Kiddushin 62 continues the discussion of whether a person is bound by a condition ("tinai") which is not doubled ("caful"). The gemara had earlier explained the classic tinai caful involving the tribes of Gad and Reuven who indicated that they wished to inherit property on the East Bank of the Jordan rather than in what was previously known as the land of Canaan. At the time, Moshe had proposed a condition that if they were to assist with the war to conquer the land of Canaan they would get the property they desired, but if not they would not be permitted to settle there.
On Kiddushin 61, R' Chanina ben Gamliel taught that there is no requirement of a tinai caful in order for the tinai to be effective. On 62a, the gemara attempts to support his position by bringing a proof from Bamidbar 5:19 where in the discussion about a Sotah the chumash states that if she was administered a vow where she affirms that she was not involved with another man and that if this is correct she would be "clean" from the vow.
Rashi (d'h "hainu") notes that there was a later set of psukim which deal with both possible results and thus presenting a tinai caful, but that the first pasuk (5:19) does not contain the caful language and that the two sets of psukim should not be confused.
Tosafos (d'h "Bishlama") reiterates the Rashi, before noting that the tinai of Gad and Reuven had the hain (if you do this then x will occur) before the lav (if you don't do this then y will occur). However, in the pasuk at 5:19 there is a lav first, since the pasuk says that if you were not involved with the other man you will be rewarded. Tosafos answers that the hen/lav is not to be taken lieterally. Instead, when the vow contains what we want to occur first (even if that is an absence of an act which would be called a lav) that is the hen for the purposes of the tinai.
If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!
No comments:
Post a Comment