תלמוד על גיטין 7:1

“What is the sole which they mentioned? Anything which looks like the sole, a sea fish. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, anything which looks like an ox tongue. Our teachers voted about this to say, only if it exhibits human traits.”⁹³Tosephta 4:6, Babli 25b. The last sentence reads in the Babli: Our teachers testified that a sole [to be the source of birth impurity] needs the shape of a face. Who are “our teachers”? Rebbi Jehudah the Prince and his court⁹⁴Šabbat 1:1 (3d 1.20), Giṭṭin 7:3 (48d 1.17), Avodah zarah 2:8 (41d 1.48); obliquely mentioned in the Babli Giṭṭin72b, 76b; Ketubot 2b, Avodah zarah37a.. At three places is Rebbi Jehudah the Prince called “our teachers”, about bills of divorce, oil, and a sole. About a sole, as we just said. About oil, as we have stated: “Rebbi and his court permitted oil^94aMishnah Avodah zarah 2:9. The Mishnah has a list of foods that cannot be taken from Gentiles without kosher supervision since one cannot be sure that no forbidden ingredients were used but which are not forbidden for usufruct. A first group contains milk, bread, and olive oil, with a note that “our teachers permitted olive oil” [to be used without supervision.] In the Babli, this permission is attributed to Rebbi, not his grandson R. Jehudah the Prince. (The chronology of the House of Hillel in the third cent. and the attribution of decrees between Rabbis Jehudah I, II, and III is in dispute.).” About bills of divorce, as we have stated there⁹⁵Mishnah Giṭṭin 7:3. From here on there exists a Geniza text; its readings are given by ג.: “This is your bill of divorce if I die, this is your bill of divorce if [I die from this] sickness, this is your bill of divorce after my death; he did not say anything⁹⁶After his death, no person can perform any legal action. Therefore, a bill of divorce which shall be valid only after the husband’s death is invalid. If the husband is sick or goes on a trip overseas, and he wants to spare his wife (or prevent her from contracting) a levirate marriage to his brother, he can give her a bill of divorce stating “if I die then this shall be your bill of divorce valid from today.” But then he cannot live with her any longer without invalidating the divorce..” But our teachers said, this is a bill of divorce⁹⁷The Babli, Giṭṭin 72b, reports the same but in 76b refers the decision to Mishnah 7:9: “If he says, this is your bill of divorce if I do not return within 12 months; if he dies in the meantime, the bill of divorce is void.” In this case also, he did not specify from today. The Babli explains that in both cases they follow R. Yose who holds that “the date of a document is proof of its validity;” a bill of divorce executed before the husband’s death is valid. The same explanation is tentatively accepted in the Yerushalmi, Giṭṭin 7:3 (48d l. 25).. Who are “our teachers”? Rebbi Jehudah the Prince and his court. They should have called him “permissive court” since any court which permits three [previously forbidden] things is called “permissive court.⁹⁸Mishnah Idiut 8:4, the oldest Mishnah on record.” Rebbi Yudan said, his court disagreed with him about the bills of divorce. Rebbi Yannai shouted, you purified the women giving birth⁹⁹By freeing all miscarriages without a recognizable fetus from the rules of birth impurity.! Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: This is part of the testimony of Rebbi Onias from Hauran¹⁰⁰One should read חוֹנְייָה מִבֵּית חַװְרָן, cf. Sevi‘it 1:7, Note 53.; as from Rebbi Ze‘ira: If this is part of the testimony of Rebbi Onias from Hauran then it was Rebbi Ḥanina¹⁰¹Rebbi Onias’s teacher. who shouted, you purified the women giving birth!

Rebbi Yasa asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: Is our Mishnah from Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, since Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, any obstacle that is not from her side does not invalidate the bill of divorce⁹³Mishnah Giṭṭin 7:6. A man gives his wife (who desires a divorce) a bill of divorce under the condition that she nurse his child for two years or that she serve his father for two years. If the child dies in the meantime or his father refuses to be served by her while she did nothing to make him angry, the anonymous majority holds that the condition was not satisfied and the bill of divorce invalid. But Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel holds that if she fulfilled the condition to the best of her ability, the divorce is valid. R. Yasa wanted to say, that Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel also will hold that a vow can be considered fulfilled if the second party refuses to accept the service.? He said to him, here it is different because of opening the vow⁹⁴The Mishnah starts the topic of the next Chapter, the conditions under which a vow can be invalidated. The main condition is that one find “an opening of remorse”, that a person would not have made the vow had he considered certain implications of it. These considerations are irrelevant for bills of divorce.. Rebbi Yose said, but do we not deal with vows which do not need dissolution by a Sage⁹⁵The topic discussed here is not that of the next Chapter.? Rebbi Jonah said, we deal not only with one who made his vow dependent on something⁹⁶This goes back to the previous paragraph. One can extend the argument given for the first case of the Mishnah to that of the second case and support the argument of R. Ze‘ira that R. Meїr and the Sages both hold that the two cases are parallel.. So far it is if he wants to give him something. But in the case that he does not want to give to him⁹⁷The second case of the Mishnah, since the person from whom the other vowed usufruct is providing the argument that the intention of the vow has been fulfilled. A different interpretation is in the Babli, 24a., he can say, I wanted only to examine you; but since I saw that it gives you pain, it is as if I had received.