💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishnah%20Gittin%205 captured on 2024-07-09 at 03:09:24. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
5 ‎[1] The court **appraises land of superior quality [*iddit*] for payment to injured** parties. **And a creditor** collects his debt **from** the debtor’s **intermediate-quality land. And** payment of **a woman’s marriage contract** is collected **from** her husband’s **inferior-quality land. Rabbi Meir says:** Payment of a woman’s **marriage contract** is **also** collected **from intermediate-quality land.**
‎[2] Payment of a debt or other obligation **is not collected from liened property** that has been sold to a third party **when** the debtor still **has unsold property, even** when this unsold property is **inferior-quality land.** The creditor cannot collect his debt from liened property that the debtor has sold to another person as long as the debtor is still in possession of other property, even if the remaining assets are inferior to those to which the creditor would otherwise have been entitled. If one who owed money died and his children inherited his property, the father’s debt **can be collected from the property of the orphans only from inferior-quality land.**
‎[3] The court **does not appropriate** liened property that has been sold to a third party **for the consumption of produce or for the enhanced value of land.** If one appropriated a field and sold it, and the buyer worked the land, enhanced it, and grew produce on it, and then the initial owner from whom the field had been stolen took back the land and the produce from the buyer, compensating him only for his expenses, then the buyer may go back to the seller, i.e., the robber, and collect his losses. He can collect the purchase price of the field even from property that the robber sold to another person. By contrast, the value of the produce and the enhancement in the value of the field, which resulted from his actions, may be collected only from the robber’s unsold property. **And** similarly, payment **for the sustenance of** a man’s **wife and daughters** cannot be collected **from** his **liened property.** One of the stipulations included in a marriage contract is that after the husband dies, his widow and daughters are entitled to sustenance from his estate. This sustenance cannot be collected from husband’s liened property that has been sold to another person, but only from his unsold property inherited by his heirs. All of these enactments were made **for the betterment of the world.** **And** it was further instituted that **one who finds a lost item** and returns it to its rightful owner is **not** required to **take an oath** that he did not keep any part of the lost item for himself. This ordinance was also instituted **for the betterment of the world.**
‎[4] With regard to **orphans who are living with a homeowner** who takes care of all their needs and affairs, even if neither their father nor the court officially appointed him to this task, **or if their father appointed a steward [*apotropos*] for them,** this person **is obligated to tithe their produce.** With regard to **a steward who was appointed by the orphans’ father,** when he returns all of the property to the orphans upon their reaching adulthood, **he takes an oath** that he took nothing of theirs for himself. By contrast, if **the court appointed him** to serve as a steward for them, then **he is not** required to **take** such **an oath. Abba Shaul says: The matters are reversed.** A steward appointed by the court takes an oath, but a steward appointed by the orphans’ father is not required to do so. With regard to **one who renders** another’s food ritually **impure, or one who mixes** *teruma* with another’s non-sacred produce, **or one who pours** another’s wine as a libation before an idol, in each of these cases causing the other a monetary loss, if he acted **unintentionally,** he is **exempt** from paying for the damage. If he acted **intentionally,** he is **liable** to pay. If **priests disqualified an offering with improper intention in the Temple,** by expressing, while sacrificing the offering, the intention of sprinkling the blood of the offering, burning its fats on the altar, or consuming it, after its appointed time, and they did so **intentionally, they are liable** to pay the value of the offering to its owner, who must now bring another offering.
‎[5] **Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda testified** before the Sages **about** the case of **a deaf-mute woman who was married** off **by her father** when she was a minor, so that her marriage took effect by Torah law. He said **that she can be released** from her marriage **through a bill of divorce,** whether as a minor or after she reaches adulthood. Although as a deaf-mute woman she is not legally competent to give her consent, the divorce is effective because divorce does not require the woman’s consent. **And** similarly, he testified **about** the case of the **minor daughter of a non-priest who** was orphaned from her father and then **married** off to **a priest** by her mother or brother, so that her marriage took effect by rabbinic law. He said **that** nevertheless **she may partake of *teruma*,** although by Torah law it is prohibited for one who is not in a priestly household to partake of *teruma*. **And** furthermore **if** this girl **dies,** then **her husband inherits her** estate. It is not said that because the validity of the marriage is by rabbinic law and not Torah law he is not entitled to inherit from her. **And** Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda further testified **about a stolen beam that was** already **built into a large building [*bira*],** that the victim of the robbery **receives** only **the value** of the beam but not the beam itself, **due to an ordinance** instituted **for the penitent.** By Torah law, a robber is obligated to return any stolen item in his possession, provided that its form has not been altered. If one stole a beam and incorporated it into a building, then by Torah law he would have to destroy the building and return the beam. In order to encourage repentance, the Sages were lenient and allowed a robber to return the value of the beam. **And** lastly, Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda testified **about a sin-offering that** was obtained **through robbery** but **that was not publicly known** to have been obtained in that manner. He said **that it effects atonement** for the robber who sacrifices it, **for the benefit of the altar,** as will be explained in the Gemara.
‎[6] The law of **Sicarii [*Sikarikon*] did not** apply **in Judea in the** time that **people were being killed in the war. From** the time that **people were being killed in the war and onward,** the law of **Sicarii did** apply **there. What** is this law of Sicarii? If **one** first **purchased** land **from a Sicarius,** who extorted the field from its prior owners with threats, **and** afterward the buyer **returned and purchased** the same field a second time **from the** prior **landowner, his purchase is void.** The prior owner of the field can say that he did not actually mean to sell him the field. By contrast, if he first acquired the field **from the** prior **owner and** afterward **he returned and purchased** the same field **from a Sicarius, his purchase stands.** Similarly, if **one** first **purchased from the husband** the rights to use a field belonging to his wife, **and** afterward **he returned and purchased** the same field **from the wife,** so that if the husband were to predecease or divorce her, the purchaser would then own it fully, **his purchase is void.** The woman can claim that she did not wish to quarrel with her husband and to object to the transaction but that in truth she did not agree to the sale. By contrast, if he first acquired the field **from the wife, and** afterward **he returned and purchased** the same field **from the husband, his purchase stands. This** is the **initial** version of this **mishna.** Later, **the court of those** who came **after** the Sages who composed that mishna **said:** With regard to **one who purchased** a field **from a Sicarius, he must give the** prior **owner one-fourth** of the field’s value. **When** does this apply? **At a time when** the prior owner **is unable to purchase** the field himself. **But if he is able to purchase** it himself, **he precedes anyone** else. **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi later **convened a court, and they counted** their votes and determined **that if** the field **remained before,** i.e., in the possession of, **the Sicarius** for **twelve months, whoever first purchases** the field **acquires possession** of it, **but he must give the** prior **owner one-fourth** of the field’s value.
‎[7] The following enactments were also made for the betterment of the world: **A deaf-mute may express** his wishes **through gestures [*romez*];** that is to say, he can signal that he wishes to buy or sell a certain item, and the purchase or sale is valid. **And** similarly **he may respond** to others **through gestures;** that is to say, he can signal that he agrees to a transaction initiated by another party, and the transaction is valid. **And ben Beteira says:** Signals are not necessary, as even if **he expresses** his wishes to buy or sell **through lip movements [*kofetz*] or responds** to others **through lip movements,** the transaction is valid. These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property.** It was similarly enacted that **a purchase** made **by young children [*paotot*]** is a valid **purchase, and a sale** made by them is a valid **sale.** These *halakhot* apply **to** transactions involving **movable property.**
‎[8] Having mentioned a series of enactments instituted by the Sages for the sake of the betterment of the world, the Gemara continues: **These are the matters** that the Sages **instituted on account of the ways of peace,** i.e., to foster peace and prevent strife and controversy: At public readings of the Torah, **a priest reads first, and after him a Levite, and after him an Israelite.** The Sages instituted this order **on account of the ways of peace,** so that people should not quarrel about who is the most distinguished member of the community. Similarly, the Sages enacted that **a joining** of courtyards **is placed in an old house** where it had regularly been placed **on account of the ways of peace,** as will be explained in the Gemara. The Sages enacted that **the pit that is nearest to the irrigation channel** that supplies water to several pits or fields **is filled first on account of the ways of peace.** They established a fixed order for the irrigation of fields, so that people would not quarrel over who is given precedence. **Animals, birds, or fish** that were caught in **traps** are not acquired by the one who set the traps until he actually takes possession of them. Nevertheless, if another person comes and takes them, it **is considered robbery on account of the ways of peace. Rabbi Yosei says:** This is **full-fledged robbery.** Similarly, **a lost item** found by **a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor** is not acquired by him, since he lacks the legal competence to effect acquisition. Nevertheless, taking such an item from him **is considered robbery on account of the ways of peace. Rabbi Yosei says:** This is **full-fledged robbery.** If **a poor person gleans** olives **at the top of an olive tree** and olives fall to the ground under the tree, then taking those olives **that are beneath it is** considered **robbery on account of the ways of peace. Rabbi Yosei says:** This is **full-fledged robbery.** **One does not protest against poor gentiles** who come to take **gleanings, forgotten** sheaves, **and the produce in the corner of the field, which is given to the poor [*pe’a*],** although they are meant exclusively for the Jewish poor, **on account of the ways of peace.**
‎[9] **A woman may lend** utensils **to her friend who is suspect with regard to** eating produce that grew in **the Sabbatical** Year after the time that such produce must be removed from the house and may no longer be eaten. The utensils that she may lend her include: **A winnow, a sieve, a mill, and an oven.** Lending her such utensils is not considered aiding in the commission of a transgression. **But she may not select** the grain from the chaff **or grind** wheat **with her,** i.e., she may not actively assist her in the performance of a sin. **The wife of a *ḥaver*,** one who is devoted to the meticulous observance of mitzvot, especially the *halakhot* of ritual purity, *teruma*, and tithes, **may lend the wife of an *am ha’aretz*,** one who is not scrupulous in these areas, **a winnow and a sieve, and she may** even **select, grind, and sift with her. But once** the wife of the *am ha’aretz* **pours water** into the flour, thereby rendering it susceptible to ritual impurity, the wife of the *ḥaver* **may not touch** anything **with her, because one may not assist those who commit transgressions. And all of** the allowances mentioned in the mishna **were stated only on account of the ways of peace.** **And one may assist gentiles** who work the land **during the Sabbatical** Year, **but** one may **not** assist **Jews** who do this. Similarly, **one may extend greetings** to gentiles **on account of the ways of peace.**
Mishneh Torah, Gifts to the Poor
Version: William Davidson Edition - English
Source: https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1
License: CC-BY-NC