Gittin

TO PREVENT ABUSES. GEMARA. R. Budia said to R. Ashi: [The Mishnah says that] they must not be bought at more than their value, but [presumably] they may be bought at their value. This would show that a scroll of the Law which is found in the possession of a heathen may be read?2   — Perhaps it can be bought to be stored away. R. Nahman said: We have it on tradition that a scroll of the Law which has been written by a Min3   should be burnt, and one written by a heathen should be stored away. One that is found in the possession of a Min should be stored away; one that is found in the possession of a heathen according to some should be stored away and according to others may be read. With regard to a scroll of the Law which has been written by a heathen, it has been taught by one authority that it should be burnt, and it has been taught by another authority that it should be stored away, and it has been taught by another authority that it may be read. There is, however, no contradiction. The view that it should be burnt follows R. Eliezer, who said that the intention of the heathen is normally idolatrous;4   the view that it should be stored away follows the Tanna of the following passage: For R. Hamnuna the son of Raba of Pashrunia learnt that a scroll of the Law, phylacteries and mezuzoth written by a Min,5   an informer, a heathen, a slave, a woman, a minor, a Cuthean6   and an irreligious Jew  are disqualified, since it says. And thou shalt bid them … and thou shalt write them,  which indicates that those who are subject to 'bind' may 'write', but those who do not 'bind' may not 'write'. The statement that such a scroll may be read follows the Tanna [of the following passage] where it has been taught: Scrolls of the Law may be bought from heathens in all places, provided only that they are written in the prescribed manner. A case arose of a heathen in Sidon who used to write scrolls of the Law, and Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel permitted them to be bought from him.  Seeing that Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel requires the tanning of the parchment to have been for the specific purpose,  will he not require the writing to have been for the specific purpose? For it has been taught: If a man overlays the phylacteries with gold or covers them with the skin of an unclean animal, they are disqualified; [if with] the skin of a clean animal, they are fit for use, even though he did not tan it for the specific purpose. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Even if covered with the skin of a clean animal they are disqualified unless it has been tanned for the specific purpose!  — Rabbah b. Samuel explained that [the heathen of Sidon was] a proselyte who had reverted to his previous errors.  But that is worse, for he is a Min?  R. Ashi said: It means one who reverted to his old religion out of fear. Our Rabbis taught: 'The price offered may exceed their value to the extent of a tropaic.'  How much is a tropaic? — R. Shesheth says: An aster. An Arab woman brought a bag of phylacteries to Abaye. Let me have them, he said, at a couple of dates for a pair. She became furious and took them and threw them into the river. Said Abaye: I should not have made them look so cheap to her as all that. MISHNAH. IF A MAN DIVORCES HIS WIFE BECAUSE OF ILL FAME, HE MUST NOT REMARRY HER.  IF BECAUSE SHE MAKES A VOW,  HE MUST NOT REMARRY HER. R. JUDAH SAYS: [IF HE DIVORCES HER] FOR VOWS WHICH SHE MADE PUBLICLY, HE MAY NOT REMARRY HER, BUT IF FOR VOWS WHICH SHE DID NOT MAKE PUBLICLY, HE MAY REMARRY HER.  R. MEIR SAYS, [IF HE DIVORCES HER] FOR A VOW WHICH REQUIRES THE INVESTIGATION OF A SAGE,  HE MAY NOT REMARRY HER, BUT IF FOR ONE WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE THE INVESTIGATION OF A SAGE, HE MAY REMARRY HER.  R. ELIEZER SAYS THAT ONE WAS ONLY FORBIDDEN ON ACCOUNT OF THE OTHER. R. JOSE SON OF R. JUDAH SAID: A CASE HAPPENED IN SIDON OF A MAN WHO SAID TO HIS WIFE, KONAM,  IF I DO NOT DIVORCE YOU, AND HE DID DIVORCE HER,  AND THE SAGES PERMITTED HIM TO REMARRY HER — ALL THIS TO PREVENT ABUSES. GEMARA. R. Joseph b. Manyumi said in the name of R. Nahman: The rule [that he must not remarry her] applies only if he says to her, 'I am divorcing you on account of your evil name',