Yevamot

that he might be a charmer.  But the first Tanna?  — Owing to the pressure  they  injure him.  Our Rabbis taught: [If a man] fell into a burning furnace, evidence may be legally tendered concerning him, [and also if he fell] into a boiler that was full of [boiling]  wine or oil, evidence may be legally tendered concerning him. In the name of R. Aha It was stated: [If the man fell into a hot boiler] of oil, evidence may legally be tendered concerning him, because it  adds fuel to the fire;  [but if into one] of wine, no evidence may legally be tendered concerning him, because it  extinguishes [the fire].  They,  however, said to him: At first it  extinguishes [the fire to a certain extent] but eventually it causes it to burn [with greater vehemence].  SAID R. MEIR: IT ONCE HAPPENED THAT A MAN FELL INTO A LARGE CISTERN etc. It was taught: They said to R. Meir, 'Miracles cannot be mentioned [as proof]'.  What [did they mean by] 'miracles'?  If it be suggested because he neither eats nor drinks, surely [it may be pointed out], It is written in Scripture, And fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink [three days]!  — Rather because he does not sleep. For R. Johanan stated: [A man who said]. 'I take an oath that I will not sleep for three days' is to be flogged  and he may sleep at once.  What then is R. Meir's reason?  — R. Kahana replied: There were  arches above arches.  And the Rabbis?  — They  were of marble.  And R. Meir? — It is hardly possible that the man did not hang  on to [the arches] and doze a while. Our Rabbis taught: It once happened that the daughter of Nehonia the well  -digger  fell into a large cistern, and people went and reported [the accident] to R. Hanina b. Dosa.  During the first hour he said to them, 'All is well'.  In the second hour he again said, 'All is well'.  In the third he said to them, 'She is saved'.  'My daughter', he asked her, 'who saved you?' — 'A ram  came to my help  with an aged man  leading it'. 'Are you', the people asked him, 'a prophet?' — 'I am', he replied, 'neither prophet nor the Son of a prophet; but should the [beneficent] work in which the righteous is engaged  be the cause of disaster  to his seed!' R. Abba stated: His  son nevertheless died of thirst; for it is said in Scripture, And round about Him it stormeth mightily,  which teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, deals strictly with those round about Him even to a hair's  breadth. R. Hanina said, [Proof  may be adduced] from here: A God dreaded in the great council of the holy ones, and feared of all them that are round about Him.  MISHNAH. EVEN [A MAN ONLY] HEARD WOMEN SAYING, 'SO-AND-SO IS DEAD', THIS SHOULD SUFFICE FOR HIM.  R. JUDAH SAID: EVEN IF HE ONLY HEARD CHILDREN SAY, 'BEHOLD WE ARE GOING TO MOURN FOR A MAN NAMED SO-AND-SO AND TO BURY HIM' [IT IS SUFFICIENT].  WHETHER [SUCH STATEMENT WAS MADE] WITH THE INTENTION [OF TENDERING EVIDENCE] OR WAS MADE WITH NO SUCH INTENTION [IT IS VALID]. R. JUDAH B. BABA SAID: WITH AN ISRAELITE [THE EVIDENCE IS VALID] EVEN IF THE MAN HAD THE INTENTION [OF ACTING AS WITNESS]. IN THE CASE OF AN IDOLATER, HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE IS INVALID IF HIS INTENTION WAS [TO ACT AS WITNESS]. GEMARA. Is it not possible that they  did not go?  — Rab Judah replied in the name of Samuel: [Our Mishnah deals with a case] where they  Say, 'Behold we are returning from the mourning for, and the burial of So-and-so'.Is it not possible that a mere ant  had died and that the children gave it the man's name?  — [It is a case] where they  say, 'Such and such Rabbis were there' or 'such and such funeral orators were there'. IN THE CASE OF AN IDOLATER, HOWEVER … IF HIS INTENTION WAS etc. Said Rab Judah in the name of Samuel: This  was taught only in the case where it was his  intention to enable [the woman] to be permitted,  but if his intention was merely to give evidence his testimony is valid. How could this  be ascertained? — R. Joseph replied: If he came to Beth din and stated. 'So-and-so is dead, allow his wife to marry again', such evidence is one where his intention was to enable [the woman] to be permitted,  [but if he stated], 'He is dead', and nothing more, his intention was merely to give evidence. So It was also stated:  Resh Lakish said, This  was taught only in the case where it was his intention to enable [the woman] to be permitted,  but if his intention was merely to give evidence his testimony is valid. Said R. Johanan to him:  Did it not happen with Oshaia Berabbi,  that he opposed  eighty-five elders saying to them that, 'This  was taught Only in the case where it was his intention to enable [the woman] to be permitted  but if his intention was merely to give evidence his testimony is valid', but the Sages did not agree with him!  But according to the ruling in our Mishnah, that  IN THE CASE OF AN IDOLATER, HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE IS INVALID IF HIS INTENTION WAS [TO ACT AS WITNESS],  how is it possible [for the idolater's testimony ever to be accepted]?  — Where he makes a statement at random;  as was the case where one went about saying, 'Who of the family of Hiwai is here? Who is here of the family of Hiwai? Hiwai is dead!', and R. Joseph allowed his  wife to marry again. A man  once went about saying, 'Alas for the valiant rider who was at Pumbeditha, for he is dead'; and R. Joseph, or it might be said, Raba, allowed his wife to marry again. A man once went about saying, 'Who of the family of Hasa is here? Hasa is drowned!' [On hearing this] R. Nahman exclaimed, 'By God, the fish must have eaten Hasa up!' Relying on R. Nahman's exclamation, Hasa's wife went and married again, and no objection was raised against her action.  Said R. Ashi: From this  it may be inferred that the ruling of the Rabbis  that [if a man had fallen into] water which had no [visible] end, his wife is forbidden [to marry again] applies only ab initio, but if someone had already married her, she is not to be taken away from him. Others read: R. Nahman allowed his  wife to marry again; for he said, 'Hasa was a great man, and had he come up [out of the water] his rescue would have become known'. The law, however, is not so. For there is no difference between a great man and one who is not great — [In either case] it is permitted  ex post facto and forbidden  ab initio. A certain idolater 'once said to an Israelite, 'Cut some grass  and throw it to my cattle on the Sabbath; if not, I will kill you as I have killed So-and-so, that son of an Israelite, to whom I said, "Cook for me a dish on the Sabbath", and whom, as he did not cook for me, I killed'. His wife  heard this and came to Abaye.  As he kept her waiting