Double Trouble

We recently discussed the the problem of ascertaining, in the context of Agunos, that one who claims to be a missing man, or to have information concerning him, is actually human and not a demonic impersonator. In this post, we discuss another intersection of the occult with the laws of Agunah – the problem of the doppelgänger.

One of the most important subtopics of this area of Halachah is the problem of the identification of cadavers. Broadly speaking, the Halachah recognizes two methods of accomplishing this: טביעת עין (recognition) and סימנים (characteristic features). The fundamental assumption underlying both these methods is that if the cadaver is not that of the missing man, then the similarity in appearance or features would be highly implausible. But what if the corpse is really that of the man’s doppelgänger?

In truth, the ardency, the enthusiasm, and the imperiousness of my disposition, soon rendered me a marked character among my schoolmates, and by slow, but natural gradations, gave me an ascendency over all not greatly older than myself; — over all with one single exception. This exception was found in the person of a scholar, who, although no relation, bore the same Christian and surname as myself; — a circumstance, in fact, little remarkable, for, notwithstanding a noble descent, mine was one of those every-day appellations which seem, by prescriptive right, to have been, time out of mind, the common property of the mob. In this narrative I have therefore designated myself as William Wilson — a fictitious title not very dissimilar to the real. My namesake alone, of those who in school phraseology constituted “our set,” presumed to compete with me in the studies of the class — in the sports and broils of the play-ground — to refuse implicit belief in my assertions, and submission to my will — indeed to interfere with my arbitrary dictation in any respect whatsoever. If there is on earth a supreme and unqualified despotism, it is the despotism of a master mind in boyhood over the less energetic spirits of its companions.

Wilson’s rebellion was to me a source of the greatest embarrassment; — the more so as, in spite of the bravado with which in public I made a point of treating him and his pretensions, I secretly felt that I feared him, and could not help thinking the equality which he maintained so easily with myself, a proof of his true superiority, since not to be overcome cost me a perpetual struggle. Yet this superiority — even this equality — was in truth acknowledged by no one but myself; our associates, by some unaccountable blindness, seemed not even to suspect it. Indeed, his competition, his resistance, and especially his impertinent and dogged interference with my purposes, were not more pointed than private. He appeared to be destitute alike of the ambition which urged, and of the passionate energy of mind which enabled me to excel. In his rivalry he might have been supposed actuated solely by a whimsical desire to thwart, astonish, or mortify myself; although there were times when I could not help observing, with a feeling made up of wonder, abasement, and pique, that he mingled with his injuries, his insults, or his contradictions, a certain most inappropriate, and assuredly most unwelcome affectionateness of manner. I could only conceive this singular behaviour to arise from a consummate self-conceit assuming the vulgar airs of patronage and protection.

Perhaps it was this latter trait in Wilson’s conduct, conjoined with our identity of name, and the mere accident of our having entered the school upon the same day, which set afloat the notion that we were brothers, among the senior classes in the academy. These do not usually inquire with much strictness into the affairs of their juniors. I have before said, or should have said, that Wilson was not, in the most remote degree, connected with my family. But assuredly if we had been brothers we must have been twins, for, after leaving Dr. Bransby’s, I casually learned that my namesake was born on the nineteenth of January, 1811 — a somewhat remarkable coincidence; for the day is precisely that of my own nativity. …

The feeling of vexation thus engendered grew stronger with every circumstance tending to show resemblance, moral or physical, between my rival and myself. I had not then discovered the remarkable fact that we were of the same age; but I saw that we were of the same height, and I perceived that we were not altogether unlike in general contour of person and outline of feature. I was galled, too, by the rumor touching a relationship which had grown current in the upper forms. In a word, nothing could more seriously disturb me, (although I scrupulously concealed such disturbance,) than any allusion to a similarity of mind, person, or condition existing between us. But, in truth, I had no reason to believe that (with the exception of the matter of relationship, and in the case of Wilson himself), this similarity had ever been made a subject of comment, or even observed at all by our schoolfellows. That he observed it in all its bearings, and as fixedly as I, was apparent, but that he could discover in such circumstances so fruitful a field of annoyance for myself can only be attributed, as I said before, to his more than ordinary penetration.

His cue, which was to perfect an imitation of myself, lay both in words and in actions; and most admirably did he play his part. My dress it was an easy matter to copy; my gait and general manner, were, without difficulty, appropriated; in spite of his constitutional defect, even my voice did not escape him. My louder tones were, of course, unattempted, but then the key, it was identical; and his singular whisper, it grew the very echo of my own.

How greatly this most exquisite portraiture harassed me, (for it could not justly be termed a caricature,) I will not now venture to describe. I had but one consolation — in the fact that the imitation, apparently, was noticed by myself alone, and that I had to endure only the knowing and strangely sarcastic smiles of my namesake himself. Satisfied with having produced in my bosom the intended effect, he seemed to chuckle in secret over the sting he had inflicted, and was characteristically disregardful of the public applause which the success of his witty endeavors might have so easily elicited. That the school, indeed, did not feel his design, perceive its accomplishment, and participate in his sneer, was, for many months, a riddle I could not resolve. Perhaps the gradation of his copy rendered it not so readily perceptible, or, more possibly, I owed my security to the masterly air of the copyist, who, disdaining the letter, which in a painting is all the obtuse can see, gave but the full spirit of his original for my individual contemplation and chagrin. …

It was upon a gloomy and tempestuous night of an early autumn, about the close of my fifth year at the school, and immediately after the altercation just mentioned, that, finding every one wrapped in sleep, I arose from bed, and, lamp in hand, stole through a wilderness of narrow passages from my own bedroom to that of my rival. I had been long plotting one of those ill-natured pieces of practical wit at his expense in which I had hitherto been so uniformly unsuccessful. It was my intention, now, to put my scheme in operation, and I resolved to make him feel the whole extent of the malice with which I was imbued. Having reached his closet, I noiselessly entered, leaving the lamp, with a shade over it, on the outside. I advanced a step, and listened to the sound of his tranquil breathing. Assured of his being asleep, I returned, took the light, and with it again approached the bed. Close curtains were around it, which, in the prosecution of my plan, I slowly and quietly withdrew, when the bright rays fell vividly upon the sleeper, and my eyes, at the same moment, upon his countenance. I looked, and a numbness, an iciness of feeling instantly pervaded my frame. My breast heaved, my knees tottered, my whole spirit became possessed with an objectless yet intolerable horror. Gasping for breath, I lowered the lamp in still nearer proximity to the face. Were these — these the lineaments of William Wilson? I saw, indeed, that they were his, but I shook as with a fit of the ague in fancying they were not. What was there about them to confound me in this manner? I gazed — while my brain reeled with a multitude of incoherent thoughts. Not thus he appeared — assuredly not thus — in the vivacity of his waking hours. The same name; the same contour of person; the same day of arrival at the academy! And then his dogged and meaningless imitation of my gait, my voice, my habits, and my manner! Was it, in truth, within the bounds of human possibility that what I now saw was the result of the habitual practice of this sarcastic imitation? Awe-stricken, and with a creeping shudder, I extinguished the lamp, passed silently from the chamber, and left, at once, the halls of that old academy, never to enter them again.

[Years later, our protagonist is at Oxford, where he has become a skilled and unscrupulous gambler:]

We had protracted our sitting far into the night, and I had at length effected the manoeuvre of getting Glendinning as my sole antagonist. The game, too, was my favorite écarté. The rest of the company, interested in the extent of our play, had abandoned their own cards, and were standing around us as spectators. The parvenu, who had been induced by my artifices in the early part of the evening to drink deeply, now shuffled, dealt, or played, with a wild nervousness of manner for which his intoxication, I thought, might partially, but could not altogether account. In a very short period he had become my debtor to a large amount, when, having taken a long draught of port, he did precisely what I had been coolly anticipating — he proposed to double our already extravagant stakes. With a well-feigned show of reluctance, and not until after my repeated refusal had seduced him into some angry words which gave a color of pique to my compliance, did I finally comply. The result, of course, did but prove how entirely the prey was in my toils; in less than a single hour he had quadrupled his debt. For some time his countenance had been losing the florid tinge lent it by the wine; but now, to my astonishment, I perceived that it had grown to a pallor truly fearful. I say to my astonishment. Glendinning had been represented to my eager inquiries as immeasurably wealthy; and the sums which he had as yet lost, although in themselves vast, could not, I supposed, very seriously annoy, much less so violently affect him. That he was overcome by the wine just swallowed, was the idea which most readily presented itself; and, rather with a view to the preservation of my own character in the eyes of my associates, than from any less interested motive, I was about to insist, peremptorily, upon a discontinuance of the play, when some expressions at my elbow from among the company, and an ejaculation evincing utter despair on the part of Glendinning, gave me to understand that I had effected his total ruin under circumstances which, rendering him an object for the pity of all, should have protected him from the ill offices even of a fiend.

What now might have been my conduct it is difficult to say. The pitiable condition of my dupe had thrown an air of embarrassed gloom over all; and, for some moments, a profound and unbroken silence was maintained, during which I could not help feeling my cheeks tingle with the many burning glances of scorn or reproach cast upon me by the less abandoned of the party. I will even own that an intolerable weight of anxiety was for a brief instant lifted from my bosom by the sudden and extraordinary interruption which ensued. The wide, heavy, folding doors of the apartment were all at once thrown open, to their full extent, with a vigorous and rushing impetuosity that extinguished, as if by magic, every candle in the room. Their light, in dying, enabled us just to perceive that a stranger had entered, of about my own height, and closely muffled in a cloak. The darkness, however, was now total; and we could only feel that he was standing in our midst. Before any one of us could recover from the extreme astonishment into which this rudeness had thrown all, we heard the voice of the intruder.

“Gentlemen,” he said, in a low, distinct, and never-to-be-forgotten whisper which thrilled to the very marrow of my bones, “Gentlemen, I make no apology for this behaviour, because in thus behaving I am but fulfilling a duty. You are, beyond doubt, uninformed of the true character of the person who has to-night won at écarté a large sum of money from Lord Glendinning. I will therefore put you upon an expeditious and decisive plan of obtaining this very necessary information. Please to examine, at your leisure, the inner linings of the cuff of his left sleeve, and the several little packages which may be found in the somewhat capacious pockets of his embroidered morning wrapper.”

While he spoke, so profound was the stillness that one might have heard a pin drop upon the floor. In ceasing, he at once departed, and as abruptly as he had entered. Can I — shall I describe my sensations? Must I say that I felt all the horrors of the damned? Most assuredly I had little time given for reflection. Many hands roughly seized me upon the spot, and lights were immediately reprocured. A search ensued. In the lining of my sleeve were found all of the court-cards essential in écarté, and, in the pockets of my wrapper, a number of packs, fac-similes of those used at our sittings, with the single exception that mine were of the species called, technically, arrondées; the honors being slightly convex at the ends, the lower cards slightly convex at the sides. In this disposition, the dupe who cuts, as customary, at the breadth of the pack, will invariably find that he cuts his antagonist an honor; while the gambler, cutting at the length, will, as certainly, cut nothing for his victim which may count in the records of the game.

Any outrageous burst of indignation upon this shameful discovery would have affected me less than the silent contempt, or the sarcastic composure with which it was received.

“Mr. Wilson,” said our host, stooping to remove from beneath his feet an exceedingly luxurious cloak of rare furs, “Mr. Wilson, this is your property.” (The weather was cold; and, upon quitting my own room, I had thrown a cloak over my dressing wrapper, putting it off upon reaching the scene of play.) “I presume it is supererogatory to seek here (eyeing the folds of the garment with a bitter smile), for any farther evidence of your skill. Indeed we have had enough. You will see the necessity, I hope, of quitting Oxford — at all events, of quitting, instantly, my chambers.”

Abased, humbled to the dust as I then was, it is probable that I should have resented this galling language by immediate personal violence, had not my whole attention been at the moment arrested, by a fact of the most startling character. The cloak which I had worn was of a rare description of fur; how rare, how extravagantly costly, I shall not venture to say. Its fashion, too, was of my own fantastic invention; for I was fastidious, to a degree of absurd coxcombry, in matters of this frivolous nature. When, therefore, Mr. Preston reached me that which he had picked up upon the floor, and near the folding doors of the apartment, it was with an astonishment nearly bordering upon terror, that I perceived my own already hanging on my arm, (where I had no doubt unwittingly placed it,) and that the one presented me was but its exact counterpart in every particular. The singular being who had so disastrously exposed me, had been muffled, I remembered, in a cloak; and none had been worn at all by any of the members of our party with the exception of myself. Retaining some presence of mind, I took the one offered me by Preston, placed it, unnoticed, over my own, left the apartment with a resolute scowl of defiance, and, next morning ere dawn of day, commenced a hurried journey from Oxford to the continent, in a perfect agony of horror and of shame.

I fled in vain. My evil destiny pursued me as if in exultation, and proved, indeed, that the exercise of its mysterious dominion had as yet only begun. Scarcely had I set foot in Paris ere I had fresh evidence of the detestable interest taken by this Wilson in my concerns. Years flew, while I experienced no relief. Villain! — at Rome, with how untimely, yet with how spectral an officiousness, stepped he in between me and my ambition! At Vienna, too, at Berlin, and at Moscow! Where, in truth, had I not bitter cause to curse him within my heart? From his inscrutable tyranny did I at length flee, panic-stricken, as from a pestilence; and to the very ends of the earth I fled in vain.

And again, and again, in secret communion with my own spirit, would I demand the questions “Who is he? — whence came he? — and what are his objects?” But no answer was there found. And now I scrutinized, with a minute scrutiny, the forms, and the methods, and the leading traits of his impertinent supervision. But even here there was very little upon which to base a conjecture. It was noticeable, indeed, that, in no one of the multiplied instances in which he had of late crossed my path, had he so crossed it except to frustrate those schemes, or to disturb those actions, which, fully carried out, might have resulted in bitter mischief. Poor justification this, in truth, for an authority so imperiously assumed! Poor indemnity for natural rights of self-agency so pertinaciously, so insultingly denied!

I had also been forced to notice that my tormentor, for a very long period of time, (while scrupulously and with miraculous dexterity maintaining his whim of an identity of apparel with myself,) had so contrived it, in the execution of his varied interference with my will, that I saw not, at any moment, the features of his face. Be Wilson what he might, this, at least, was but the veriest of affectation, or of folly. Could he, for an instant, have supposed that, in my admonisher at Eton — in the destroyer of my honor at Oxford — in him who thwarted my ambition at Rome, my revenge in Paris, my passionate love at Naples, or what he falsely termed my avarice in Egypt — that in this, my arch-enemy and evil genius, I could fail to recognise the William Wilson of my schoolboy days — the namesake, the companion, the rival, the hated and dreaded rival at Dr. Bransby’s? Impossible! — But let me hasten to the last eventful scene of the drama. …

It was at Rome, during the carnival of 18– , that I attended a masquerade in the palazzo of the Neapolitan Duke Di Broglio. I had indulged more freely than usual in the excesses of the wine-table; and now the suffocating atmosphere of the crowded rooms irritated me beyond endurance. The difficulty, too, of forcing my way through the mazes of the company contributed not a little to the ruffling of my temper; … At this moment I felt a light hand placed upon my shoulder, and that ever-remembered, low, damnable whisper within my ear.

In a perfect whirlwind of wrath, I turned at once upon him who had thus interrupted me, and seized him violently by the collar. He was attired, as I had expected, like myself; wearing a large Spanish cloak, and a mask of black silk which entirely covered his features.

“Scoundrel!” I said, in a voice husky with rage, while every syllable I uttered seemed as new fuel to my fury, “scoundrel! impostor! accursed villain! you shall not — you shall not dog me unto death! Follow me, or I stab you where you stand,” and I broke my way from the room into a small ante-chamber adjoining, dragging him unresistingly with me as I went.

Upon entering, I thrust him furiously from me. He staggered against the wall, while I closed the door with an oath, and commanded him to draw. He hesitated but for an instant; then, with a slight sigh, drew in silence, and put himself upon his defence.

The contest was brief indeed. I was frantic with every species of wild excitement, and felt within my single arm the energy and the power of a multitude. In a few seconds I forced him by sheer strength against the wainscoting, and thus, getting him at mercy, plunged my sword, with brute ferocity, repeatedly through and through his bosom.

At this instant some person tried the latch of the door. I hastened to prevent an intrusion, and then immediately returned to my dying antagonist. But what human language can adequately portray that astonishment, that horror which possessed me at the spectacle then presented to view? The brief moment in which I averted my eyes had been sufficient to produce, apparently, a material change in the arrangements at the upper or farther end of the room. A large mirror, (so at first it appeared to me in my confusion), now stood where none had been perceptible before; and, as I stepped up to it in extremity of terror, mine own image, but with features all pale and dabbled in blood, advanced, with a feeble and tottering gait, to meet me.

Thus it appeared, I say, but was not. It was my antagonist — it was Wilson, who then stood before me in the agonies of his dissolution. Not thread in all the raiment — not a line in all the marked and singular lineaments of that face which was not, even identically, mine own! His mask and cloak lay where he had thrown them, upon the floor.

It was Wilson; but he spoke no longer in a whisper; and I could have fancied that I myself was speaking while he said —

“You have conquered, and I yield. Yet henceforward art thou also dead — dead to the world and its hopes. In me didst thou exist — and, in my death, see by this image, which is thine own, how utterly thou hast murdered thyself.”1

The Gemara actually considers this possibility:

מתני’ אין מעידין אלא על פרצוף פנים עם החוטם אע”פ שיש סימנין בגופו ובכליו אין מעידין אלא עד שתצא נפשו ואפי’ ראוהו מגוייד וצלוב והחיה אוכלת בו אין מעידין אלא עד ג’ ימים ר’ יהודה בן בבא אומר לא כל האדם ולא כל המקום ולא כל השעות שוין: …

גמ’ … אע”פ שיש סימנין וכו’: למימרא דסימנין לאו דאורייתא ורמינהי מצאו קשור בכיס ובארנקי ובטבעת או שנמצא בין כליו אפילו לזמן מרובה כשר
אמר אביי לא קשיא הא רבי אליעזר בן מהבאי הא רבנן דתניא אין מעידין על השומא ר’ אליעזר בן מהבאי אומר מעידין מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי דמר סבר סימנין דאורייתא ומר סבר סימנין דרבנן
אמר רבא דכולי עלמא סימנין דאורייתא הכא בשומא מצויה בבן גילו קמיפלגי מר סבר שומא מצויה בבן גילו ומר סבר אינה מצויה בבן גילו
ואיכא דאמרי הכא בשומא העשויה להשתנות לאחר מיתה קמיפלגי מר סבר עשויה להשתנות לאחר מיתה ומר סבר אינה עשויה להשתנות לאחר מיתה
ואיכא דאמרי אמר רבא דכולי עלמא סימנין דרבנן והכא בשומא סימן מובהק קא מיפלגי מר סבר סימן מובהק ומר סבר לאו סימן מובהק
ולהך לישנא דאמר רבא סימנין דאורייתא הא קתני אף על פי שיש סימנין בגופו ובכליו
גופו דארוך וגוץ כליו דחיישינן לשאלה
ואי חיישינן לשאלה חמור בסימני אוכף היכי מהדרינן
לא שיילי אינשי אוכפא דמסקיב ליה לחמרא
מצאו קשור בכיס ובארנקי ובטבעת היכי מהדרינן
טבעת חייש לזיופי כיס וארנקי מנחשי אינשי ולא מושלי
ואיבעית אימא כליו בחיורי וסומקי:2

It is not clear, however, whether normative Halachah accepts this concern over בן גילו and which specific methods of identification are called into question by it; on the one hand, Ra’avad suggests that any congenital deformation cannot be used for identification due to this concern:

בן גילו שנולדו שניהם ביום ובשעה אחת

ואני תמה על שאר ענינים הנולדים עם האדם כגון רגלו עקומה ויתר בידיו וברגליו שש ושש וכמה חידושין שנולדים עם האדם אם הם מצויים בבן גילו אם לא ומה הפרש בין השומא לשאר חידושין ולמה דברו על השומא יותר מכולן או שמא דברו עליה והוא הדין לכולם …3

But on the other hand, Rema, based on on a responsum of Rosh, rules unequivocally that such deformations are acceptable evidence of identity:

אבל היו להם בגופו סימנים מובהקים ביותר מעידין עליו:

הגה כגון שהיה לו יתר או חסר או שינוי באחד מאיבריו4

This contradiction is raised by Rav Moshe Zev of Byelostok, who initially suggests that the concern of בן גילו is non-normative, that even Ra’avad does not mean to cast aspersions on the reliability of identification via congenital deformation as a matter of practical Halachah, and that even if he does, we do not accept his view:

ואין מקום ליישב בזה כי אם על פי דרכינו דלעיל שהרי”ף והרמב”ם ז”ל פסקו לגמרי כלישנא בתרא דרבא דסימנים דרבנן וכו’ (וכמו שכתב הבית שמואל גם כן) ולפום האי לישנא מסקינן דלא חיישינן כלל למצויה בבן גילו אפילו בשומא אלא דהשומא מצד עצמה נמי אינה סימן מובהק מה שאין כן ביתרת

ואפשר דהראב”ד גופיה לא כתב כן כי אם בפשט ההלכה אליבא דלישנא קמא דרבא אבל לדינא גם הוא סובר כהרי”ף והרמב”ם …

ואפילו תימא שאין כן דעת הראב”ד ז”ל מכל מקום דברי הרי”ף והרמב”ם ז”ל יכריעו בזה לדינא כדעת הרא”ש ז”ל כמו שיתבאר בסמוך:5

Subsequently, however, he concludes that the entire concern of בן גילו is only with regard to סימנים אמצעים, but that סימנים מובהקים are powerful enough evidence to rule out the possibility:

וצריך לומר .. דדוקא בשומא דמצויה בהרבה בני אדם יש לחוש למצוי בבן גילו, אבל בסימן מובהק, כגון חסר או יתר בידיו, שאנו רואין בעין שאינו מצוי כי אם באחד מני אלף, עד שמפאת זה אנו חושבין זה לסימן מובהק, בודאי אין לחוש לבן גילו, שהרי אנו רואין שאינו מצוי כלל, ובהכרח לומר שאינו מצוי בבן גילו, שאם לא כן היה מצוי כנ”ל.6

שדוקא השומא שמצויה בהרבה בני אדם הוא יש לחוש לבן גילו אבל סימן מובהק כגון יתרת ושאר חדושים אשר עין בעין נראה שאינו מצוי כי אם באחד מני אלף או רבוא אנשים עד שמפאת זה אנו חושבים אותו לסימן מובהק אם כן היא גופא תכריע שאינה מצויה בבן גילו דאם לא כן היה לו להיות מצוי בעולם [ועיין שם שהאריך בזה]7

Ra’avad, on the other hand, maintains that our preconceptions about doppelgängers trump our empirical findings of the rarity of the סימן, and we follow the dictates of the former rather than the evidence of our lying eyes:

אולם דעת הראב”ד ז”ל יראה שהוא מפרש החשש של מצוי בבן גילו הוא זה שאף שלפי ראות עינינו יראה שהוא בגדר הסימנים על פי מה שאנו רואין שאינו מצוי בעולם מכל מקום אחר שאנו יודעים מדרך התולדה שיש לו להיות מצוי בבן גילו אין לנו לסמוך על מראות עינינו ואמרינן דודאי יש לו להיות מצוי בעולם אלא דאנן הוא דלא בקיאין ביה שפיר ולא ראינו אינו ראיה ואם כן גם ביתרת ושאר חדושים הבאין בתולדה יש לחוש לזה אף על פי שאין מצויין למראית העין [ועיין שם שהאריך עוד בזה]8

Le’Halachah, however, Rav Moshe Zev concludes that we are not concerned with בן גילו in the context of a סימן מובהק:

העולה מזה דיתרת בידיו או ברגליו ושאר חדושים הנולדים עם האדם להראב”ד ז”ל יש לחוש ומצוי בבן גילו ואף על פי שיראה למראית העין שאינו מצוי בעולם אבל דעת הרא”ש בתשובה דכל סימן מובהק שנראה לפי ראות עינינו שאינו מצוי בעולם אף על פי שבא בתולדה אין לחוש למצויה בבן גילו וכן פסק הרמ”א בהגה”ה דיתרת חשיב סימן מובהק

ואף על פי שהרמ”א לא ראה דברי הראב”ד שהובאו דבריו בספר שיטה מקובצת לבבא מציעא שלא היה בדפוס בימיו מכל מקום יש לסמוך על זה על פי דברי הרי”ף והרמב”ם שפסקו לגמרי כלישנא בתרא דרבא דסימנים דרבנן ולפום האי לישנא מסיק בש”ס דכולי עלמא שומא אינה מצויה בבן גילו וכל שכן שאר חדושים הנולדים.9

Rav Yosef Shaul Nathanson also maintains that בן גילו is only a concern when dealing with a סימן אמצעי, not a סימן מובהק:

דעד כאן לא חיישינן לזאת [ר”ל, דחיישינן למצוי בבן גילו] רק למאן דאמר סימנים דאורייתא ואם כן לא נצטרך לחדש דסימן מובהק הוה כעדים ורק דכל סימן הוה דאורייתא אף בסימן בינוני ואם כן ממילא שוב כל שיש לחוש שמצוי בבן גילו שוב גם סימן בינוני לא קחשיב דמצוי בבן גילו אבל לדידן דקיימא לן סימנים דרבנן אם כן על פנים מוכרחין אנו לחדש דסימן מובהק הוה כמו עדים ואם כן שוב אין לחוש ולא שייך לומר דאנן חוששין שמא סימנים דאורייתא ושוב חיישינן שמא מצוי בבן גילו דעד כאן לא חיישינן שמא מצוי בבן גילו היינו בשומא דלא הוה סימן מובהק .. ואינו רק סימן בינוני אם כן כל שמצוי בבן גילו שוב הוה סימן גרוע כחוורי וסומקי … וזה ברור לפע”ד10

I am somewhat puzzled by this view, particularly as explicated Rav Moshe Zev; it would seem that insofar as we reject the view of Ra’avad (as explained by Rav Moshe Zev) and accept the reliability of our empirical conclusion that the incidence of the סימן מובהק is exceedingly rare, the only way to reconcile this rarity with the (stipulated) fact that בני גיל share סימנים is by assuming that the very existence of a בן גיל itself is exceedingly rare! But if so, why are we ever concerned about the possibility of a בן גיל, even in the context of a סימן אמצעי?

But whichever סימנים are shared between בני גיל, they evidently, unlike a man and his doppelgänger, do not actually resemble each other to the point of indistinguishableness; this point is articulated by Rav Meir Eisenstädter (Maharam Ash (Imre Esh)):

ולפע”ד זהי דעת בעל העיטור שתמה עליו הבית יוסף במ”ש

ומסתברא דליכא סימן מובהק אחרינא בגופו אלא הכרת פנים כו’ ולא סמכינן על שום סימן אחר אלא אהכרת פנים וכו’

והקשה הבית יוסף דמשמע מלשון העיטור שאין שום סימן אפילו מובהק מהני והרי הוא עצמו כתב גבי גט דמהני נקב יש בו נקב בצד אות פלוני …

ואולי דעת העיטור כמ”ש (הרא”ש) [הראב”ד] הובא בספר שיטה מקובצת בבא מציעא … ונראה דזה דעת העיטור גם כן דאת”ל דפליגי בשומא מצויה בבן גילו הוא הדין לכל שאר החידושין הנולדים עם האדם שמצויים בבן גילו רק פרצוף פנים עם החוטם אף שגם הוא אינו רק כמו סימן מובהק מכל מקום אין לחוש שיהיה בן גילו דומה לו עד שאין הפרש כלל שזה מגדולתו של מלך מלכי המלכים שאין דומין לזה בהכרת פניהם והכי קאמר העיטור שאין שום סימן מובהק אחרינא בגופו דהיינו הנולדים עם האדם דומיא דהכרת פנים כי על הכל יש לחוש שמצוי בבן גילו אלא הכרת פנים בלבד אבל שנוים המתחדשים אחר כך כמו נקב יש בצד אות פלוני בגט מודה העיטור דמהני:11

Maharam Ash’s last line is another crucial limit on the resemblance between בני גיל: it only extends to congenital features, but not to those acquired afterward. This point is also made by Rav Yehezkel Landau (Noda Be’Yehudah)

הנה האמת אין דרכי כל כך לעיין בתשובות אחרונים ואף על פי כן הואיל והבית שמואל הביאו עיינתי דרך העברה בדברי המשאת בנימין וראיתי שכתב וגם הוא מבואר בהדיא שהרושם הזה בא לא על ידי שמתחלה היה לו שומא באותו מקום ונעקרה השומא ממקום מושבה ונעשה שם רושם קטן ההוא אם כן לא היה כח הרושם עדיף משומא דאתי מינה והשומא כולי עלמא סבירא ליה דלא הוי סימן מובהק והוא הדין רושם דאתי מינה עכ”ד המשאת בנימין.

ובעיני אין דמיונו עולה יפה דאי שומא אינו נחשב סימן מובהק לפי שמצויה בבן גילו הא ודאי שאין הדברים אמורים אלא בדבר שהוא בטבע האדם מצד התולדה או אף במקרה המתחדש בגופו מצד הגוף כמו שומא שגידולה העור שלא על פי סבה אמרינן בבן גילו שוה לו בתולדה אבל בדבר המתחדש על פי מעשה כמו מכה ורושם מחמת פצע וחבורה או אף מחמת שומא שנעקרה וכי בשביל שזה חיכך בהשומא או עשה שאר דברים ועקר השומא בכח גם בן גילו יעשה כן בודאי שאין זה דמיון כלל.

וז”ל הראב”ד … והרי שלא נסתפק אלא על מה שהוא מן הנולדים אם האדם אבל מה שמתחדש בגוף על ידי מעשה לא עלה על הדעת שיהיה מצוי בבן גילו. ואם כן לפי טעם זה ודאי שאין דברי המשאת בנימין נכונים.12

  1. Edgar Allan Poe, William Wilsonlink. []
  2. יבמות קכ.-: – קשר []
  3. שיטה מקובצת, בבא מציעא פרק שני כז: (בשם הראב”ד) ד”ה והכא בשומא, הובא בגליון רע”א אה”ע סימן י”ז סעיף כ”ד אות ל”א ובאוצר הפוסקים שם ס”ק קצ”א עמוד 260 []
  4. שלחן ערוך שם []
  5. שו”ת אגודת אזוב סימן י”ח אות ד’ – קשר, ועיין במראות הצובאות בפתיחה לסעיף כ”ד ד”ה (ג) הם סימנים המובהקים ביותר, והובאו דבריו באוצר הפוסקים שם []
  6. מראות הצובאות אות צ”ז []
  7. אגודת אזוב שם אות ה’, הובא באוצה”פ שם []
  8. אגודת אזוב שם אות ו []
  9. אגודת אזוב שם אות ז []
  10. שו”ת שואל ומשיב, מהדורא שתיתאי סימן ט”ו ד”ה והנה ע”ד, הובא באוצה”פ שם לוח הסימנים אות י”ז עמוד קמ”ו. ובעצם השאלה אם למעשה חוששים לבן גילו, הנה באמת לא נזכרה ענין של בן גילו כלל בשלחן ערוך, אולם כמה פוסקים אכן נקטו בדבריהם שקיים חשש זה, וכמו שהובאו דבריהם בדין השומא באוצה”פ ס”ק קפ”ט מאות ב’ (עמוד קי.) והלאה []
  11. שו”ת אמרי אש, חלק שני (אה”ע) סימן ט”ו ד”ה ולפע”ד – קשר, הובא באוצה”פ ס”ק קצ”א שם []
  12. שו”ת נודע ביהודה (ניו יורק תש”ך) קמא אה”ע סימן נ”א עמוד מה: ד”ה ומה שנכנס – קשר, הובא באוצה”פ ס”ק קצ”ח אות ב’ עמוד קמג:‏ []

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *