Kesubos - Daf 108
- המודר הנאה מחבירו...פורע את חובו
The Gemara brings a Mishnah from Nedarim Daf 33a, which states: המודר הנאה מחבירו – If one is forbidden by a neder to derive benefit from his friend, שוקל את שקלו ופורע את חובו ומחזיר לו אבידתו – his friend may contribute his half-shekel for him, pay off his debt, and return his lost property to him, ובמקום שנוטלין שכר תפול הנאה להקדש – and in a place where payment is taken for returning lost property, the benefit should fall to the Temple treasury. The Gemara asks, that while it is understandable that he may pay his half-shekel or return his lost property, because he is only doing a mitzvah, how can he pay off his debt when he is benefiting him? Rav Oshaya said that the Tanna is Chanan, who said regarding one who paid for a woman’s support while her husband was overseas: איבד את מעותיו – “He has lost his money.” This is because Chanan holds that prevention of a loss is not considered a tangible benefit. But Rava says that the Mishnah can even be according to the view of the Rabbanon in the Mishnah, who hold that the husband must pay the one who supported his wife, because this was a case שלוה על מנת שלא לפרוע – where the debtor borrowed on the condition that he does not have to repay by a certain date. Rashi explains that since he can delay the payment for as long as he wants, he does not gain any real financial benefit through another person paying off his loan. The Gemara explains why Rav Oshaya and Rava did not hold of each other’s opinions.
- אדמון – בשביל שאני זכר הפסדתי
The next Mishnah states: אדמון אומר שבעה – Admon issued seven rulings. מי שמת והניח בנים ובנות – If one died and left behind sons and daughters, when the property of the estate is abundant, the sons inherit it and the daughters are supported. But when the property of the estate is meager, which Rashi explains is defined by property that is not sufficient to support them for twelve months, הבנות יזונו והבנים יחזרו על הפתחים – the daughters are supported, and the sons go around begging at people’s doors. But Admon says: בשביל שאני זכר הפסדתי – because I am a male, I lose out? Rabban Gamliel said: רואה אני את דברי אדמון – I see the words of Admon as correct. After Abaye’s interpretation of Admon is rejected, Rava explains that Admon is saying: בשביל שאני זכר וראוי לירש בנכסים מרובין הפסדתי בנכסים מועטין – because I am a male and fit to inherit when there is a lot of property, I should lose when there only a little property? Why should the sons be treated worse than the daughters?
- הטוען את חבירו כדי שמן והודה בקנקנים
The next Mishnah states: הטוען את חבירו כדי שמן והודה בקנקנים – If one claims jugs of oil from his friend, and his friend admits to owing him just the jars, Admon says: הואיל והודה במקצת הטענה ישבע – since he admitted to a part of the claim, he should swear, but the Chochomim say: אין הודאה מקצת ממין הטענה – His partial admission is not of the same type as the claim. Rabban Gamliel said: רואה אני את דברי אדמון – I see Admon’s words as being correct. Rava says that the case is where the plaintiff said to the defendant, “I have ten jugs of oil with you,” and the defendant denied the entire claim for oil, and said “I only owe you five jugs, and I do not owe you the other five.” Admon says that the claim of “ten jugs of oil,” includes the jugs, and therefore the defendant made a partial admission, and since he is swearing on the remainder of the jugs, he can make him swear on the oil על ידי גלגול – through the principle of a rolling oath, but the Rabbanon hold that the expression “ten jugs of oil,” does not include the jugs, and therefore the defendant is not admitting to him what the plaintiff accused him of.
