More Discussions for this daf
1. Bari v'Shema with and without a Chazakah 2. What is Rebbi Yehudah "Modeh"? 3. Mukas Etz
4. Owning a field for 3 years 5. "Dancing" before the Kalah 6. Migo

Bezalel Hirsch asked:

Dear Rabbi,

Please answer my question it is bothering a me lot. The Gemara before on Daf 12b had 2 reasons for Rabban Gamliel either migo or Chazka. So whats going on what does this gemara hold?

In the begining it seems to hold of chazka because or else whats the gemara's question our mishna doesn't have a migo. But the gemera later says rebbi Yehushoa is going on migo.

And also the second reason of chazka that the gemara said before Tos' explains is for Rebbi Yochanan because he can't hold of migo so how does this gemara (which at end seems to hold of migo) answer according to him.

Bezalel Hirsch, Brooklyn,NY

The Kollel replies:

Your questions are so good that one answers the other.

In our Mishnah there is no Migu as you stated, which is why Rashi explains that the reason he should be believed is Chazakah d'Gufa. Why do we ask how Raban Gamliel can agree to our Mishnah, if we only find that he relies on a Ta'anah with a Migu and Chazakah? The answer is that although there are two reasons given on 12b for why Raban Gamliel believes a person with a Bari v'Shema (Migu, Chazakah), from a later Mishnah, which discusses Ra'uha Medaberes (13a) where there is no Migu, it is clear that Raban Gamliel believes a Ta'anas Bari with a Chazakah alone.

However, Tosfos 13b (DH Heshavtanu) gives a different reason for believing her in the case of Ra'uha Medaberes. It is clear that he rejects the possibility that Raban Gamliel believes her with a Bari and Chazakah (and without a Migu). Therefore according to Tosfos we are forced to say that the Gemara's question was based on the opinion of Rebbi Yochanan, who holds that there is no Migu in the case of Derusas Ish. Rebbi Yochanan must explain that Raban Gamliel trusts a person with a Bari and a Chazakah, and that is why the Gemara asks whether he agrees to the Halachah of the Mishnah. (PNEI YEHOSHUA).

Dov Zupnik

Bezalel Hirsch wrote back:

Dear Rabbi

I still don't understand if the gemarah holds that the reason of rab' gamliel is chazka how is rav Yehousha going on migo?

Bezalel Hirsch, Brooklyn,NY

The Kollel replies:

Notwithstanding the reasoning of Raban Gamliel, clearly Rebbi Yehoshua did not hold of Migo in the previous cases and here he does. Therefore he the Mishnah can say "Modeh" here.

Dov Zupnik

Bezalel Hirsch writes back:

Dear Rabbi,

How is rav Yehousha admitting to Rab' Gamliel (as rashi says) if rab' gamliel himself doesn't hold of migo?

The Kollel replies:

Excellent question!

(a) The answer, it seems, is that even though Raban Gamliel holds that a Bari wins against a Shema without a Migu (if there is a Chazakah), that does not mean that he does not allow a Bari with a Migu -- or a Migu in its own right, for that matter, see Ramban -- to win. Both the Chazakah and the Migu are enough reason to win according to Raban Gamliel, even according to the way Rebbi Yochanan understands Raban Gamliel's opinion.

How does the Gemara know that, though? The Gemara infers this, apparently, from the fact that Raban Gamliel also teaches his Halachah in the Mishnah of mishe'Irastani Ne'anasti, which is not necessary if not to teach that even without the advantage of Bari v'Shema and Chazakah, the wife is believed because of the added Migu.

(b) This, however, can only be inferred according to Tosfos (end of 12b) and the Ran (there) and the other Rishonim, who learn that in the second Mishnah (13a, Mukas Etz Ani) the woman has a Chazakah. If so, the only difference between the two Mishnayos is that the first has a Migu, and therefore we can say that the first Mishnah teaches that a Migu suffices. However, Rashi (12b, as explained by the Ramban here) does not seem to learn that way. He learns that although in the first Mishnah (12b) she has both a Migu and a Chazakah, in the second Mishnah, according to Rebbi Yochanan, she has neither Chazakah nor Migu. If so, there is no way to infer that Migu alone would suffice according to Raban Gamliel, since it might be that the first Mishnah is teaching us that Chazakah helps, and not that Migu helps.

It therefore seems that Rashi must have answered your question differently, perhaps along the lines of the RE'AH (cited by the Shitah). The Re'ah writes that even Raban Gamliel does not hold of a Migu when there is a Shor Shachut. He explains that indeed "Modeh" Rebbi Yehoshua is not a precise term; it means that Rebbi Yehoshua is Modeh to what Raban Gamliel might have said. (That is, we have no proof from the Mishnah that Raban Gamliel does not say Migu, nor do we have proof that he does. We do have proof that Rebbi Yehoshua does not say Migu, though.)

This does not sit well with the Girsa in our Gemara, "d'Migu... Mishum Hachi Ka'amar Raban Gamliel d'Mehemna." In the Munich and Rome manuscripts, though, the words "Mishum Hachi..." do not appear.

Otherwise, I did not yet find Acharonim who discussed your question.

Be well,

-Mordecai Kornfeld