Study Ketubot folio 105A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
תשבע בסוף, ולא תשבע בתחלה. נחלקו עליו בני כהנים גדולים, ואמרו: תשבע בתחלה ובסוף. אמר רבי דוסא בן הרכינס כדבריהם. אמר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי: יפה אמר חנן, לא תשבע אלא בסוף.
She takes an oath at the end of their marriage, i.e., when she learns that her husband died. The oath is to the effect that he did not leave her any funds when he departed overseas, as she is claiming full payment of her marriage contract. And she does not take an oath at the outset of his trip overseas, when she demands support soon after his departure. The sons of High Priests disagreed with Ḥanan’s opinion and said: She takes an oath both at the outset and at the end. R' Dosa ben Harkinas said: The halakha is in accordance with their statement, i.e., that of the sons of the High Priests. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said that Ḥanan spoke well: She takes an oath only at the end.
גמ׳ ורמינהי: שלשה דייני גזילות היו בירושלים: אדמון בן גדאי, וחנן המצרי, וחנן בן אבישלום. קשיא תלת אתרין, קשיא גזירות אגזילות!
Talmud: The Mishnah states that there were two judges who issued decrees [gezeirot] in Jerusalem. And the Talmud raises a contradiction from the following baraita: There were 3 judges who adjudicated cases of theft [gezeilot] in Jerusalem: Admon ben Gaddai, Ḥanan the Egyptian, and Ḥanan ben Avishalom. The fact that the baraita mentions 3 judges is difficult, as the Mishnah includes only two; and the fact that the judges are described in the Mishnah as those who issue decrees is also difficult as they are described in the baraita as judges who adjudicate cases of theft.
בשלמא תלת אתרין לא קשיא: דחשיב ליה — קתני, דלא חשיב ליה — לא קתני. אלא גזירות אגזילות קשיא!
The Talmud continues: Granted, the contradiction between the statement that there were 3 judges and the statement that there were two is not difficult, as those who are important to him the tanna teaches in the Mishnah, and those who are not important to him the tanna does not teach in the Mishnah. Although there were other judges, the tanna mentioned only those pertinent to the topic at hand. However, the contradiction between the ruling that refers to decrees and the ruling that refers to theft is difficult.