Talmud zu Gittin 5:5

הֵעִיד רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן גֻּדְגְּדָה עַל הַחֵרֶשֶׁת שֶׁהִשִּׂיאָהּ אָבִיהָ, שֶׁהִיא יוֹצְאָה בְגֵט. וְעַל קְטַנָּה בַת יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת לְכֹהֵן, שֶׁאוֹכֶלֶת בַּתְּרוּמָה, וְאִם מֵתָה, בַּעְלָהּ יוֹרְשָׁהּ. וְעַל הַמָּרִישׁ הַגָּזוּל שֶׁבְּנָאוֹ בַבִּירָה, שֶׁיִּטֹּל אֶת דָּמָיו, מִפְּנֵי תַקָּנַת הַשָּׁבִים. וְעַל חַטָּאת הַגְּזוּלָה שֶׁלֹּא נוֹדְעָה לָרַבִּים, שֶׁהִיא מְכַפֶּרֶת, מִפְּנֵי תִקּוּן הַמִּזְבֵּחַ:

R. Yochanan b. Gudgeda sagte aus, dass ein Taubstummer, dessen Vater sie geheiratet hat, geschieden wird. [Obwohl sie eine gutgläubige verheiratete Frau war und ihr Vater ihre Verlobung als Minderjährige akzeptiert hat, erhält sie dennoch ein Get, und sie erhält ihr Get, wenn sie taubstumm ist, obwohl ihre Zustimmung fehlt . Denn eine Frau kann notgedrungen geschieden werden, so dass ihre Zustimmung nicht erforderlich ist.]; und dass die minderjährige Tochter eines Israeliten [einer Waise, deren Ehe rabbinisch (und nicht biblisch) sanktioniert ist] Terumah isst [rabbinisch vorgeschriebene Terumah, was nicht aufgrund der (Möglichkeit, dass sie zum Essen kommt) schriftlich vorgeschriebenen Terumah verordnet wird ]; und dass, wenn sie starb, ihr Ehemann sie erbt; und dass, wenn man einen Balken baute, den er in ein Gebäude gestohlen hatte, eine finanzielle Erstattung ausreicht, [zum Wohl des Büßers; denn wenn er sein Gebäude zerstören und den Balken selbst zurückgeben müsste, würde er davon abgehalten, Buße zu tun.]; und dass ein gestohlenes Sündopfer, das vielen [als gestohlen bekannt] nicht bekannt war [und ein anderes nicht gebracht werden muss], zum "Wohl des Altars", [dass die Cohanim nicht beunruhigt werden (der Gedanke an ) nachdem sie Chullin (nicht geweihtes Essen) von (einem Tier) gegessen haben, das in der Azara (dem Tempelhof) geschlachtet wurde, und der Altar "verlassen" ist, unterlassen die Cohanim den (Opfer-) Gottesdienst.]

Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kamma

HALAKHAH: “One who robbed wood and turned it into utensils,” etc. Here⁴Tosephta 10:2 states that raw wool that was bleached does not have to be returned; only its value as raw wool has to be paid. Babli 93b., you say that bleaching is a change, and there⁵The Mishnah, which says that only turning wool into a garment is a change by which the robber becomes the owner; this implies that cleaning, spinning, and dying the wool prior to weaving is not a change which absolves the robber from returning the wool as is. you say that bleaching is not a change. If you say that bleaching is a change, if he made it into wool flakes⁶Arabic صوفة, Samaritan Aramaic צוף. The wool flakes can be used to stuff pillows; they cannot be spun into thread. The robber changed raw material into a finished product.. If you say that bleaching is not a change, if he left it unchanged. We find bleaching without flakes. Are there flakes without bleaching⁷At least the raw wool has to be washed before being turned into flakes.? Rebbi Yudan said, it is a leniency instituted for the robber that he pay their value at the time of the robbery⁸Since robbers, in contrast to thieves, are known, it should be made easy for them to return the robbed goods and avoid prosecution. This is the position of the House of Hillel as explained in the next paragraph. The Mishnah represents the teaching of the House of Hillel.. If somebody robbed raw hide and cleaned it, can you say that he turned it into flakes⁹Nonetheless, he only owes the value of the hide and cannot be forced to return it as is.? Again it is a leniency instituted for the robber that he pay the value at the time of the robbery.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot

MISHNAH: Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, why can a deaf-mute woman be divorced but a deaf-mute man cannot divorce? They told him, a divorcing man is not comparable to a divorced woman since a woman can be divorced with or against her will²⁰By talmudic standards. By an institution of R. Gershon ben Jehudah (Mayence, about the year 1000), European Jews were forbidden to divorce without the wife’s consent (except in cases where the law forces the husband to divorce). but a man divorces only by his own will²¹If the court coerces a recalcitrant husband to give a divorce, they have to coerce him “until he says, I want to do it.”.
Rebbi Joḥanan ben Gudgada²²A Tanna, about one generation older than R. Joḥanan ben Nuri. His testimony is also in Mishnah Idiut 7:9, Giṭṭin 5:5. testified about a deaf-mute girl who was married off by her father²³When she was a minor and was passive in the marriage. She is married by biblical standards. that she could be divorced by a bill of divorce. They said to him²⁴To R. Joḥanan ben Nuri, that in principle, the biblical marriage of an incompetent person can be dissolved by divorce., that is an example.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Bava Kamma

Rebbi Yudan did not go to the house of assembly. He met Rebbi Mana and asked him, what was new for you in the house of study today? He told him, such and such a subject. He replied, is that not a Mishnah, “heave and it became impure”? He replied, explain it if it became impure by itself⁴⁴For example, if a dead reptile was found in the utensil containing the heave. Then it implies nothing about the status of the object if the robber caused the change. and you cannot infer anything.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Vorheriger Vers Ganzes Kapitel Nächster Vers