Audio Roundup 2023:44

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

by Joel Rich

Anan sahadei (we testify) generally appears in the gemara as an ironclad presumption that defines an event (eg if a lender says to a borrower not to pay back unless there are witnesses, he won’t pay back without witnesses) or an intent (eg a seller making aliya intended to sell only if he made aliyah).

Is anyone aware of anything on whether these are rebuttable presumptions? A function of time and place? Are we encouraged to be mvarer when we can?

Is one permitted to wish the past were different (for self or community) or must one believe it was as HKBH wanted and thus the best?

Please direct any informal comments to [email protected].

About Joel Rich

Joel Rich is a frequent wannabee cyberspace lecturer on various Torah topics. A Yerushalmi formerly temporarily living in West Orange, NJ, his former employer and the Social Security administration support his Torah listening habits. He is a recovering consulting actuary.

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to our Weekly Newsletter

The latest weekly digest is also available by clicking here.

Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter