משנה: הֵפֵר נְדָרִים כָּל־הַיּוֹם. שֶׁיֵּשׁ בַּדָּבָר לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. נָֽדְרָה בְלֵילֵי שֶׁבָּת מֵיפֵר בְּלֵילֵי שֶׁבָּת וּבְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת עַד שֶׁתֶּחְשַׁךְ. נָֽדְרָה עִם חֲשֵׁיכָה מֵיפֵר עַד שֶׁלֹּא תֵחְשַׁךְ שֶׁאִם לֹא הֵפֵר מִשֶּׁחֲשֵׁיכָה אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. MISHNAH: The dissolution of vows may take place the entire day75The day of Creation, the night followed by daylight.; this can imply a lenient or a stringent implementation. How is that? If she made the vow Friday night76It could be any other night; the Mishnah informs us that dissolution of vows is permitted on the Sabbath., he may dissolve during the night and the next day until [the next] nightfall. If she made the vow shortly before nightfall, he dissolves until it becomes dark; for after dark he cannot dissolve.
הלכה: הֵפֵר נְדָרִים כָּל־הַיּוֹם כול׳. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִיבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים. הֵפֵר נְדָרִים מֵעֵת לָעֵת. מַה טַעֲמוֹן דְּרַבָּנִין. מִיּוֹם אֶל יוֹם. מַה טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵה בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה. בְּיוֹם שֶׁמְעוֹ. מַה מְקַייְמִין רַבָּנִין טַעֲמֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵה בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה בְּיוֹם שֶׁמְעוֹ. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁנָּֽדְרָה בִּתְחִילַּת הַלַּיְלָה. מַה מְקַייֵם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה טַעֲמוֹן דְּרַבָּנִן מִיּוֹם אֶל יוֹם. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁנָּֽדְרָה בִּתְחִילַּת לֵילֵי שַׁבָּת וְנִשְׁתַּתֵּק וְחָזַר לְדִיבּוּרוֹ. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה נוֹתְנִין לוֹ כ̇ד̇ שָׁעוֹת. עַל דַּעְתּוֹן דְּרַבָּנִין אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם בִּלְבַד. נִשְׁתַּתֵּק וְחָזַר לְדִיבּוּרוֹ. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה מְצָֽרְפִין לוֹ כ̇ד̇ שָׁעוֹת. עַל דַּעְתּוֹן דְּרַבָּנִין לְעוֹלָם הוּא מֵיפֵר וְהוֹלֵךְ עַד שֶׁיַּחֲזוֹר לְדִיבּוּרוֹ. לִפְנֵי שְׁקִיעַת הַחַמָּה שָׁעָה אַחַת. עוֹד אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. HALAKHAH: “The dissolution of vows may take place the entire day,” etc. It was stated77Babli 76b, 77a, Šabbat 157a.: “Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon say78In Sifry Num. 156 this is attributed to R. Simeon himself., the dissolution of vows may take place from time to time7924 hours from the moment the husband is informed..” What is the reason of the rabbis? “From day to day80Num. 30:15..” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah? “On the day of his hearing81Num. 30:6,8,13. In the Babli, 76b, and Sifry Num. 156, the arguments are switched: “On the day of his hearing” implies that at nightfall the time has run out, “from day to day” implies 24 hours.
It is not necessary to amend the Yerushalmi since Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and Rashi explain Num. 30:15 following the rabbis: “If her husband remains silent from the day he was informed to another day”, i. e., the next night. R. Yose ben R. Jehudah will explain that “the day of his hearing” starts only with his hearing..” How do the rabbis explain Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah’s reason, “on the day of his hearing”? Explain it that she made the vow on the start of the night82In that case, the husband has 24 hours even according to the rabbis.. How does Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah explain the rabbis’ reason, “from day to day”? Explain it that she made the vow at the start of Friday night83The mention of the start of Friday night is problematic. It is a correction by the scribe himself and probably an insertion at the wrong place., he became paralyzed84After he was informed of the vow., and then his power of speech returned85Within 24 hours after he heard from his wife.. In the opinion of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah one gives him 24 hours. In the opinion of the rabbis he has only that day86Until nightfall on Saturday, less than 24 hours.. If he became paralyzed, and later87Not on the same day. his power of speech returned, in the opinion of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah one adds up to a total of 24 hours88The paralysis does not stop the clock. In this case, R. Yose ben R. Jehudah is more restrictive than the rabbis.. In the opinion of the rabbis he always can dissolve when his speech returns. But if it happened one hour89“One hour” means “a short time”. If the husband was informed of the vow shortly before sundown and before he could dissolve the vow was paralyzed at sundown, for the rabbis he had his day and when he regains his speech cannot undo the vow. before sundown, he can no longer dissolve.
מוּפָר לָךְ בַּמִּנְחָה. מוּפָר לְעוֹלָם. מוּקָם לָךְ בַּמִּנְחָה. מוּקָם לְעוֹלָם. מוּפָר לָךְ עַד הַמִּנְחָה. כְּאוֹמֵר. מוּפָר לֶיךְ מִן הַמִּנְחָה וּלְמַעֲלָה. “It shall be dissolved at the time of the afternoon prayer,” it is permanently dissolved90There can be no partial confirmation or dissolution. Since he did not mention confirmation, one does not take his word to mean that the vow shall be valid until the time of the afternoon prayer; it is dissolved immediately and permanently. The same holds in the following two cases.. “It shall be confirmed at the time of the afternoon prayer,” it is permanently confirmed. “It shall be dissolved until the time of the afternoon prayer,” it is as if he said, “it shall be dissolved starting with the time of the afternoon prayer.”
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. מֵפֵירִין נְדָרִים בַּשַּׁבָּת. תַּנֵּי. בֵּין נְדָרִים שֶׁהֵן לְצוֹרֶךְ הַשַּׁבָּת בֵּין נְדָרִים שֶׁאֵין לְצוֹרֶךְ הַשַּׁבָּת. וְנִשְׁאָלִין נְדָרִים שֶׁהֵן לְצוֹרֶךְ הַשַּׁבָּת. הָא שֶׁלֹּא לְצוֹרֶךְ הַשַּׁבָּת לֹא. זָקֵן שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר לְמָחָר. וּכְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה וּכְרִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דְּאָֽמְרֵי. הֵפֵר נְדָרִים מֵעֵת לָעֵת. אֲפִילוּ נְדָרִים שֶׁהֵן לְצוֹרֶךְ הַשַּׁבָּת לֹא יָפֵר. תִּיפְתָּר דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל שֶׁנָּֽדְרָה בִּתְחִילַּת לֵילֵי שַׁבָּת. There91Mishnah Šabbat 24:5., we have stated: “One dissolves vows on the Sabbath.” It was stated92In the Babli, 77a, this is the result of a discussion of late Amoraïm.: Both vows that intrude on the Sabbath and vows that do not intrude on the Sabbath. “And one asks about vows that intrude on the Sabbath91Mishnah Šabbat 24:5.,” therefore not if there is no need for the Sabbath. The Elder can dissolve the next day93But the husband who was informed on the Sabbath must dissolve on the Sabbath or lose his right to dissolution.. Then for Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon who say that the dissolution of vows is from time to time, he should not dissolve even vows that intrude on the Sabbath94This argument is also made in the Babli, 77a.! Explain it according to everybody, if she made the vow at the start of Friday night.
רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הַבַּעַל שֶׁאָמַר. אֵין כָּאן נֵדֶר אֵין כָּאן שְׁבוּעָה. לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. וְזָקֵן שֶׁאָמַר. מוּפָר לֵיךְ בָּטֵל לֵיךְ. לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. אֶלָּא זֶה כְהִילְכָתוֹ וְזֶה כְהִלְכָתוֹ. הַבַּעַל אֹמֵר. מוּפָר לֵיךְ בָּטֵל לֵיךְ. וְהַזָּקֵן אוֹמֵר. אֵין כָּאן נֵדֶר אֵין כָּאן שְׁבוּעָה. 95Babli 77b, with biblical support for the change in language between dissolution and permission. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The husband who said “there is no vow, there is no oath,” did not say anything. Also the Elder who said “it is dissolved for you, it is voided for you,” did not say anything. But everybody has to follow his own rules. The husband says “it is dissolved for you, it is voided for you,” and the Elder says, “there is no vow, there is no oath”.
אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. רִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ נִשְׁאָלִין. מָהוּ שֶׁיִּשְׁאַל אָדָם עַל הֲקָמָתוֹ. הִיךְ עֲבִידָא. נָֽדְרָה אִשָּׁה וְשָׁמַע בַּעֲלָהּ וְלֹא הֵיפֵר לָהּ. פְּשִׁיטָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֵיפֵר לָהּ לְעִנְייָן הַבַּעַַל. מָהוּ שֶׁיֵּפֵר לָהּ לְעִנְייָן הַזָּקֵן. מָה אֲנָן קַייָמִין. אִם בִּנְדָרִים שֶׁבֵּינוֹ לְבֵינָהּ נִדְרֵי עַצְמוֹ הֵן. אֶלָּא כִי נָן קַייָמִין בִּנְדָרִים שֶׁבֵּינָהּ לְבֵין אֲחֵרִים. [וְלָאו מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. אַף לֹא נִדְרֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁבֵּינָהּ לְבֵין אֲחֵרִים.] וְלֹא רִבִּי יוּדָה הִיא. תַּנֵּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוּדָה רִבִּי חִייָה תַּנֵּי לָהּ בְשֵׁם חֲכָמִים. Rebbi Joḥanan99From Naḥmanides, missing in ms. and editio princeps; required by the general style of the Yerushalmi. said, earlier generations were asking, may a man ask about his confirmation? How is that? If his wife made a vow, her husband heard it and did not dissolve for her100He did not dissolve in time and by inaction lost his veto power. The Yerushalmi seems to hold that a vow explicitly confirmed by the husband cannot be referred to an Elder for annulment, since it discusses only confirmation by default.. It is obvious that he cannot dissolve as a husband. May he dissolve as an Elder? What are we talking about? If it is about vows between him and her, these are vows of himself101The husband can interfere with his wife’s vows only if it touches him personally or is a vow of mortification (cf. Note 17). If it touches him personally, he certainly cannot act as an Elder in his own behalf.. But we must talk about vows between her and others. [Is that not a Mishnah102Mishnah Nega‘im 2:5: “A man [sitting as judge] can permit all vows except his own. R. Jehudah says, nor his wife’s vows concerning others.”? “Not his wife’s vows between her and others!”] Is that not Rebbi Jehudah’s? It was stated in the name of Rebbi Judah; Rebbi Ḥiyya stated it in the name of the Sages103R. Ḥiyya [the older] is the great authority for the Mishnah text. According to him, one has to switch the attributions in the Mishnah and, therefore, practice has to follow what in the common Mishnah is attributed to R. Jehudah. Naḥmanides (11:1) holds that practice has to follow the Yerushalmi in this since the Babli does not discuss the theme; Maimonides (Commentary to Nega‘im 2:5; Code Hilkhot Ševu‘ot 6:6) disagrees and follows the majority opinion in the Mishnah..
מָהוּ לְהַתִּיר נְדָרִים בַּלַּיְלָה. וּמָה אִם נֵדֶר הַבַּעַל שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהֶן בְּיוֹם הֲרֵי הוּא מֵיפֵר בַּלַּיְלָה. נִדְרֵי זָקֵן שֶׁאֵין כָּתוּב בָּהֶן בְּיוֹם לֹא כָּל־שֶׁכֵּן. מָהוּ לְהַתִּיר עַל יְדֵי הַתּוּרְגְּמָן. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. רִבִּי בָּא בַּר זוּטְרָא אִיתְעֲבִיד תּוּרְגְּמָן דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּחָדָא אִיתָא דְלָא הֲװָת חָֽכְמָה מִישְׁמַע סוּרִיבטִין. May one permit103R. Ḥiyya [the older] is the great authority for the Mishnah text. According to him, one has to switch the attributions in the Mishnah and, therefore, practice has to follow what in the common Mishnah is attributed to R. Jehudah. Naḥmanides (11:1) holds that practice has to follow the Yerushalmi in this since the Babli does not discuss the theme; Maimonides (Commentary to Nega‘im 2:5; Code Hilkhot Ševu‘ot 6:6) disagrees and follows the majority opinion in the Mishnah. vows in the night? Since vows under the husband’s jurisdiction, about which “on the day” is written81Num. 30:6,8,13. In the Babli, 76b, and Sifry Num. 156, the arguments are switched: “On the day of his hearing” implies that at nightfall the time has run out, “from day to day” implies 24 hours.
It is not necessary to amend the Yerushalmi since Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and Rashi explain Num. 30:15 following the rabbis: “If her husband remains silent from the day he was informed to another day”, i. e., the next night. R. Yose ben R. Jehudah will explain that “the day of his hearing” starts only with his hearing., he may dissolve in the night, vows under the jurisdiction of the Elder, where “on the day” is not written, not so much more104The Babli agrees, 77b, Eruvin 62b.? Can one permit through an interpreter? Let us hear from the following: Rebbi Abba bar Ẓutra was made an interpreter for Rebbi Joḥanan in the case of a woman who did not know Syriac105She spoke only Greek. In general, a judge is only competent to sit in a case if he understands all witnesses since it says “by the mouth of two witnesses”, not the mouth of an interpreter (Deut. 19:15; Makkot 1:9. Sifry Deut. 188.).
תַּנֵּי. אֵין נִשְׁאָלִין נְדָרִים אֶלָּא עֲטוּפִין וְיוֹשְׁבִין. וְהַנִּשְׁאָל יוֹשֵׁב. וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת עוֹמֵד. מִן הָדֵין וְעָֽמְדוּ שְׁנֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר לָהֶם הָרִיב. אֵין לִי עוֹמְדִין אֶלָּא נִידּוֹנין. שׁוֹאֵל הֲלָכוֹת. אַגָּדוֹת מְנַיִין. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר עָֽמְדוּ וְעָֽמְדוּ. רִבִּי אָחָא בַּר פַּפָּא סְלַק מִישְׁרֵי נִדְרָא דְרִבִּי אִימִּי. אִיחֵר בָּעֲמִידָה כְדֵי לוֹמַר. אֵין כָּאן נֵדֶר. רִבִּי מָנָא סְלַק מִישְׁרֵי נִדְרָא דְגַמְלִייֵל דְּקוֹנְתֵּיהּ. אִיחֵר בָּעֲמִידָה כְדֵי לוֹמַר. אֵין כָּאן נֵדֶר אֵין כָּאן שְׁבוּעָה. רִבִּי מָנָא סְלַק מִישְׁרֵי נִדְרָא דְגַמְלִיאֵל בַּר בְּרֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. לָא תֵיעַבֵּיד לִי כְּמָה דָעֲבַדְתְּ לְסַבִּי. אֶלָּא תִיב לָךְ וָאֲנָא קְייַם לִי. It was stated: One is asked about vows only while sitting and wrapped106According to the rules of court proceedings. The judges have to be seated and wrapped in their judicial robes.. The one who is asked must be sitting and the one who is asking is standing; from the following107Deut. 19:17.: “And the two people who have the dispute shall stand.” “Standing” means only “being judged”. That is for asking legal rules108The verse does not imply that the parties have to stand before the judges but that they have to remain there to be judged. The interpretation of the verse is in dispute, cf. Ševu‘ot 4:1 (35b, 1. 30 ff.), Sanhedrin 3:10 (21c 1. 15ff.), Yoma 6:1 (43b 1. 51 ff.); Babli Ševu‘ot 30a; Sifry Deut. 190.. Asking about sermons from where? The verse says “shall stand, and shall stand”109The consecutive vaw is interpreted as sign of an addition; to answer anything of a theological nature, the Sage has to sit. The Babli disagrees, 77b; the opinion of the Yerushalmi is quoted as that of Rabban Gamliel II.. Rebbi Aḥa bar Pappus went to permit the vow of Rebbi Immi. He remained standing to say “there is no vow”110Following the opinion of the Babylonian Amoraïm for the Babylonian Immi.. Rebbi Mana went to permit the vow of the older Gamliel. He remained standing to say “there is no vow, there is no oath”. Rebbi Mana went to permit the vow of Gamliel the grandson. He said to him, do not treat me as you treated my grandfather, but sit down and I shall remain standing111He asked him to follow the Palestinian rules..
רִבִּי זְעִירָא רַב יְהוּדַה יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל. שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁיּוֹדְעִין לִפְתּוֹחַ מַתִּירִין כְּזָקֵן. סָֽבְרִין מֵימַר. בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין זָקֵן. רַבָּנִין דְּקַיְסָרִין. אֲפִילוּ בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ שָׁם זָקֵן. אָֽמְרִין קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יָסָא. רַב הוּנָא רָאשֵׁי מַטּוֹת. מָאן אִינּוּן רָאשֵׁי מַטּוֹת. רַב הוּנָא רֹאשׁ לְרָאשֵׁי הַמַּטּוֹת. 112From here to the end of the Halakhah, the text also is in Ḥagigah 1:8, 76c 1. 62. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rav Jehudah, Jeremiah bar Abba, in the name of Rebbi Samuel113Probably one should read: R. Ze‘ira, Rav Jehudah, Rav Jeremiah bar Aḥa in the name of Samuel.: Three who know how to find an opening may permit like an Elder114Persons who are not ordained but know the rules of invalidating vows explained in the preceding Chapters. In the Babli, 78a, R. Aḥa bar Jacob admits any three lay persons to invalidate vows (cf. R. Nissim Gerondi ad loc., s. v. אמר רב אחא בר יעקב.). In Bekhorot 36b, the same rule is attributed to R. Ḥiyya bar Abin in the name of Rav Amram, a student of Samuel’s student Rav Naḥman.. They thought, at a place where no Elder was available. The rabbis of Caesarea: Even at a place of an Elder115Invalidation of a vow by three laymen is not infringing on the privileges of the rabbinate. The ordained rabbi has the privilege to invalidate a vow alone (Babli, 78a).. They said before Rebbi Yasa: Rav Huna is “head of tribes”116Who was the undisputed head of the Babylonian rabbinate and was of the family of the davidic Head of the Diaspora. He certainly had the right to invalidate vows, being of the “heads of the tribes” (Num. 30:2).. Who are the heads of tribes117Since they are mentioned in the plural, it appears that more than one person in a generation was empowered to invalidate vows.? Rav Huna is head of the heads of tribes118He is the head of all ordained rabbis, even though his Babylonian ordination is not complete as explained in the next paragraph..
מָהוּ לִמְנוֹת זְקֵינִים לִדְבָרִים יְחִידִים. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. רַב מְנִיתֵיהּ רִבִּי לְהַתִּיר נְדָרִים וְלִרְאוֹת כְּתָמִים. מִן דִּדְמָךְ בְּעָא גַבֵּי בְּרֵיהּ מוּמֵי בְּכוֹרוֹת. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אֵינִי מוֹסִיף לָךְ עַל מַה שֶׁנָּתַן לָךְ אַבָּא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. כּוּלָּא יְהִב לֵיהּ. לָדוּן יְחִידִי וּלְהַתִיר נְדָרִים וְלִרְאוֹת כְּתָמִים וְלִרְאוֹת מוּמִין שֶׁבְּגָלוּי. מִן דִּדְמָךְ בְּעָא גַבֵּי בְּרֵיהּ מוּמִין שֶׁבְּסֵתֶר. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אֵינִי מוֹסִיף לָךְ עַל מַה שֶׁנָּתַן לָךְ אַבָּא. אַף עַל גַּו דְּתֵימַר. מְמַנִּין זְקֵינִים לִדְבָרִים יְחִידִים. וְהוּא שֶׁיְּהֵא רָאוּי לְכָל־הַדְּבָרִים. כְּהָדָא. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי מְנֵי לְכָל־תַּלְמִידוֹי. וַהֲוָה מִצְטָעֵר עַל חַד דַּהֲוָה גִבֵּי בְּעֵיינֵיהּ וְלֹא הֲוָה יְכִיל מְמַנֵּיתֵיהּ. וּמְנֵי יָתֵיהּ לִדְבָרִים יְחִידִים. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה. הָרָאוּי לְדָבָר אֶחָד רָאוּי לְכָל־הַדְּבָרִים. וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְכָל־הַדְּבָרִים אֲפִילוּ לְדָבָר אֶחָד אֵינוֹ רָאוּי. May one appoint Elders for selected topics119Is it possible to give ordination without conferring all rabbinical powers on the candidate?? Let us hear from the following: Rebbi appointed Rav to invalidate vows and to see stains120To decide whether a female genital discharge was menstrual blood or not; i. e., whether the woman would be permitted to her husband or not. This is taken as example of his power to decide in matters of ritual prohibitions and includes permission to judge in all matters of such prohibitions.. After his death, [Rav] asked his son for [permission to see] defects of firstlings. He said to him, I shall not add to what my father gave you. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, he gave him everything: To sit in judgment alone, to invalidate vows, to see stains, and to see outside blemishes121In the tradition of the Babli, Sanhedrin 5a, Rav received full rabbinic powers except the right to decide anything in matters of firstlings. (A firstling of cattle, sheep, or goats must be sacrificed unless it has a blemish which disqualifies it as a sacrifice. In the absence of a Temple, the firstling must graze until it develops a blemish; Deut. 15:19–23.) The full ordination was refused to him since his intent was to return to Babylonia and Rebbi disapproved of that. After him, all rabbis with the limited diaspora ordination received the title of “Rav”.. After his death, [Rav] asked his son for [permission to see] hidden defects. He said to him, I shall not add to what my father gave you. Even though you say, one appoints Elders for selected topics, only if he is competent for everything. As the following: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi ordained all his students, but he was sorry about one who had a defect in his eye and he could not ordain him122Since skin lesions (wrongly translated as “leprosy”, Lev. 13–14) must be seen with both eyes, a one-eyed or blind person could not be ordained to decide on their ritual purity.; so he ordained him for selected topics123For everything except matters of impurity and duties as judge.. That implies that one who is competent in one thing has to be competent in everything, and one who is not competent in everything cannot be declared competent in one thing124The difference between the titles of “Rav” and “Rebbi” is one of circumstances, not of quality..
מָהוּ לִמְנוֹת זְקֵינִים לְיָמִים. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. דְּרִבִּי חִייָה בַּר אַבָּא אָתָא לְגַבֵּיהּ רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. אָמַר לֵיהּ. פַּיֵּיס לְרִבִּי יוּדָן נְשִׂייָא דְּיִכְתּוֹב לִי חָדָא אִיגֶּרָא דְאִיקָר דְּאֵיפּוּק לְפַרְנָסָתִי לְאַרְעָא בַּרְייְתָא. וּפַייְסֵיהּ וְכָתַב לֵיהּ. הֲרֵי שֶׁשָּׁלַחְנוּ לָכֶם אָדָם גָּדוֹל שְׁלוּחֵינוּ וּכְיוֹצֵא בָנוּ עַד שֶׁיַּגִּיעַ אֶצְלֵינוּ. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי דוֹסִתַּי רִבִּי אַבָּא בַר זְמִינָא וּמָטוּ בָהּ בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי דוֹסִתַּי סַבָּא. אָכֵן כָּתַב לֵיהּ. הֲרֵי שָׁלַחְנוּ לָכֶם אָדָם גָּדוֹל. שֶׁאֵינוֹ בוֹשׁ לוֹמַר. לֹא שָׁמַעְתִּיו. May one appoint Elders for a fixed time? Let us hear from the following: Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba went to Rebbi Eleazar and asked him to intervene with the Patriarch Rebbi Jehudah, that the latter should write him a letter of recommendation for seeking a livelihood in a foreign country. He intervened, and [the Patriarch] wrote for him: Here we are sending you as our representative a great personality with all our powers until he shall return to us125He shall have full ordination until he returns to the Patriarch. The Babli, Sanhedrin 5b, has a similar story involving R. Joḥanan who similarly gave conditional ordination to Rebbi Shimen.. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Dositheus, Rebbi Abba bar Zamina in the name of the old Rebbi Dositheus: He wrote him the following. Here we are sending you a great personality who will not be ashamed to say “1 did not learn this”126In this version, which has no parallel in the Babli, the ordination was unconditional and permanent..
מָהוּ לְהַתִּיר בְּפֶלוֹנֶס. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מַתִירִין בְּפֶלוֹנֶס. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי הִתִּיר בְּפֶלוֹנֶס. רִבִּי הוּנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין טַלִּית. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. בִּנְדָרִים הִקַּלִּים. May one permit wearing a coat127Must the rabbi always be wrapped in his robe (Note 106)? The word פלונס parallels Syriac פלימנא, פילמנא, Greek φαινόλης (φαιλόνης) παινόλης, Latin paenula “coat”.? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: One permits wearing a coat. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi permitted wearing a coat. Rebbi Huna in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: At a place where one does not wear a toga. Rebbi Yose ben Abun said, for easy vows128Those which can be permitted unquestionably, for which no argument is needed..