Study Ketubot folio 16A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
שהפה שאסר — הוא הפה שהתיר. ואם יש עדים שהיא של אביו, והוא אומר: ״לקחתיה הימנו״ — אינו נאמן.
This is so, as the mouth that prohibited, i.e., claimed that the field had belonged to the other’s father, is the mouth that permitted, i.e., claimed that he purchased the field. Even if he had not admitted that it had belonged to the other’s father, the field would have remained in his possession. Therefore, his claim is accepted. However, if there are witnesses that the field belonged to his father, and the one who has the field in his possession says: I purchased it from him, he is not deemed credible and his claim is rejected.
Talmud: The Talmud infers: The reason that the bride’s claim is accepted is specifically due to the fact that there are witnesses that she went out of her father’s house to the wedding with a hinnuma. However, if there are no witnesses, the husband is deemed credible. Let us say that the unattributed ruling that we learned in the Mishnah is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, as, if the ruling was according to Rabban Gamliel, didn’t he say that she is deemed credible?
אפילו תימא רבן גמליאל, עד כאן לא קאמר רבן גמליאל התם אלא בברי ושמא. אבל הכא בברי וברי — לא אמר.
The Talmud answers: Even if you will say that the ruling in the Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, Rabban Gamliel stated his opinion only there, in a case where the claim of the bride is certain and the claim of the groom is uncertain, as the groom does not know what actually happened. However, here, in a case where the claim of the bride is certain and the claim of the groom is also certain, as he is certain that he married her as a widow, Rabban Gamliel did not say that her claim is deemed credible.