Study Gittin folio 83A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
מאי דאסר שרא; ״לראובן״, מהו? לראובן – והוא הדין לשמעון, והאי דקאמר לראובן – משום דפתח ביה; או דלמא – לראובן דוקא?
that what he initially forbade he then permitted, enabling her to marry anyone she wishes, what is the halakha if he said the second time that she is permitted to marry Reuven? Did he mean that she is permitted to marry Reuven and the same is true with regard to Shimon, i.e., she is permitted to marry him as well? Is the fact that he mentioned only that she is permitted to marry Reuven because he opened his prior qualification by mentioning him before he mentioned Shimon, but he intended to permit her to marry Shimon as well? Or did he, perhaps, specifically intend to permit her to marry Reuven?
ואם תמצא לומר ״לראובן״ דוקא; ״לשמעון״, מהו? לשמעון – והוא הדין לראובן, והאי דקאמר ״שמעון״ – משום דסליק מיניה; או דלמא – לשמעון דוקא?
And if you say that he intended to permit her to marry specifically Reuven and not Shimon, what is the halakha if he said that she is permitted to marry Shimon? Did he mean that she is permitted to marry Shimon and the same is true with regard to Reuven, and the fact that he mentioned only Shimon is because he ended his initial previous statement by mentioning him? Or perhaps he was specifically referring only to Shimon?
בעי רב אשי: ״אף לשמעון״, מהו? ״אף״ – אראובן קאי; או דלמא, ״אף״ – אעלמא קאי? תיקו.
Rav Ashi raises another dilemma with regard to the same case: If he said to her the second time: You are also permitted to marry Shimon, what is the halakha? Is the word also referring to Reuven, i.e., she is permitted to marry Shimon in addition to Reuven, or perhaps it is also referring to everyone, i.e., she is permitted to marry Shimon in addition to all men, but not Reuven? The dilemma should stand unresolved.