The incident1 happened at the springs2 of Zepphoris, and the ruling followed R. Ammi, for R. Ammi said: and that is when a company of unfit men passed by there,3 and also R. Jannai. for R. Jannai said: if she had intercourse at the springs she is fit for the priesthood. — Do you really mean to say at the springs? — But rather [say]: If she had intercourse at the time of [the people visiting] the springs she is fit for the priesthood. But if someone went4 from Zepphoris and had intercourse [with her], the child is a shethuki.5 This is according to the following: When R. Dimi came6 he said that Ze'iri said [in the name of] R. Hanina, and some say: Ze'iri said [in the name of] R. Hanina:7 One goes after the majority of [the inhabitants of] the town and one does not go after the majority of the [passing] company. — Just the reverse! These8 move about and those9 are stationary!10 — But [say thus]: One goes after the majority of the [inhabitants of the] town, but only when there is [also] the majority of the [passing] company with it, but one does not go after the majority of the [inhabitants of the] town alone, nor after the majority of the [passing] company alone.11 — What is the reason?12 — It is prohibited13 [to go after] the majority of the [passing] company in order to prevent14 [going after] the majority of [the inhabitants of] the town. But even [in the case of] the majority of [the inhabitants of] the town, if he, went15 to her, [let us say that] he who separates himself separates himself from the majority?16 — It speaks of a case17 when she went to him.18 so that he was stationary,19 and R. Zera said: All that is stationary is considered as half to half.20 But do we require two majorities? Has it not been taught: if nine [meat] shops.21 all of them, sell ritually killed meat. and one [shop sells] meat not ritually slaughtered and he bought in22 one of them and he does not know in which of them he bought. it is prohibited because of the doubt;23 but if [meat] was found,24 one goes after the majority?25 And if you will say that [it speaks of a case] when the gates of the city are not closed,26 so that a majority27 came [also] from outside,28 did not R. Zera say: even when29 the gates of the city are closed? — Where purity of descent is concerned they30 put up a higher standard.31 The text says: 'R. Zera said: All that is stationary is considered as half to half.' [This apparently means] whether it is for leniency or for strictness.32 Whence does R. Zera take it? Shall I say from [the Baraitha which teaches that] if nine [meat] shops, all of them, sell ritually killed meat and one [shop sells] meat not ritually slaughtered and he bought in one of them33 and he does not know in which of them he bought, it is prohibited because of the doubt; but if [meat] was found, one goes after the majority? There it is for strictness!34 But [he derives it] from [the following]: If there were [in a certain place] nine frogs and one reptile35 and he touches one of them and he does not know which of them he touched he is unclean because of the doubt? — There also it is for strictness!36 — But [rather] from [the following]: If there were [in a certain place] nine reptiles and one frog and he touches one of them and he does not know which of them he touched, [if this happened] on private ground he is unclean because of the doubt, [but] if this happened in a public place,37 he is clean because of the doubt.38 And how do we know this39 from the Bible? — The verse says: And if he lie in wait for him and rise up against him,40 [that is to say that he is not guilty of murder] until he intended [to kill] him. And the Rabbis? — They said in the school of R. Jannai: This excludes one who throws a stone into [a group of people]. What case do you mean? Do you mean a case when there are nine idolators and one Israelite? Let it be sufficient for him41 that the majority are idolators, [and] even if [you will say that it is considered as] half to half, [the rule is that] when there is a doubt in capital cases one takes a lenient view! — It speaks of a case when there are nine Israelites and one idolator, so that the idolator is stationary, and whatever is stationary is considered as half to half.42 It was stated: R. Hiyya b. Ashi [said that] Rab said [that] the law is according to R. Jose.43 And R. Hanan b. Raba [said that] Rab said [that] it was [only] a decision for the hour.44 R. Jeremiah argued: And for pure descent we do not require two majorities? Have we not learned:
Kethuboth 15b[If] one found in it1 an abandoned2 child — if the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite, if the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] Israelites [the child is] an Israelite, [and if the inhabitants of the town are] half to half, [the child is] an Israelite.3 And Rab said: They have taught this only with regard to sustaining it,4 but not with regard to pure descent. And Samuel said: [They have taught this only] with regard to removing debris5 for its sake?6 — That which Rab Judah said in the name of Rab7 [namely, that] the incident happened at the springs of Zepphoris,8 escaped his9 attention.10 But according to R. Hanan b. Raba who said [that] it was a decision for the hour,11 it is difficult!12 He who taught this13 did not teach that.14 The [above] text [says]: '[If] one found in it an abandoned child — if the majorlty [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite. if the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] Israelites [the child is] an Israelite, [and if the inhabitants of the town are) half to half [the child is] an Israelite. Rab said: They have taught this only with regard to sustaining it, but not with regard to pure descent. But Samuel said: [They have taught this only] with regard to removing debris for its sake.' But did Samuel say so? Did not R. Joseph say that R. Judah said in the name of Samuel: We do not go with regard to saving life after the majority?15 — But the saying of Samuel referred16 to the first clause: 'If the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite.' [Upon this] Samuel said: And with regard to removing debris it is not so,17 'If the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite' — for what practical purpose [is this taught]? — R. Papa said: To allow him to eat [meat of] animals not ritually slaughtered. — 'If the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consists of] Israelites [the child is] an Israelite,' — for what practical purpose [is this taught]? — R. Papa said: That one returns to him a lost object.18 If [the inhabitants of the town are] half to half [the child is] an Israelite' — for what practical purpose [is this taught]? Resh Lakish said: With regard to damages.19 How shall we imagine this case? Shall we say that an ox of ours20 gored21 an ox of his?22 [In this case] let him23 say to him.24 'Bring evidence that you are an Israelite — and take!25 It speaks of a case when an ox of his26 gored an ox of ours27 — one half he28 pays, and with regard to the other half he says to them,29 'Bring evidence that I am not an Israelite and I will pay30 you.31
CHAPTER IIMISHNAH. IF A WOMAN BECAME A WIDOW OR WAS DIVORCED32 [AND] SHE SAYS, 'THOU DIDST MARRY ME [AS] A VIRGIN,'33 AND HE SAYS, 'NOT SO, BUT I MARRIED THEE [AS] A WIDOW,'34-35 — IF THERE ARE WITNESSES THAT SHE WENT OUT36 WITH A HINUMA37 AND HER HEAD UNCOVERED,38 HER KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ.]39 R. JOHANAN THE SON OF BEROKA SAYS: ALSO THE DISTRIBUTION OF ROASTED EARS OF CORN IS EVIDENCE.40 AND R. JOSHUA ADMITS THAT, IF ONE SAYS41 TO HIS FELLOW,42 THIS FIELD BELONGED TO YOUR FATHER AND I BOUGHT IT FROM HIM. HE IS BELIEVED, - To Next Folio -
|