Talmud sur Nedarim 11:6

אָמְרָה, קוֹנָם תְּאֵנִים וַעֲנָבִים אֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת, קִיֵּם לַתְּאֵנִים, כֻּלּוֹ קַיָּם. הֵפֵר לַתְּאֵנִים, אֵינוֹ מוּפָר עַד שֶׁיָּפֵר אַף לָעֲנָבִים. אָמְרָה, קוֹנָם תְּאֵנִים שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת וַעֲנָבִים שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שְׁנֵי נְדָרִים:

Si elle disait: "Konam, que je ne goûterai pas ces figues et ces raisins", s'il le faisait (le vœu) représenter des figues, tout cela tient. S'il l'a annulée pour les figues, elle n'est annulée que lorsqu'il l'a annulée également pour les raisins. [La raison: (Nombres 30:14): "Son mari yekimmenu" ("Son mari le fera tenir.") "Yakim mimenu" ("Il en fera tenir une partie.") Quand il en fera tenir une partie. il reste debout, il fait que tout cela reste debout. Mais "yeferenu" ("Il l'annulera") ne peut pas être expliqué ainsi, de sorte qu'il n'y a pas d'annulation tant qu'il n'a pas annulé tout cela. Ceci est une opinion individuelle et n'est pas la halakha, la halakha étant en accord avec les sages, qui disent: Causer pour se tenir est assimilé à l'annulation, à savoir: Tout comme avec l'annulation, ce qu'il a annulé est annulé, et ce qu'il n'a pas l'annulation n'est pas annulée (il n'est pas possible d'exposer "yeferenu" comme une annulation partielle), donc à faire tenir. Ce qu'il a fait tenir, tient; et ce qu'il n'a pas fait tenir, ne tient pas. (Car "yekimmenu" n'est pas non plus présenté comme une confirmation partielle, c'est la manière de l'écrire ainsi.) Et même s'il s'agit de l'absolution (hatarah) d'un sage, nous disons: "Si l'on est absous d'une partie d'un vœu qu'il soit dispensé de tout cela, "avec l'annulation du mari et du père, il n'en est rien.] Si elle disait:" Konam, que je ne goûterai pas de figues et que je ne goûterai pas de raisin ", ce sont deux vœux.

Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin

“From today and after 30 days.” Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even preliminary marriages of a hundred men apply to her⁵⁰This refers to the case where a sequence of men said: “from now and after 30 days,” cf. Note 3. In this case, she is married to none of them completely; cf. Yebamot 3:5, Notes 102–105 (5:1, end; Nedarim 10:6 Note 59); Babli 60a.. Rebbi Eleazar said, it was necessary [to state], even if the second preliminarily married her absolutely⁵¹The interpretation of R. Abbahu is not the only one possible. Since the Mishnah mentions the condition “from now and after 30 days” only for the first man, it is quite possible that the second marries her unconditionally. Then no other man can join the list of suitors but nevertheless the woman is still “married and not married”.. Rebbi Isaac bar Tebele asked before Rebbi Eleazar: As you take it⁵²מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ is a technical term implying that a certain conclusion follows from two mutually exclusive premises.; what the first acquired, he acquired; the remainder the second finished⁵³This elliptic statement can be explained as follows (R. Moses Margalit): If the statement of the first groom, “from today and after 30 days”, means that he requires 30 days to make up his mind and might annul the preliminary marriage, then it is obvious that the second contracted a valid marriage and the first is eliminated. But if “from today and after 30 days” means that he wants to be married now but his obligations start only after 30 days, the first acquired the right to preliminarily marry the woman after 30 days. If now the second man marries her unconditionally within the thirty days, which the first cannot hinder, his acquisition should have eliminated the option which the first had acquired.. He answered, is this kind of argument applicable to incest prohibitions⁵⁴Incest and adultery prohibitions are so serious that no kind of intellectual acrobatics is applicable to them.? How is that? To any woman who is not acquired by one man only, even preliminary marriages of a hundred men apply.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot

Rebbi Yudan asked: If somebody gave qiddushin to a woman “from now and after thirty days”¹⁰²Mishnah Qiddušin 3:1. If somebody gives something of value to a woman and says, “be betrothed to me after thirty days”, if another man comes in the meantime and gives her qiddushin, she is the wife of the second man and after 30 days, when she should become the wife of the first, she already is married and betrothal with a married man is void. But if the first had said, “from now after thirty days”, he reserved his rights to her from the moment of the transaction but she becomes his wife in civil and criminal law only after 30 days. If anybody else gives her qiddushin in that period, she is tentatively betrothed to both of them and both have to divorce her. and her sister became a candidate for levirate with him during these thirty days, is even in this “his wife with him and the other one should leave as the wife’s sister”¹⁰³Following the House of Shammai.? He said, the House of Shammai said that only after candidacy and “bespeaking”. But that what Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, even a hundred qiddushin are valid for her¹⁰⁴Babli Qiddušin 60a, Yerushalmi Qiddušin fol. 63c, 3:1. It is a little difficult to accomodate 100 qiddushin. The general idea is that the first man says, from now in 30 days, the next day another says, from now in 29 days, etc., does not follow the House of Shammai¹⁰⁵Since the House of Shammai hold that “bespeaking”, which is a very weak imitation of qiddushin, suffices to make the woman a wife in relation to female competitors, they should hold that qiddushin “from now to 30 days” also are enough to eliminate male competitors..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Verset précédent Chapitre complet Verset suivant