָבִיו אֶל הַקּוֹצְרִים. וַיֹֹּאמֵר אֶל אָבִיו רֹאשִׁי רֹאשִׁי וַיֹּאמֵר אֶל הַנַּעַר שָׂאֵהוּ אֶל אִמּוֹ. וַיִּשָּׂאֵהוּ וַיְּבִיאֵהוּ אֶל אִמּוֹ וַיֵּשֶׁב עַל בִּרְכֶּיהָ עַד הַצָּהֳרַיִם וַיָּמֹת. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי. דְּרִיחְשָׁא שָׁכִיחַ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. סַכּוֹתָה לְרֹאשִׁי בְּיוֹם נָשֶׁק. בְּיוֹם שֶׁהַקַּיִיץ נוֹשֵׁק אֶת הַחוֹרֶף. דָּבָר אַחֵר. בְּיוֹם נָשֶׁק זֶה נִשְׁקוֹ שֶּׁלַּגּוֹג. דָּבָר אַחֵר. בְּיוֹם שֶׁשְּׁנֵי עוֹלָמוֹת נוֹשְׁקִין זֶֶה אֶת זֶה הָעוֹלָם הַזֶּה יוֹצֵא וְהָעוֹלָם הַבָּא נְכְנַס.

HALAKHAH: “The House of Hillel say, we heard only,” etc. The House of Shammai said to them: Is there not harvest the entire year? How is that? At the end of barley harvest starts wheat harvest. At the end of wheat harvest starts grape harvest. At the end of grape harvest starts olive harvest. That means, there is some harvest the year round. They accepted this argument. And why the grain harvest? Rebbi Mana said, because there accidents are frequent, for the sun only hits a person’s head at grain harvest time. That is what is written: “The child grew and some day it went to his father, to the harvesters. He said to his father, ‘my head, my head’; who said to the servant, ‘carry him to his mother’. He carried him and brought him to his mother where he sat on her knees until noontime, when he died.” But the rabbis say, because snakes are abundant. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, “You shielded my head at the day of kissing,” at the day summer and winter are kissing. Another explanation: “At the day of weaponry,” that is Gog’s weaponry. Another explanation, on a day when two worlds kiss one another, when this world leaves and the future world enters.

Mishnah

משנה: בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים תִּינָּשֵׂא וְתִיטּוֹל כְּתוּבָתָהּ. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים תִּינָּשֵׂא וְלֹא תִיטּוֹל כְּתוּבָתָהּ. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּי הִיתַּרְתֶּם אֶת עֶרְוָה הַחֲמוּרָה וְלֹא תַתִּירוּ אֶת הַמָּמוֹן הַקַּל. אָמרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל מָצִינוּ שֶׁאֵין הָאַחִין נַכְנָסִין לַנַּחֲלָה עַל פִּיהָ. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּי וַהֲלֹא מִסֵּפֶר כְּתוּבָתָהּ נִלְמוֹד שֶׁהוּא כוֹתֵב לָהּ שֶׁאִם תִּינָּשְׂאִי לְאַחֵר תִּיטְּלִי מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב לִיךְ. חָזְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְהוֹרוֹת כְּבֵית שַׁמַּי.

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say, she should remarry and collect her ketubah. The House of Hillel say, she should remarry but not collect her ketubah. The House of Shammai said to them, you permitted the stringent incest prohibition, should you not permit the lenient money matters? The House of Hillel said to them, we find that the brothers cannot access the inheritance on her testimony. The House of Shammai said, we can infer that from the text of her ketubah document in which he writes: “If you would be married to another man you shall take the amount I wrote for you.” The House of Hillel reversed themselves and taught following the House of Shammai.

Halakhah

הלכה: בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים תִּינָּשֵׂא כול׳. בָּנוֹת מַהוּ שֶּׁיִּיכָּנְסוּ לִמְזוֹנוֹת עַל פִּיהָ.

HALAKHAH: “The House of Shammai say, she should remarry,” etc. May the daughters claim upkeep based on her word?

בֵּית שַׁמַּי עָבְדִין כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי דָרְשִׁין מִסֵּפֶר כְּתוּבָתָהּ נִלְמוֹד. שֶׁהוּא כוֹתֵב לָהּ. שֶׁאִם תִּינָּשְׂאִי לְאַחֵר תִּיטְּלִי מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב לִיך. חָזְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְהוֹרוֹת כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּי. בֵּית הִלֵּל עָבְדִין כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דָּרַשׁ הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן לְשׁוֹן הֶדְיוֹט. הָיוּ כוֹתְבִין בְּאַלֶכְסַנְדְּרִיאָה שֶׁהָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן מְקַדֵּשׁ אִשָּׁה וַחֲבֵירוֹ חוֹטְפָהּ מִן הַשּׁוּק. וּכְשֶׁבָּא מַעֲשֶׂה לִפְנֵי חֲכָמִים בִּיקְּשׁוּ לַעֲשׂוֹתָן מַמְזֵירִים. אָמַר לָהֶן הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן. הוֹצִיאוּ כְּתוּבַת אִימּוֹתֵיהֶן. וְהוֹצִיאוּ כְּתוּבַת אִימּוֹתֵיהֶן וּמָצְאוּ כָתוּב בָּהֶן. לִכְשֶׁתִּיכָּנְסִי לְבֵיתִי תְּהַוְיָין לִי לְאִינְתּוּ כְדַת מֹשֶׁה וִיהוּדָאֵי.

The House of Shammai insist on interpretation of the ketubah. As the House of Shammai explain, we can infer that from the text of her ketubah document in which he writes: “If you would be married to another man you shall take the amount I wrote for you.” The House of Hillel reversed themselves and taught following the House of Shammai. The House of Hillel insist on interpretation of the ketubah. Hillel the Elder explained it, using the vernacular. In Alexandria they were writing that a man there became betrothed to a woman. Another man abducted her from a public place. When this came before the Sages, they intended to declare [the children] as bastards. Hillel the Elder told them, bring your mothers’ ketubah. They brough their mothers’ ketubah. They found written there: “When you enter my house you shall be my wife according to the laws of Moses and the Jews.”

רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה עֲבַד כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דָּרַשׁ רִבִּי לָעְזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה הַבָּנִים יִירְשׁוּ וְהַבָּנוֹת יַזוֹנוּ. מַה הַבָּנִים אֵינָן יוֹרְשִׁין אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן. אַף הַבָּנוֹת אֵינָן נִיזּוֹנוֹת אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן.

Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah insisted on interpreting the ketubah. “Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah explained: ‘The sons shall inherit and the daughters shall be supported.’ Since the sons can only inherit after their father’s death, so the daughters can claim support only after their father’s death.”

רִבִּי מֵאִיר עֲבַד כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דְּאָמַר רִבִּי מֵאִיר הַמְקַבֵּל שָׂדֶה מֵחֲבֵירוֹ שָׁמִין אוֹתָהּ כַּמָּה הִיא רְאוּיָה לַעֲשׂוֹת וְנוֹתְנִין לוֹ. שֶׁהוּא כוֹתֵב לוֹ. אִם אוֹבִיר וְלֹא אַעֲבִיד אֲשַׁלֵּם בְּמֵיטְבָא.

Rebbi Meїr insists on interpreting the contract text. As Rebbi Meїr said, if somebody accepts a field as a contractor, one estimates how much it is expected to yield and give to [the owner]. Because the standard contract reads: “If I let it lie fallow and do not work on it, I shall pay as if from the best.”

רִבִּי יוּדָה עֲבַד כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה. מֵבִיא הוּא אָדָם עַל יְדֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ כָּל קָרְבָּן שֶׁהִיא חַיֶיבֶת. אֲפִילוּ אָכְלָה חֵלֶב אֲפִילוּ חִילְלָה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת. וְכֵן הָיָה רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. פּוֹטְרָהּ אֵינוֹ חַיָיב בָּהּ. שֶׁכֵּן הִיא כוֹתֶבֶת לוֹ. וְאוֹחְרָן דִּי אַתְיָין לָךְ מִן קַדְמַת דְּנָא.

Rebbi Jehudah insists on interpreting the contract text. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: A person brings for his wife any sacrifice she is obligated for, even if she ate suet or desecrated the Sabbath. Also, Rebbi Jehudah says, once he divorces her, he is no longer obligated for her, for she writes to him “any other obligations that come to you from earlier times.”

רִבִּי יוֹסֵי עֲבַד כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דָּרַשׁ רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מָקוֹם שֶׁנָּהֲגוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּתוּבָּה מִלְוֶה גּוֹבָה אֶת הַכֹּל. לִכְפּוֹל אֵינוֹ גּוֹבָה אֶלָּא מֶחֱצָה. רִבִּי לָעְזָר [הַקַּפָּר] אָמַר. אֵין אָדָם רַשַּׁאי לִיקַּח לוֹ בְּהֵמָה חַיָּה וְעוֹף אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִתְקִין לָהֶן מְזוֹנוֹת. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה עֲבַד כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דְּאָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה. הַמַּלְוֶה אֶת חֲבֵירוֹ לֹא יְמַשְׁכְּנֶנּוֹ יוֹתֵר עַל חוֹבוֹ. שֶׁהוּא כוֹתֵב לוֹ. תִּשְׁלַמְּתָהּ מִן נִיכְסַיי דִיאַתְיָין לְיָידִי דְאַקְנָה לִקְבֵּל דְּנָהּ.

Rebbi Yose insists on interpreting the contract text. Rebbi Yose explained: In a place where one treats the ketubah as a loan, she collects the entire amount. Where one doubles, she collects only half the amount. Rebbi Eleazar [the caper grower] said, nobody is permitted to buy domesticated or wild animals or birds unless he has food prepared for them. Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥa insists on interpreting the contract text, since Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥa said, a person lending money to another person should not take pledges from him for more than the value of the loan since he writes for him: “It will be paid by the property that came to my hand that I shall acquire corresponding to this [sum].”

רַב חוּנָה עֲבַד כְּתוּבָּה מִדְרָשׁ. דָּרַשּׁ רַב חוּנָה. הַבָּנִים יִירְשׁוּ וְהַבָּנוֹת יִיזוֹנוּ. מַה הַבָּנִים יוֹרְשִׁין מִן הַמְטַלְטְלִין אַף הַבָּנוֹת נִיזּוֹנוֹת מִן הַמְטַלְטְלִין. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר אֵין הַבָּנוֹת נִיזּוֹנוֹת מִן הַמְטַלְטְלִין. מַתְנִיתָא מְסַיְיעָא לִשְׁמוּאֵל. בְּנָן נוּקְבָּן דִיהֲווֹן לֵיכִי מִינַּאי יְהַיוְיָין יָתְבָן בְּבֵיתִי וּמִיתְזְנָן מִנִּיכְסַיי. וְתַנֵּי עֲלָהּ. מִמְקַרְקְעֵי וְלֹא מִמְטַלְטְלֵי. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זַבְדָא. אַתְיָא דְּרַב הוּנָא כְרִבִּי וְרִבִּי שְּׁמוּאֵל כְּרִבִּי שִּׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָעְזָר. דְּתַנֵּי. אֶחָד נְכָסִין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אֲחֵרָיוּת וְאֶחָד נְכָסִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶן אֲחֵרָיוּת נִפְרָעִין מֵהֶן לְמָזוֹן הָאִשָּׁה וְהָבָּנוֹת. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָעְזָר אוֹמֵר. נְכָסִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן אֲחֵרָיוּת הַבָּנִים מוֹצִיאִין מִן הַבָּנִים וְהָבָּנוֹת מִן הַבָּנוֹת וְהָבָּנִים מִן הַבָּנוֹת וְהָבָּנוֹת מִן הַבָּנִים. וְשֶׁאֵין לָהֶן אֲחֵרָיוּת הַבָּנִים מוֹצִיאִין מִן הַבָּנוֹת וְאֵין הַבָּנוֹת מוֹצִיאִין מִן הַבָּנִים. אָמְרִין. חָזַר בָּהּ רַב חוּנָא. אָמְרִין. יֵאוּת. כְּתוּבָּה דְּבַר תּוֹרָה וּמָזוֹן הַבָּנוֹת מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן. וְדִבְרֵיהֶן עוֹקְרִין דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. אֶלָּא בְּכֶסֶף כְּתוּבַּת אִימָּן פְּלִיגִין. וְכֶסֶף כְּתוּבַּת אִמָּן לֹא קַרְקַע הוּא.

Rav Huna insists on interpreting the contract text. Rav Huna explained: “The sons shall inherit but the daughters must be fed.” Since the sons inherit movables, the daughters also are fed from movables. Samuel said, the daughters are not fed from movables. A Mishnah supports Samuel: “The female children you shall have from me shall dwell in my house and be supported from my property.” It was stated on this: From real estate but not from movables. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda said: Rav Huna follows Rebbi and Samuel follows Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar, as it was stated: “One uses both guaranteed property and non-guaranteed property for the support of the wife and the daughters, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, guaranteed property may be taken by sons from sons, by daughters from daughters, by sons from daughters 59, and by daughters from sons. But non-guaranteed property may be taken by sons from daughters but not by daughters from sons.” They said, Rav Huna reversed himself. They said, that was well done, ketubah is a biblical commandment but support of the daughters is from their words. May their words uproot a biblical commandment? It must be that they differ about the money contained in their mother’s ketubah. But is the money contained in their mother’s ketubah not also real estate?

הַיּוֹרֵד לְנִיכְסֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ וְנָתַן עֵינָיו בָּהּ לְגָרְשָׁהּ וְקָפַץ וְתָלַשׁ מִן הַקַּרְקַע הֲרֵי זֶה זָרִיז וְנִשְׂכָּר. הַיּוֹרֵד לְנִיכְסֵי שְׁבוּיִין וְשָׁמַע עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁהֵן מְמַשְׁמְשִׁין וּבָאִין וְקָפַץ וְתָלַשׁ מִן הַקַּרְקַע הֲרֵי זֶה זָרִיז וְנִשְׂכָּר. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן נִיכְסֵי שְׁבוּיִים. כָּל שֶׁהָלַךְ אָבִיו אוֹ אָחִיו אוֹ אֶחָד מִכָּל הַמּוֹרִישִׁין אוֹתוֹ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וְשָׁמַע עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁמֵּתוּ וְיָרַד לוֹ לְנַחֲלָה. אֲבָל נִיכְסֵי נְטוּשִׁין מוֹצִיאִין אוֹתָהּ מִיָּדוֹ. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן נִיכְסֵי נְטוּשִׁין. כָּל שֶׁהָלַךְ אָבִיו אוֹ אָחִיו אוֹ אֶחָד מִכָּל הַמּוֹרִישִׁין אוֹתוֹ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וְלֹא שָׁמַע עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁמֵּתוּ וְיָרַד לוֹ לְנַחֲלָה. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. שָׁמַעְתִּי הוּא שְׁבוּיִים הוּא נְטוּשִׁים. אֲבָל נִיכְסֵי רְטוּשִׁין מוֹצִיאִין מִיָּדוֹ. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן נִיכְסֵי רְטוּשִׁין. כָּל שֶׁהָלַךְ אָבִיו אוֹ אָחִיו אוֹ אֶחָד מִכָּל הַמּוֹרִישִׁין אוֹתוֹ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיכָן הוּא. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר שָׁבוּי זֶה שֶׁיָּצָא שֶׁלֹּא לְדַעַת. שֶׁאִילּוּ יָצָא לְדַעַת הָיָה מְצַוֵּיהוּ. נָטוּשׁ זֶה שֶׁיָּצָא לְדַעַת. תֵּדַע לָךְ שֶׁעִילָּה הָיָה רוֹצֶה לְהַבְרִיחוֹ מִנְּכָסָיו. הֲרֵי לְדַעַת יָצָא וְלֹא צִיוָּהוּ. רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי בָּא רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל. הַמְטַלְטְלִין אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם נִיכְסֵי רְטוּשִׁין. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רַב יְהוּדָה. קָמָה עוֹמֶדֶת לְהִיקָּצֵר וּגְפָנִים עוֹמְדוֹת לְהִיבָּצֵר מִמְטַלְטְלִין הֵן. רַב שֵׁשֶׁת שָׁאַל. אִילֵּין דִּיקְלַיָּא דְבָבֶל דְּלָא צְרִיכִין מֻרְכָּבָא לֹא מִסְתַּבְּרָא מֵיעַבְּדִינָין כְּקָמָה עוֹבֶרֶת לְהִיקָּצֵר וּגְפָנִים עוֹבְרוֹת לְהִיבָּצֵר.

“If somebody who works his wife’s property has the intention of divorcing her and goes and takes from the ground, he is quick and is rewarded. If somebody who works the property of prisoners heard that they prepare to return, goes and takes from the ground, he is quick and is rewarded. These are properties of prisoners: In any case where his father, brother, or any person from whom he might inherit, went overseas, he heard that they died, and he went to work the inheritance. But property of abandoning persons one takes out of their hands. These are properties of abandoning persons: In any case where his father, brother, or any person from whom he might inherit, went overseas, he did not hear that they died, but he went to work the inheritance. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, I heard that there is no difference between prisoners and abandoning persons. But property of broken persons one takes out of their hands. These are properties of smashed persons: In any case where his father, brother, or any person from whom he might inherit, went overseas, and his whereabouts are not known.” Samuel says, the prisoner is one who left involuntarily. If he had left voluntarily he would have given him instructions. The abandoning person is one who left voluntarily. You should know that he had the intention of keeping [the relative] off his property since he left voluntarily and did not give him instructions. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Abba, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: Movables do not fall under the rules of smashed people. RebbiJacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rav Jehudah: Standing grain ready to be harvested and grapes ready to be harvested are movables. Rav Sheshet asked: Those date palms of Babylonia which do not need grafting, is it not reasonable that we should treat them like standing grain ready to be harvested and grapes ready to be harvested?

Mishnah

משנה: הַכֹּל נֶאֱמָנִים לְהַעִידָהּ חוּץ מֵחֲמוֹתָהּ וּבַת חֲמוֹתָהּ וְצָרָתָהּ וִיבִמְתָּהּ וּבַת בַּעֲלָהּ. מַה בֵין גֵּט לְמִיתָה שֶׁהַכְּתָב מוֹכִיחַ. עֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר מֵת וְנִשֵּׂאת. וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָמַר לֹא מֵת הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תֵצֵא. עֵד אוֹמֵר מֵת וּשְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִין לֹא מֵת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת תֵּצֵא. שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים מֵת וְעֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר לֹא מֵת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִשֵּׂאת תִּינָּשֵׂא.

MISHNAH: Everybody is accepted to be a witness for her except her mother-in-law, her mother-in-law’s daughter, her co-wife, her levir’s wife, and her husband’s daughter. What is the difference between a bill of divorce and death? The document is the proof. If one witness says that he died and she remarried, then another comes and says that he is not dead, she shall not leave. If one witness says that he died but two say that he did not die, even if she remarried she must leave. If two say that he died but one said that he did not die, even if she has not yet remarried she may remarry.

Halakhah

הלכה: הַכֹּל נֶאֱמָנִים לְהַעִידָהּ כול׳. תַּנֵּי. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱמָנוֹת עָלֶיהָ כָּךְ אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת עֲלֵיהֶן. בֶּן חֲמוֹתָהּ כְּבַת חֲמוֹתָהּ. בֶּן בַּעֲלָהּ כְּבַת בַּעֲלָהּ. צָרָתָהּ אֲפִילוּ נְשׂוּאָה. יְבִמְתָּהּ אֲפִילוּ אֲחוֹתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מַתְנִיתָא אָ‍מְרָה כֵן שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ זְכָרִים כִּנְקֵיבוֹת. דְּתַנִינָן תַּמָּן. שֶׁאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר. מֵת יְבָמִי. שֶׁתִּינָּשֵׂא. וְלֹא מֵתָה אֲחוֹתוֹ. שֶׁתִּיכָּנֵס לְבֵיתָהּ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לָהּ בָנִים. אֲבָל אִם יֵשּׁ לָהּ בָּנִים נֶאֱמֶנֶת.

HALAKHAH: “Everybody is accepted to be a witness for her,” etc. It was stated: “Just as they cannot be trusted for her, so she cannot be trusted about them.” Her mother-in-law’s son is like her mother-in-law’s daughter. Her husband’s son is like her husband’s daughter. Her co-wife, even if remarried. Her levir’s wife, even [if she is] her own sister. Rebbi Yose said, a Mishnah says that they did not treat the males as they treat the females, as we have stated there: “because a woman is not trusted if she says, my levir died, that she should be free to remarry, nor that her sister died, to enter her house.” Because she has no children. But if she has children, she is trustworthy.

וְהַכְּתָב מוֹכִיחַ. וְלַּא מִפִּיהָ מַאֲמִינִין אוֹתָהּ. שֶׁאִילּוּ לֹא אָמְרָה. בְּפָנַיי נִכְתָּב וּבְפָנַיי נֶחְתָּם. אַף אַתְּ שֶׁמָּא מַתִּירָהּ לְהִינָּשֵׂא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. כְּהַהִיא דְאָמַר רִבִּי בּוּן. אֵינוֹ חָשׁוּד לְקַלְקְלָהּ בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם. בְּבֵית דִּין חָשׁוּד לְקַלְקְלָהּ. שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ שֶׁהוּא יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁאִם בָּא (וְעֵידָיו עִמּוֹ) [וְעִרְעֵר עִרְעוּרוֹ] בָּטֵל אַף הוּא מַחְתִּמוֹ בְעֵדִים כְּשֵׁירִים. וְהָכָא מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהִיא יוֹדַעַת שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ בָהּ דְּבָרֶיהָ אֶצֶל חֲבֵירָתָהּ כְּלוּם אַף הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת אֱמֶת.

Does the document prove? Do we not have to believe what she says? If she did not say ‘it was written in my presence, it was signed in my presence’, would you permit her to remarry? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that parallels what Rebbi Abun said, one does not suspect him to vilify her in the eyes of Heaven; he is suspect to vilify her in the eyes of the court. Since he knows that if he were to come [and object, his objection] would not be accepted, he has [the bill of divorce] signed by witnesses in good standing. And here, since she knows that her word does not count for the other woman, she will be truthful.

עֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר כול׳. עֵד אֶחָד אָמַר מֵת. וְנִישֵּׂאת. וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָמַר. לֹא מֵת. הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תֵצֵא. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמַר מִשֶּׁנִּישֵּׂאת. הָא אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִישֵּׂאת וְנִישֵּׂאת תֵּצֵא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. זוֹ דִבְרֵי רִבִּי מְנַחֵם בֵּירִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אֲבָל דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים בֵּין אָמַר מִשֶּׁנִּישֵּׂאת בֵּין שֶׁאָמַר עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִישֵּׂאת לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא. וְאִם נִישֵּׂאת לֹא תֵצֵא. רַב נַחמָן בַּר יַעֲקֹב בְּשֵׁם רַב. נִישֵּׂאת עַל פִּי עֵדִים שְׁנַיִם אֲפִילוּ אָתוֹן. אָמְרִין לֵהּ. לֵית אַתְּ נוֹ. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק בָּעֵי. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁהוּא אָדָם מְסוּיָים כְּגוֹן אִימִּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. וְלֵית כְּמָן בַּר נַשּׁ דָמֵיי לְרִבִּי אִמִּי. אָתָא עוֹבְדָא קוֹמֵי דְרַבָּנִן דְּתַמָּן. אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. לֵית (אתנו). קָם אַבָּא בַר בָּא וְלָחַשׁ לָהּ גַו אוּדְנֵהּ. אָמַר לֵהּ. בְּחַיֶּיךָ. הַב לָהּ גֵּט מִסָּפֵק. קָמוּ תַלְמִידוֹי דְרַב וּמְחוֹנֵיהּ. אָמַר. עַרְקְתָא יְקַד וְסַפְסְלָה יְקַד. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. תַּמָּן הֲוֵינָא וְלָא עַרְקְתָא יָקְדָת וְלָא סַפְסְלָא יָקְדָת אֶלָּא אַבָּא הוּא דְלָקָה. וְקָם לֵהּ. אָתָא עוֹבְדָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִימִּי. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אִין בָּרִיא דְהִיא שַׁרְיָא לָךְ אֶלָּא תְהֵא יוֹדֵעַ דִּבְנֵיהּ דְּהַהוּא גַבְרָא מַמְזֵירָא קוֹמֵי שְׁמַיָיא וַהֲוָה רִבִּי זְעִירָא מְקַלֵּס לֵיהּ דוּ מֵקִים מִילְּתָא עַל בְּרָרָה.

“If one witness says,” etc. “If one witness says that he died and she remarried, then another comes and says that he is not dead, she shall not leave.” Because he said that after she had remarried. Therefore if [the second witness came] before she remarried, if she remarried she has to leave. Rebbi Joḥanan said, these are the words of Rebbi Menaḥem ben Rebbi Yose. But the words of the Sages [are], whether he testified after she remarried or before she remarried, she should not remarry, but if she remarried she shall not leave. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob said in the name of Rav, if she was married by the testimony of two witnesses, even if he returns, one says to him, “you are not he.” Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac asked, think of it, if he is a famous person like Immi? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, is there nobody who would look like Rebbi Immi? There came a case before the rabbis there. They said to him, “you are not he.” Abba bar Abba got up and whispered in his ear saying, by your life, give her a bill of divorce because of the doubt. Rav’s students got up and beat him. Somebody said, the whip is burning and the footstool is burning. Samuel said, I was there, no whip was burning and no footstool was burning, but my father was hit and got up. There came a case before Rebbi Immi. He said to him, yes, it is sure that she is permitted to you but you should know that the child of this man is a bastard before Heaven. Rebbi Ze‘ira was praising him because he made the situation clear.

Mishnah

משנה: אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת מֵת וְאַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת לֹא מֵת זוֹ שֶׁאוֹמֶרֶת מֵת תִּינָּשֵׂא וְתִיטּוֹל כְּתוּבָּתָהּ וְזוֹ שֶׁאוֹמֶרֶת לֹא מֵת לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא וְלֹא תִיטּוֹל כְּתוּבָּתָהּ. אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת מֵת וְאַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת נֶהֱרַג רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר הוֹאִיל וּמַכְחִישּׁוֹת זוֹ אֶת זוֹ הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ לֹא יִנָּשֵׂאוּ. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִין זוֹ וְזוֹ מוֹדוֹת שֶׁאֵינוֹ קַיָים יִנָּשֵׂאוּ.

MISHNAH: One [wife] says, he died, the other one says, he did not die. The one who said that he died can remarry and collect her ketubah; the one who said that he did not die cannot remarry nor collect her ketubah. If one said that he died, while the other one said he was killed; Rebbi Meïr says, since they contradict one another, they cannot remarry. Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon say, since both agree that he is not alive they can remarry.

Halakhah

הלכה: הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא כול׳. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי מֵאִיר בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה. אַשְׁכָּח תַּנֵּי. עוֹד הִיא בְמַחֲלוֹקֶת. מַה בֵין שְׁנִיָיה מַה בֵין רִאשׁוֹנָה. רִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא עָשׂוּ בָהּ דָּבָר זֶה אֵצֶל חֲבֵירָתָהּ כְּלוּם. אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּעֵדִים. מַה בֵּין עֵדִים מַה בֵּין צָרָה. לא עָשׂוּ דִבְרֵי צָרָה אֵצֶל חֲבֵירָתָהּ כְּלוּם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אִילּוּ אֲמָרָהּ רִבִּי לָעְזָר מִנִּי שְּׁמָעָהּ וַאֲמָרָהּ.

HALAKHAH: “A woman who went overseas with her husband,” etc. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Rebbi Meïr agrees in the first case. It was found stated: That is also in dispute. What is the difference between the second and the first cases? In the first case, did they not consider her word as nonexistent for her companion? Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Judah and Rebbi Simeon concede in the case of witnesses. What is the difference between witnesses and the co-wife? Did they not consider the co-wife’s words as nonexistent for her companion? Rebbi Joḥanan said, if Rebbi Eleazar said this, he heard it from me and formulated it.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. מִי שֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִיתֵּי עֵדִים מֵעִידוֹת אוֹתוֹ. אֵלּוּ מֵעִידִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁנָּזַר שְׁתַּיִם וְאֵלּוּ מֵעִידִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁנָּזַר חָמֵשׁ. רַב אָמַר. בִּכְלָל נֶחְלְקוּ. אֲבָל בִּפְרָט כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בִּכְלָל חָמֵשׁ שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁיְּהֵא נָזִיר שְׁתַּיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בְּמוֹנֶה נֶחְלְקוּ. אֲבָל בִּכְלָל כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי. נֶחֱלֶקֶת הָעֵדוּת אֵין כָּאן נְזִירוּת. וְהֵידֵינוֹ כְלָל וְהֵידֵינוֹ מוֹנֶה. כְּלָל. הָהֵן אָמַר תַּרְתֵּיי וְהָהֵן אָמַר חָמֵשׁ. מוֹנֶה. הָהֵן אָמַר. חָדָא תַּרְתֵּיי וְהָהֵן אָמַר. תְּלַת אַרְבַּע וְחָמֵשׁ.

There, we have stated: “If two groups of witnesses testified about him, one group testifying that he vowed two periods of nezirut, the other group testifying that he vowed five periods of nezirut.” Rav said, they differ in the overall testimony. But in detail, everybody agrees that five contains two, that he has to be a nazir for two periods. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they differ in counting. But in an overall testimony, everybody agrees that the testimonies contradict one another and there is no nezirut. What is overall and what is counting? Overall, this one says two, the other one says five. Counting, this one says one, two, the other one says three, four, five.

רַב אָמַר. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָּטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. דִבְרֵי הַכֹּל. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת לְאַחַר עֲדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כְּדַעְתֵּיהּ. דָּמַר רִבִּי בָּא רִבִּי חִיָיה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הוּחְזָק הַמּוֹנֶה. זֶה אָמַר. מִן הַכִּיס מוֹנֶה. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. מִן הַצְּרוֹר מוֹנֶה. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת. וְאַף רַב מוֹדֶה שֶּׁבָּטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּשֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִיתֵּי עֵדִים. אֵילּוּ אוֹמְרִים. מִן הַכִּיס מוֹנֶה. וְאֵילּוּ אוֹמְרִים. מִן הַצְּרוֹר מוֹנֶה. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָּטֵל הָעֵדוּת. וּכְרַב לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. אֵילּוּ אוֹמְרִים. לְתוֹךְ חֵיקוֹ מָנָה. וְאֵילּוּ אוֹמְרִים. לְתוֹךְ פוּנְדָּתוֹ מָנָה. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל. הִכְחִישׁ הָעֵדוּת לְאַחַר עֵידוּת לֹא בָטְלָה עֵדוּת. זֶה אָמַר. בַּמַּקֵל הֲרָגוֹ. וְזֶה אָמַר. בַּסַּיָיף הֲרָגוֹ. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. וְאַף רַב מוֹדֶה שֶׁבָּטְלָה עֵדוּת. מַה פְלִיגִין. כְּשֶׁהָיוּ שְׁתֵּי כִתֵּי עֵדִים. אֵלּוּ אָמַר. בַּמַּקֵל הֲרָגוֹ. וְאֵלּוּ אָמַר. בַּסַּיָיף הֲרָגוֹ. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת בְּתוֹךְ עֵדוּת בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. וּכְרַב לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. אֵילּוּ אוֹמְרִים. בְּדָרוֹם פָּנָה. וְאֵילוּ אוֹמְרִים. בְּצָפוֹן פָּנָה. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל. הִכְחִישׁ עֵדוּת לְאַחַר עֵדוּת לֹא בָטְלָה הָעֵדוּת. חֵיילֵיהּ דְּרַב מִן הָדָא. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְרִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמְרִין. הוֹאִיל וְזוֹ וְזוֹ מוֹדוֹת שֶׁאֵינוֹ קַיָים יִנָּשֵׂאוּ. וְלֹא שְׁמִיעַ דָּמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּעֵדִים. מַה בֵּין עֵדִים מַה בֵּין צָרָה. לא עָשׂוּ דִבְרֵי צָרָה אֵצֶל חֲבֵירָתָהּ כְּלוּם. (דָּמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אִם אֲמָרָהּ רִבִּי לָעְזָר מִינִּי שְׁמָעָהּ וַאֲמָרָהּ.) מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רַב. אֶחָד חֲקִירוֹת וְאֶחָד בְּדִיקוֹת. בִּזְמָן שֶׁהֵן מַכְחִישִׁין זֶה אֶת זֶה עֵדוּתָן בְּטֵילָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. פָּתַר לָהּ רַב עֵד בְּעֵד. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּן. וַאֲפִילוּ תֵימַר כַּת בְּכַת. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא בְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. צֶדֶק צֶדֶק תִּרְדוֹף.

Rav said, if testimony was contradicted in its essence, the testimony is not void. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if testimony was contradicted in itself, the testimony is void in the opinion of everybody. If testimony was contradicted in some aspects that belong after the fact, the testimony is not void. Rebbi Joḥanan is consistent since Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya, said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, if it was agreed that he counted but one [witness] said, he counted from a wallet and the other said, he counted from a bundle, that contradicts the essence of the testimony, and Rav will agree that the testimony is void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, these say he counted from a wallet and the others say he counted from a bundle. That contradicts the essence of the testimony, the testimony is void but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. These say, he counted into his bosom, the others say he counted into his money-belt; everybody agrees that is contradicting testimony after the main testimony, and the testimony is not void. If one [witness] said, he killed him with a mace, the other [witness] said, he killed him with a sword, that contradicts the essence of the testimony, the testimony is void and Rav will agree that the testimony is void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, these say he killed him with a mace and the others say, he killed him with a sword. That contradicts the essence of the testimony, the testimony is void but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. If these say, he ran away to the South and those say, he ran away to the North, everybody agrees that the testimony was contradictory in some aspects that belong after the fact, the testimony is not void. The strength of Rav comes from the following: “Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon say, since both agree that he is not alive they can remarry.” He did nor hear that Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Judah and Rebbi Simeon concede in the case of witnesses. What is the difference between witnesses and the co-wife? Did they not consider the co-wife’s words as nonexistent for her companion? (Rebbi Joḥanan said, if Rebbi Eleazar said this, he heard it from me and formulated it.) A Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “Both in investigations and in cross examinations, if they contradict one another their testimony is void.” Rebbi Mana said, Rav will explain that as referring to single witness against single witness. Rebbi Abun said, even if you say groups and groups. There is a difference in criminal cases: “Justice, justice you shall pursue”.

Mishnah

משנה: עֵד אָמַר מֵת וְעֵד אֶחָד אָמַר לֹא מֵת אִשָּׁה אָמְרָה מֵת וְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת לֹא מֵת הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תִינָּשֵׂא.

MISHNAH: One witness said that he died, another witness said that he did not die; a woman said that he died, another woman said that he did not die; she may not remarry.

Halakhah

הלכה: אָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי כול׳. גִּידֻל בַּר מִנְיָימִין בְּשֵׁם רַב. בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁהִכְשִׁירוּ עֵדוּת הָאִשָּׁה בָאִישׁ הָאִישׁ מַכְחִישׁ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה וְהָאִשָּׁה מַכְחֶשֶׁת אֶת הָאִישׁ. נִיתְנֵי. עֵד אוֹמֵר. מֵת. וְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת. לֹא מֵת. אִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת. מֵת. וְעֵד אוֹמֵר. לֹא מֵת. תַּנֵּיי דְּבֵית רִבִּי כֵן. תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי נְחֶמְיָה. הוֹלְכִין אַחַר רוֹב הָעֵדוּת. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָה. שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים וְאִשָּׁה אַחַת עָשׂוּ אוֹתָן כִּשְׁנֵי עֵדִים וְעֵד אֶחָד. הָדָה אַתְּ אָמַר בְאִשָּׁה וְנָשִׁים. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ מֵאָה נָשִׁים וְעֵד אֶחָד כְּעֵד אִינּוּן.

HALAKHAH: “if she says ‘my husband died’,” etc. Gidul bar Miniamin in the name of Rav: Anywhere they accepted the testimony of a woman parallel to that of a man, a man can contradict a woman and a woman can contradict a man. Then one should state: “A witness says that he died, and a woman says that he did not die; a woman said that he died and a witness said that he did not die.” In the House of Rebbi they stated it this way. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Neḥemiah: One follows the majority of the testimonies. How is that? Two women against one woman they considered as if there were two witnesses against one witness. What you say refers to a woman and women. But if there were a hundred women against one [male] witness, they are like one witness.

Mishnah

משנה: הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעֲלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם בָּאָת וְאָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי תִּינָּשֵׂא וְתִיטּוֹל כְּתוּבָתָהּ וְצָרָתָהּ אֲסוּרָה. הָיְתָה בַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לַכֹּהֵן תֹּאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֵין זוֹ דֶרֶךְ מוֹצִיאַתָּהּ מִידֵי עֲבֵירָה עַד שֶּׁתְּהֵא אֲסוּרָה לְהִינָּשֶׂא וַאֲסוּרָה מִלּוֹכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה.

MISHNAH: If a woman went overseas with her husband and she returns and says “my husband died”, she can remarry and collect her ketubah, but her co-wife remains forbidden. If she was the daughter of an Israel married to a Cohen, she should eat heave, the words of Rebbi Tarphon. Rebbi Aqiba says, in this way one does not remove her from sin unless she be forbidden to remarry and forbidden to eat heave.

Halakhah

הלכה: חֲשׁוּדָה הִיא לְקַלְקֵל עַצְמָהּ כְּדֵי לְקַלְקֵל צָרָתָהּ. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילוּ עַל עַצְמָהּ לֹא תְהֵא נֶאֱמֶנֶת. מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהִיא יוֹדַעַת שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ דְּבָרֶיהָ אֵצֶל חֲבֵירָתָהּ כְּלוּם אַף הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת אֱמֶת. מֵעַתָּה אֲפִילּוּ עַל צָרָתָהּ תְּהֵא נֶאֱמֶנֶת. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילָא. חוֹזֵר לַקִּילְקוּל הָרִאשׁוֹן. חֲשׁוּדָה הִיא לְקַלְקֵל עַצְמָהּ כְּדֵי לְקַלְקֵל צָרָתָהּ.

HALAKHAH: She is suspected to cause trouble to herself in order to cause trouble to her co-wife. Then she should not be trustworthy even for herself! Since she knows that her word does not count for the other woman, she will be truthful. Then she should be trustworthy even for her co-wife! She is suspected to cause trouble to herself in order to cause trouble to her co-wife.

Mishnah

משנה: אָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת חָמִי תִּינָּשֵׂא וְתִיטּוֹל כְּתוּבָּתָהּ וַחֲמוֹתָהּ אֲסוּרָה. הָיְתָה בַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לַכֹּהֵן תֹּאכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֵין זוֹ דֶרֶךְ מוֹצִיאַתָּהּ מִידֵי עֲבֵירָה עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא אֲסוּרָה לְהִינָּשֶׂא וַאֲסוּרָה מִלּוֹכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה.

MISHNAH: If a woman went overseas with her husband and she returns and says “my husband died and then my father-in-law died”, she can remarry and collect her ketubah, but her mother-in-law remains forbidden. If she was the daughter of an Israel married to a Cohen, she should eat heave, the words of Rebbi Tarphon. Rebbi Aqiba says, in this way one does not remove her from sin unless she be forbidden to remarry and forbidden to eat heave.

Halakhah

הלכה: קִידֵּשׁ אַחַת. וּתְהֵא נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר מֵת חָמִי. לֹא כֵן סָבְרִינָן מֵימַר. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵינָן נֶאֱמָנוֹת עָלֶיהָ כָּךְ הִיא אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת עֲלֵיהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָא. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁהָיָה חָמִיהָ כָן וְסִיְימָהּ.

HALAKHAH: “If he was betrothed to one.” Should she not be trusted to say “my father-in-law died”? Did we not hold that just as they are not trusted about her so she is not trusted about them? Rebbi Ḥanina said, explain it if her father-in-law was there and she described the circumstances.

Mishnah

משנה: קִידֵּשׁ אַחַת מֵחָמֵשׁ נָשִׁים וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵיזוֹ קִידֵּשׁ כָּל אַחַת אוֹמֶרֶת אוֹתִי קִידֵּשׁ נוֹתֵן גֵּט לְכָל אַחַת וְאַחַת וּמַנִּיחַ כְּתוּבָּה בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמִסְתַּלֵּק דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֵין זוֹ דֶרֶךְ מוֹצִיאַתּוּ מִידֵי עֲבֵירָה עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן גֵּט וּכְתוּבָּה לְכָל אַחַת וְאַחַת. גָּזַל אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ לְאֵי זֶה גָזַל וְכָל אֶחָד אוֹמֵר אוֹתִי גָזַל מַנִּיחַ אֶת הַגְּזֵילָה בֵּינֵיהֶן וּמִסְתַּלֵּק דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֵין זוֹ דֶרֶךְ מוֹצִיאַתּוּ מִידֵי עֲבֵירָה עַד שֶׁיְּשַּׁלֵּם גְּזֵילָה לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד.

MISHNAH: If he became betrothed to one of five women but it cannot be ascertained to which of them he became betrothed, and each one says he became betrothed to me, he gives a bill of divorce to each of them, puts up the amount of one ketubah between them and removes himself, the words of Rebbi Tarphon. Rebbi Aqiba says, in this way one does not remove him from sin unless he gives a bill of divorce and pays the ketubah to each of them. He robbed one of five people, it is not known which of them he robbed and each one says “I was robbed”, he puts up the amount of the robbery between them and removes himself, the words of Rebbi Tarphon. Rebbi Aqiba says, in this way one does not remove him from sin unless he pays the amount of the robbery to each of them.

Halakhah

הלכה: [(גָּזַל אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה). אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּן מַתְנִיתָה בְּשֶׁקִּדְּשָׁהּ בִּשְׁטָר אֲבָל אִם קִדְּשָׁהּ בְּכֶסֶף כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁיִּתֵּן גֵּט וּכְתוּבָּה לְכָל אַחַת וְאַחַת.]

HALAKHAH: [(He robbed one of five people). Rebbi Abun said, the Mishnah deals with the case that she was betrothed by a document. But if he was betrothed by money, everybody agrees that he gives a bill of divorce and pays the ketubah to each of them.]

גָּזַל אֶחָד מֵחֲמִשָּׁה. אָמַר רִבִּי אַסִּי. מַתְנִיתִין דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָא. דְּלֹא כְרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. [אָמַר] לִשְׁנַיִם. גָּזַלְתִּי אֶת אֶחָד מִכֶּם מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מִכֶּם הוּא. אָבִיו שֶׁל אֶחָד מִכֶּם הִפְקִיד אֶצְלִי מָנֶה וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מִכֶּם הוּא. נוֹתֵן לַזֶּה מָנֶה וְלַזֶּה מָנֶה. שֶׁהוֹדָה מִפִּי עַצְמוֹ. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. אוֹמֵר. צֵא יְדֵי שָׁמַיִם. רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רַב יְהוּדָה. כָּאן שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֵדִים יוֹדְעִים. כָּאן שֶׁאֵין עֵדִים יוֹדְעִים. רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. כָּאן בְּשׁוֹתְקִין. כָּאן בִּמְדַבְּרִים. רַב יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רַב. כָּאן בְּשֶׁנִּשְׁבַּע. כָּאן בְּשֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁבַּע. [רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. אִם בְּשְׁנִּשְׁבַּע] הָיָה לוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת שָׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין וְלִמְסוֹר. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן סָבַר מֵימַר. בֵּית דִּין שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ [גוֹזֵל]. לֹא בֵית דִּין שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ נִגְזַל. רַב אָמַר בֵּית דִּין שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ נִגְזַל וְלֹא בֵּית דִּין שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ גוֹזֵל. חֵילֵיהּ דְּרַב מִן הָדָא. דָּמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָעְזָר. בֵּית דִּין שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ נִגְזַל וְלֹא בֵּית דִּין שֶׁעֲשָׂאוֹ גוֹזֵל. וְאִם לא הָיָה לִשְׁתּוֹק. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה סָבַר מֵימַר. הָיָה לוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹק וְלֹא [לְהוֹדוֹת]. רִבִּי יוֹסֵה סָבַר מֵימַר. הָיָה לוֹ לִשְׁתּוֹק וְלֹא לְהִשָּׁבַע. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. וַאֲפִילוּ תֵימַר דְּאִינּוּן אָמְרִין. הִיא שׁוֹתְקִין וְהִיא מְדַבְּרִים בִּגְ[זֵ]ילָה מוֹדֵי בְּפִקָּדוֹן דְּשָׁתַק מִתְגַּר וּדְמִשְׁתָּעֵי [מַפְסִד]. דְּשָׁתַק מִתְגַּר מִן הָדָה. שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהִפְקִידוּ אֶצֶל אֶחָד זֶה מָנֶה וְזֶה מָאתַיִם. זֶה אוֹמֵר. מָאתַיִם שֶׁלִּי. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. מָאתַיִם שֶׁלִּי. נוֹתֵן לַזֶּה מָנֶה וְלַזֶּה מָנֶה וְהַשְּׁאָר יְהֵא מוּנַח עַד שֶׁיָּבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ. דְמִשְׁתָּעֵי [מַפְסִד] מִן הָכָא. גָּזַלְתִּי אֶת אֶחָד מִכֶּם. וְאֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אֵיזֶה מִכֶּם כו׳.

“He robbed one of five people.” Rebbi Assi said, there is a Mishnah which follows Rebbi Aqiba against Rebbi Tarphon. As we have stated there: “If he said to two people, I robbed a mina from one of you but I do not know who of you it was; I received a deposit of a mina from the father of one of you but I do not know who of you it was; he gives to each of them a mina because he confessed himself.” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This is everybody’s opinion. One says, to be clean before Heaven. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah: Here, if witnesses know; there, if no witnesses know. Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Here if they are silent; there if they are talking. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Here if he swore; there if he did not swear. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he swore, he should have appointed an officer of the court and hand it over to him. Rebbi Joḥanan seems to say, a court which determined that one was a robber, not a court which determined that one was robbed. Rav said, a court which determined that one was robbed, not a court which determined that one was a robber. The strength of Rav is from the following, that Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, a court which determined that one was robbed, not a court which determined that one was a robber. Otherwise he should have kept silent. Rebbi Jeremiah wanted to say, he should have kept silent and not confessed. Rebbi Yose wanted to say, he should have kept silent and not have sworn. Rebbi Yudan said, even following those who say that there is no difference between keeping silent and talking in matters of a robbery, for a deposit they agree that he who keeps silent is rewarded and he who talks loses. He who keeps silent is rewarded from the following: “Two people deposited with the same person, one a mina and one 200 [tetradrachmas]. This one says, the 200 belong to me, and that one says, the 200 belong to me. He gives each one a mina and the rest shall lie with him until Elijah comes.” He who talks loses, from this: “If he said to two people, I robbed a mina from one of you but I do not know which one of you.”

Mishnah

משנה: הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעֲלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וּבְנָהּ עִמָּהֶם בָּאָה וְאָמְרָה מֵת בְּנִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת בַּעֲלִי נֶאֱמֶנֶת. מֵת בַּעֲלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת בְּנִי אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת וְחוֹשְׁשִׁין לִדְבָרֶיהָ וְחוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. נִיתַּן לִי בֵן בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם אָמְרָה מֵת בְּנִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּעֲלִי נֶאֱמֶנֶת מֵת בַּעֲלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ בְּנִי אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת וְחוֹשְׁשִׁין לִדְבָרֶיהָ וְחוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַיבֶּמֶת. נִתַּן לִי יָבָם בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם אָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת יְבָמִי. יְבָמִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּעֲלִי נֶאֱמֶנֶת. הָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעֲלָהּ וִיבָמָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם אָמְרָה מֵת בַּעֲלִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת יְבָמִי יְבָמִי וְאַחַר כָּךְ בַּעֲלִי אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת שֶׁאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר. מֶת יְבָמִי. שֶׁתִּינָּשֵׂא. וְלֹא. מֵתָה אֲחוֹתִי. שֶׁתִּיכָּנֵס לְבֵיתוֹ. וְאֵין הָאִישׁ נֶאֱמָן לוֹמַר מֵת אָחִי שֶׁיְּיַבֵּם אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא מֵתָה אִשְׁתִּי שֶׁיִּשָּׂא אֶת אֲחוֹתָהּ.

MISHNAH: A woman went overseas with her husband and her son; if she returns and says, “my husband died and after that my sondied,” she is to be believed. “My son died and after that my husband died,” she is not believed but one takes her words into account and she performs ḥalîṣah but is excluded from levirate. “I had a son overseas,” she says, “my son died and after him my husband,” she is believed; “my husband died and after that my son,” she is not believed but one takes her words into account and she performs ḥalîṣah but is excluded from levirate. “A levir was given to me overseas;” if she said “my husband died and after that my levir” [or] “my levir died and after that my husband”, she is to be believed. If she, her husband, and her levir went overseas, if she said “my husband died and after that my levir” [or] “my levir died and after that my husband”, she is not to be believed, since no woman is believed if she says “my levir died” that she might marry [outside the family] nor “my sister died” that she might enter his house. Also the husband is not to be believed if he says “my brother died” that he might marry his wife in levirate, nor “my wife died” that he might marry her sister.

Halakhah

הלכה: נִיתַּן לִי בֵן בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם. רִבִּי חֲנַניָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אִילָא. מָן תַּנָּא חוֹשְׁשִׁין לִדְבָרֶיהָ חוֹלֶצֶת. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן דְּלֹא כְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הוּא הָכָא אוֹף רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה מוֹדֶה בָהּ. מַה בֵינָהּ לְקַדְמִיָיתָא. הָכָא תֵימַר אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְכָה תֵימַר. נֶאֱמֶנֶת. (בְּשֶׁיָּצְתָה מִכְּלָל הֵיתֵר לְיִיבֻּם. וְ)הֵן דְּתֵימַר. אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. בְּשֶׁלֹּא יָצְתָה מִכְּלָל הֵיתֵר לְיִבֻּם.

HALAKHAH: “I had a son overseas.” Rebbi Ḥanania asked before Rebbi Hila: Who is the one who stated that one takes her words into account and she performs ḥalîṣah? Rebbi Tarphon, but not Rebbi Aqibah! He said to him, it is the opinion of everybody and even Rebbi Aqiba agrees to it. What is the difference betweeen this statement and the first one? There, you say that she is not to be believed. But here, you say that she is believed! (When she left as included in the permission of levirate. But) where you say that she is not believed, when she left and was not included in the permission of levirate.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ [זְכָרִים] כִּנְקֵיבוֹת. דְּתַנִינָן [תַּמָּן]. שֶׁאֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר. מֵת יְבָמִי. תִּנָּשֵׂא. וְלֹא מֵתָה אֲחוֹתִי. שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לְבֵיתָהּ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לָהּ בָנִים. הָא אִם יֵשׁ לָהּ בָּנִים נֶאֱמֶנֶת.

Rebbi Yose said, a Mishnah says that they did not treat the males as they treat the females, as we have stated there: “because she is not trusted if she says, my levir died, that she should be free to remarry, nor that her sister died, to enter her house.” Because she has no children. But if she has children, she is trustworthy.