Ketubot

[If] one found in it  an abandoned  child — if the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite, if the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] Israelites [the child is] an Israelite, [and if the inhabitants of the town are] half to half, [the child is] an Israelite.  And Rab said: They have taught this only with regard to sustaining it,  but not with regard to pure descent. And Samuel said: [They have taught this only] with regard to removing debris  for its sake?  — That which Rab Judah said in the name of Rab  [namely, that] the incident happened at the springs of Zepphoris,  escaped his  attention.  But according to R. Hanan b. Raba who said [that] it was a decision for the hour,  it is difficult!  He who taught this  did not teach that. The [above] text [says]: '[If] one found in it an abandoned child — if the majorlty [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite. if the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] Israelites [the child is] an Israelite, [and if the inhabitants of the town are) half to half [the child is] an Israelite. Rab said: They have taught this only with regard to sustaining it, but not with regard to pure descent. But Samuel said: [They have taught this only] with regard to removing debris for its sake.' But did Samuel say so? Did not R. Joseph say that R. Judah said in the name of Samuel: We do not go with regard to saving life after the majority?  — But the saying of Samuel referred  to the first clause: 'If the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite.' [Upon this] Samuel said: And with regard to removing debris it is not so,  'If the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consist of] non-Israelites [the child is] a non-Israelite' — for what practical purpose [is this taught]? — R. Papa said: To allow him to eat [meat of] animals not ritually slaughtered. — 'If the majority [of the inhabitants of the town consists of] Israelites [the child is] an Israelite,' — for what practical purpose [is this taught]? — R. Papa said: That one returns to him a lost object.  If [the inhabitants of the town are] half to half [the child is] an Israelite' — for what practical purpose [is this taught]? Resh Lakish said: With regard to damages.  How shall we imagine this case? Shall we say that an ox of ours  gored  an ox of his?  [In this case] let him  say to him.  'Bring evidence that you are an Israelite — and take!  It speaks of a case when an ox of his  gored an ox of ours  — one half he  pays, and with regard to the other half he says to them,  'Bring evidence that I am not an Israelite and I will pay  you. MISHNAH. IF A WOMAN BECAME A WIDOW OR WAS DIVORCED  [AND] SHE SAYS, 'THOU DIDST MARRY ME [AS] A VIRGIN,'  AND HE SAYS, 'NOT SO, BUT I MARRIED THEE [AS] A WIDOW,'34-35 — IF THERE ARE WITNESSES THAT SHE WENT OUT  WITH A HINUMA  AND HER HEAD UNCOVERED,  HER KETHUBAH IS TWO HUNDRED [ZUZ.]  R. JOHANAN THE SON OF BEROKA SAYS: ALSO THE DISTRIBUTION OF ROASTED EARS OF CORN IS EVIDENCE.  AND R. JOSHUA ADMITS THAT, IF ONE SAYS  TO HIS FELLOW,  THIS FIELD BELONGED TO YOUR FATHER AND I BOUGHT IT FROM HIM. HE IS BELIEVED,