משנה: כָּתַב לָהּ נֶדֶר וּשְׁבוּעָה אֵין לִי עָלַיִיךְ אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַשְׁבִּיעָהּ אֲבָל מַשְׁבִּיעַ הוּא אֶת הַיּוֹרְשִׁין וְאֵת הַבָּאִין בִּרְשׁוּתָהּ. שְׁבוּעָה אֵין לִי עָלַיִיךְ וְעַל יוֹרְשַׁיִיךְ וְעַל הַבָּאִין בִּרְשׁוּתֵיךְ הוּא אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַשְׁבִּיעָהּ לֹא אוֹתָהּ וְלֹא אֶת יוֹרְשֶׁיהָ וְלֹא אֶת הַבָּאִין בִּרְשׁוּתָהּ אֲבָל יוֹרְשִׁין מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ וְאֶת יוֹרְשֶׁיהָ וְאֵת הַבָּאִין בִּרְשׁוּתָהּ. MISHNAH: If he wrote to her122This continues Mishnah 4. If the wife refuses to conduct a business or a stewardship for him if he does not believe her accounts and will require her to swear, all depends on the language of the contract between husband and wife. This Mishnah is really one together with Mishnah 6.: “I have no vow or oath against you,” he cannot make her swear, but he can ask an oath from the heirs123If she died, he can make her sons swear who will inherit her ketubah(Mishnah 4:10) or eventually her family if she was childless (Note 87). This “oath of heirs” is “that our mother did not tell us that the ketubah was paid, or that money of hers was due to others, etc.” or her business associates124They can swear that none of the husband’s money is in their hands.. “I have no oath against you, or your heirs, or your business associates,” he cannot ask an oath from her, or her heirs, or her business associates, but the heirs125The husband’s heirs, after the husband’s death. can ask an oath from her, or her heirs, or her business associates.
הלכה: כָּתַב לָהּ. נֶדֶר וּשְׁבוּעָה אֵין לִי עָלַיִיךְ כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹנָה וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵה תְּרֵיהוֹן אָֽמְרִין. לֹא סוֹף דָּבָר בִּנְכָסִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּלְּטָה בָהֶן בְּחַיֵּי בַעֲלָהּ. אֶלָּא אֲפִילוּ בִּנְכָסִין שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּלְּטָה בָהֶן לְאַחַר מִיתַת הַבַּעַל אֵין הַיּוֹרְשִׁין מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ. HALAKHAH: “If he wrote to her: “I have no vow or oath against you,” etc. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose both say, not only about properties over which she exercised control during her husband’s lifetime but even about properties over which she exercised control after her husband’s death are the heirs prevented from making her swear126This paragraph is in the wrong place; it refers to Mishnah 6 where the husband exempts the wife and her heirs from any oath imposed by him and his heirs. In that case the wife is exempted as long as she acts within the powers entrusted to her by her husband..
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הַשּׂוֹכֵר פָּרָה מֵחֲבֵירוֹ וְהִשְׁאִילָהּ לְאַחֵר וּמֵתָה כְדַרְכָּהּ יִשְׁבַּע הַשּׂוֹכֵר שֶׁמֵּתָה כְדַרְכָּהּ וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל יְשַׁלֵּם לַשּׂוֹכֵר. רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יַנַּאי. וְהוּא שֶׁנָּתַן לֹו רְשׁוּת לְהַשְׁאִיל לָאֲחֵרִים. וְתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָה כֵן. אֵין הַשּׁוֹאֵל רַשַּׁאי לְהַשְׁאִיל וְלֹא הַשּׂוֹכֵר רַשַּׁאי לְהַשְׂכִּיר וְלֹא הַשּׁוֹאֵל רַשַּׁאי לְהַשְׂכִּיר וְלֹא הַשּׂוֹכֵר רַשַּׁאי לְהַשְׁאִיל. וְלֹא מִי שֶׁהוֹפְקַד אֶצְלוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְהַפְקִיד אֶצֶל אַחֵר אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן נָֽטְלוּ רְשׁוּת מֵהַבְּעָלִים. וְכוּלָּם שֶׁשִּׁינּוּ אֶת שְׁמוֹתֵיהֶן שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעַת הַבְּעָלִים חַייָבִין. וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל לֹא אֲפִילוּ לֹא שִׁינָּה חַייָב. אֶלָּא בְּגִין דְּתַנִּינָן. מַתְנֶה שׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם לִהְיוֹת פָּטוּר מִן הַשְּׁבוּעָה וְהַשּׁוֹאֵל לִהְיוֹת פָּטוּר מִלְּשַׁלֵּם. וְאָתָא מֵימַר לָךְ שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיתְנָה עִמּוֹ שֶׁהוּא פָטוּר שֶׁהוּא חַייָב. בִּיקֵּשׁ לְהַשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת הַשּׁוֹאֵל. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. כָּתַב לָהּ. נֶדֶר וּשְׁבוּעָה אֵין לִי עָלַיִיךְ. אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהַשְׁבִּיעָהּ אֲבָל מַשְׁבִּיעַ הוּא אֶת יוֹרְשֶׁיהָ וְאֵת הַבָּאִים בִּרְשׁוּתָהּ. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה שֶׁאִם בִּיקְּשׁוּ לְהַשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת הַשּׁוֹאֵל הוּא מַשְׁבִּיעוֹ. הַָדָא יָֽלְפָה מִן הַהִיא וְהַהִיא יָֽלְפָה מִן הָדָא. הָדָא יָֽלְפָה מִן הַהִיא. שֶׁאִם בִּיקֵּשׁ לְהַשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת הַשּׁוֹאֵל מַשְׁבִּיעוֹ. וְהַהִיא יָֽלְפָה מִן הָדָא. שֶׁאִם בִּיקֵּשׁ לְהַשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת הַאִשָּׁה (שֶׁלֹּא) מַשְׁבִּיעָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָה. לָא צוֹרְכַת מֵילַף הָדָא מִן הַהִיא. וּמַה צוֹרְכָה תֵּילַף הַהִיא מִן הָדָא. כַּיי דָּמַר רִבִּי הִילָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יַנַּאי. וְהוּא שֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְהַשְׁאִיל. וְהָכָא. וְהוּא שֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ רְשׁוּת שֶׁיְּהוּ בָנֶיהָ אֶפִּיטְרוֹפִּים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. צָרִיךְ לְהַעֲלוֹת לוֹ שָׂכָר כָּל־זְמָן שֶׁהִיא שְׂכוּרָה אֶצְלוֹ. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי אֲבוּנָא. שְׁאָלוּהָ הַבְּעָלִים וָמֵתָה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כֵּן אֲנָן אָֽמְרִין. אֲכָלוּהָ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבוּן. אָֽכְלוּ שֶׁלָּהֶן אָֽכְלוּ. רִבִּי זְעוּרָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רַבִּי יָסָא. הֵיךְ עָֽבְדִין עוֹבְדָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. תְּרֵיי כָּלקֳבֵל אַרְבָּעָה וְלָא עָֽבְדִין עוֹבְדָא כְסוּגְייָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. תְּרֵיי כָּל קֳבֵל תְּרֵיי אִינּוּן. רַבִּי לָֽעְזָר תַּלְמִידֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִייָה רוֹבָה. רִבִי יוֹחָנָן תַּלְמִידֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יַנַּאי. 128This entire paragraph is from Qiddušin 1:4, fol. 60b. Since at the end it treats a question from there which was not introduced here, it is clear that the text here is secondary. There129Mishnah Baba meṣi‘a 3:3., we have stated: “If somebody leases a cow from another person and lends it to a third party; if it died naturally, the lessee has to swear that it died naturally130Since the lessee does not have to pay for acts of God; Note 120. and the borrower has to pay to the lessee.131The borrower has to pay for every defect that develops; Note 120. Agreed to in the Babli, Baba meṣi‘a29b. In 96b, this is a matter of dispute; the Tanna R. Yose holds there that the borrower pays the original owners.” Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Only if he gave permission to lend to others132Otherwise the lessee violates the terms of his lease and becomes liable for every defect which develops. In the Babli, Baba meṣi‘a 36a, this is a matter of dispute which is decided (36b) in conformity with the Yerushalmi.. Also Rebbi Ḥiyya stated thus133Tosephta Baba meṣi‘a 3:1 (the first sentence only), also quoted in Baba meṣi‘a 3:3 (9a 1.51).: “The borrower cannot lend, nor the lessee lease, nor the borrower lease, nor the lessee lend, nor the trustee give to another unless they received permission from the owners. And all who changed the titles without the owners’ knowledge are liable. But the borrower is liable even if he did not change.” But it is because we stated134Mishnah Baba meṣi‘a 7:13.: “An unpaid watchman can stipulate to be exempt from an oath and the borrower may stipulate that he not have to pay.” This means that even if he stipulated to be exempt that he is obligated135If he deviated from the original terms; even if he later subleased with permission (unless he explicitly requested immunity also for the later change.). What if he wanted to let the borrower swear136Can the original owner of the cow go to court against the borrower from the lessee to have him swear that the cow died a natural death and, if the borrower refuses to swear, collect the value of the cow from the lessee, or can the borrower claim that he is involved only with the lessee and is immune to suits from third parties?? Let us hear from the following: “If he wrote to her: ‘I have no vow or oath against you,’ he cannot make her swear, but he can ask an oath from the heirs or her business associates.” This implies that if he137The original owner, since the borrower is a business associate of his lessee. wanted to make the borrower swear, he can force him to swear. The first case teaches about the second and the second about the first138The first Mishnah Ketubot 9:5 and the second Baba Meṣi‘a 3:3 with its Tosephta can be combined.. The first case teaches about the second, that if he wanted to make the borrower swear, he can force him to swear. The second case teaches about the first, that if he wants to force the wife to swear, that he can make her swear139Cf. Note 127; editio princeps reads here “that he cannot make her swear.” But the text is very clear, the fact that the husband freed his wife from having to swear about her fiduciary duties does not absolve her from responsibility and having to swear if she deviated from the framework of these duties.. Rebbi Ḥanina said, it is not necessary to derive the first case from the second, and what does one learn for the second case from the first? Following what Rebbi Hila said in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Only if he gave permission to lend to others. And here, only if he gave permission to let her sons be stewards140The wife can appoint others to fulfill part of her duties (in the example given, her adult sons from a prior marriage) only with her husband’s explicit agreement; they have to swear unless especially exempted (interpretation of Tosaphot 86b, s. v. נדר; Sefer Ha‘iṭṭur 23a, Note ג.). Rebbi Yose said, he has to pay the lease all the time it is leased to him141This refers back to Mishnah Baba meṣi‘a 3:1. Even if the original owner gave permission to the lessee to lend out his cow, the lessee is responsible for paying his lease the whole time the cow is in the hands of the non-paying borrower.. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked Rebbi Abuna: If the owners borrowed it and it died142Is this true even if the original owners borrowed it back?? He said to him, in that case we say, they ate it. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, if they ate it, they ate their own property143In that case, the lessee does not have to pay.. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Yasa: How does one act144This refers to the problem dealt with in Qiddušin 60b 1. 48: Rav Jehudah sent to R. Eleazar: A person having responsibility who handed it over to another (and something happened, who is responsible)? He said to him, the first one has to pay. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the second one has to pay; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the second one has to pay. (The following argument shows that one has to read that R. Joḥanan holds the first one has to pay.) In Qiddušin there follows the discussion of this paragraph, which shows that R. Yannai and R. Ḥiyya (the Elder) both agree with R. Eleazar and R. Joḥanan.
The Babli, Baba qama 11b, attributes to R. Eleazar the opinion that the first one is free from paying if he did not have to pay under the original arrangement; in practice it is decided that the first one always has to pay unless the original owner agreed to the new arrangements.? He said to him, there are two146The quote should have been: R. Eleazar says in the name of the Elder R. Ḥiyya, R. Joḥanan says in the name of R. Yannai (which is the quote of the latter in Baba qama 115a.) against four; one does not act following the argument. He said to him, they are two against two! Rebbi Eleazar is the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya’s student; Rebbi Joḥanan is Rebbi Yannai’s student147A lengthy discussion of this text is in R. Bezalel Ashkenazi, שיטה מקובצת כתובות (reprint Tel Aviv, n/d) p. 221 a/b. However, probably the text is not based on an original ms. since it is Babylonized, remarkable for such a careful author..