Torah Community Connections

Week 85 - Monday - 9 July 2001

GITTIN: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 8

If one sends away his wife because of aylonit, Rabbi Yehudah says, He may not take back. But the Sages say, He may take back. If she married another and she had children from him, and she demands her ketubah, Rabbi Yehudah said, they say to her: "Your silence is better for you than your speech."

Kehati

After having learned in the previous mishnah that one who divorces his wife because of a bad name or because of a vow, may not take her back, our mishnah discusses the ease of a person who divorces his wife because she is an aylonit. As explained in several instances, an aylonit is a woman who is incapable of giving birth. The term is derived from the word ayal (ram), i.e., she has no female characteristics.

If one sends away his wife - divorces her, because of - being - aylonit - as explained above, Rabbi Yehudah says, He may not take - her - back - after divorcing her because it may cause her disgrace if she remarries and has children, and her first husband will allege that if he had known that she was capable of giving birth, he would not have divorced her, thereby invalidating her get retroactively, for he had divorced her in error, and making her children illegitimate. The Sages therefore enacted that a person who divorces his wife because she is an aylonit may never take her back, and the divorce is therefore irrevocable. Rabbi Yehudah, however, does not fear her disgrace in the case of one who sends out his wife because of a vow of the previous mishnah, since in the case of a vow which requires examination by a Sage, Rabbi Yehudah agrees with Rabbi Eleazar, that a person does not want his wife to be humiliated in Court and the husband can therefore not say that if he had known that a Sage could release her from her vow, he would not have divorced her; and in the case of a vow which does not require examination by a Sage, he agrees with Rabbi Meir that people generally know that the husband can annul his wife's vows (Gemara).

But the Sages say, He may take back - the Gemara explains that this is the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who holds, "A condition which is not like the condition of the children of Gad and the children of Reuven is not a valid condition" (Kidd. 3:4), i.e., only a "double" condition is valid, similar to that which Moses imposed on the children of Gad and the children of Reuven, as it is written, "If the children of Gad and the children of Reuven will pass with you over the Jordan ... then you shall give them the land of Gilead for a possession, but if they will not pass over with you armed, they shall have possessions among you in the land of Canaan" (Num. 32:29-30). In the case of our mishnah the husband did not make a "double" condition when he divorced his wife, i.e., he told her that he was divorcing her because she was an aylonit, but did not say that if she were not an aylonit he would not divorce her (Rambam; Hameiri; also see Bartenura and Tosefot Yom Tov). The divorce is therefore irrevocable, and even if she proved not to be an aylonit, we do not fear that she might be disgraced. The previous mishnah, however, deals with a case in which the husband made a "double" condition at the time of the divorce and therefore Rabbi Meir holds there that we fear the impugnation of the get (Rosh; Tosefot Yom Tov).

If she - the woman who was divorced "because of aylonit," married another and she had children from him - thereby showing that she was not an aylonit, and she demands her ketubah- from the first husband, for at the time of divorce, she was not entitled to it, as we have learned, "An aylonit does not receive her ketubah" (Ket. 11:6), i.e., if when marrying her the husband did not know she was an aylonit, she is divorced without receiving her ketubah, and since in this case he divorced her for being an aylonit, it follows that he had not been aware of the fact. She therefore did not receive her ketubah. Now, however, that she proves not to be an aylonit, she claims her ketubah.

Rabbi Yehudah said, They say to her: "Your silence is better for you than your speech" - It is better for you to remain silent and not demand the ketubah, for if you do, your first husband will say that if he had known that he would have to give you the ketubah, he would not have divorced you, and you will prejudice yourself.

GITTIN: CHAPTER 4: MISHNAH 9

If one sells himself and his children to a non-Jew, they do not redeem him, but they redeem the children after the death of their father. If one sells his field to a non-Jew and an Israelite purchased it from him - the purchaser brings bikkurim, for reasons of the public interest.

Kehati

If one - an Israelite sells himself and his children - to be servants, to a non-Jew, they do not redeem him - so that he will not any more sell himself and his children, relying on others to redeem him. The Gemara explains that our mishnah refers to the case of one who sold himself for the third time, but the first and second time, he must be redeemed, but they redeem the children after the death of their father - so that they should not assimilate among non-Jews. They do not redeem the children during his lifetime, however, because we fear that he will sell them again.

If one - an Israelite sells his field - in Eretz Israel, to a non-Jew and an Israelite purchased it - the field, from him - the non- Jew, the purchaser brings bikkurim - even though the produce grew and ripened while in the non-Jew's possession, the purchaser must bring bikkurim (the First Fruits, which are taken to the Temple) from its produce, for reasons of the public interest - the Gemara explains that two regulations were enacted. By Torah law the purchaser is liable to bikkurim, because the acquisition of lands in Eretz Israel by a non-Jew does not cancel the sanctity of the land and does not exempt from the dues. However, the Sages saw that many people sold their fields to non-Jews, knowing that the land remained holy and that they were not liable to punishment. The Sages therefore enacted that the person who purchases property from a non-Jew should not bring bikkurim so that people would think that the land loses its sanctity, and would refrain from selling their fields to non-Jews. However, when the Sages realized that some people were forced to sell their field, and their enactment caused these fields to remain in the hands of the non-Jews because people now thought that the fields were no longer holy, and were not particular to redeem them, they enacted a second regulation reinstating the Torah law, that produce bought from a non-Jew is liable to bikkurim so that the land should not remain in Gentile hands, for knowing that the land retained its sanctity they will endeavor to redeem it.

According to another version, our mishnah reads as follows: "one who sells his field to non-Jews, purchases and brings bikkurim" - i.e., each year he is obligated to purchase the First Fruits of the field from the non-Jew in order to take them to Jerusalem, "for reasons of the public welfare" - so that he should not be wont to sell land in Eretz Israel to non-Jews; and if he did, he should endeavor to buy it back (Rashi; Bartenura).

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives