תלמוד על גיטין 5:1

HALAKHAH: “If the daughter married, the husband has to sustain her,” etc. What is the status of the ketubah stipulations if he wrote them in the document²⁹All the stipulations enumerated in Mishnaiot 4:7 ff. are enforceable even if they are not written in the ketubah. What is the legal difference between a ketubah in which the stipulations are explicit and one in which they are implicit?? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he wrote them for emphasis³⁰Without legal consequences. (In Rashi’s interpretation of the Babli, 102b, Rav Ashi agrees.); Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he wrote them to collect from encumbered property. Rebbi Jeremiah switched the traditions³¹He switched the attributions to R. Joḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish. Therefore, the discussion proceeds without referring to names.. Rebbi Yudan said, a Mishnah supports him who said, he wrote them for emphasis, since we stated there³²Mishnah Giṭṭin 5:3.: “One does not foreclose from mortgaged property to indemnify for produce or investment³³If somebody sold a field, the title to which was later disputed and the court awarded the title to another person who then takes the field away from the buyer. The innocent buyer then has regress on the fraudulent seller. Real estate is always sold with a title guarantee; therefore the value of the field can be taken from the seller’s mortgaged property (depending on the time of sale). But both the value of the standing crop which the buyer lost, and the value of the investments the buyer made in the property cannot be recovered from mortgaged property. The main difference is that the privileged amount, the value of the field, is a well-defined sum written in the sales contract, whereas the rest are open-ended obligations which cannot be foreseen and whose inclusion in the causes for foreclosure would bring all real estate transactions to a halt., or sustenance of widow and daughters³⁴These also are open-ended obligations which cannot be estimated beforehand; they cannot be enforced against mortgage holders, in contrast to the ketubah sum which is well-defined., in order not to impede the economy.” Are [the first categories] not based on a document? Here also based on the document³⁵Since the regress of the buyer on the fraudulent seller is based on the sales contract, and it turns out that only part of the claim can be satisfied by foreclosure, it shows that the ketubah document also has parts which have the status of certificates of indebtedness and other parts which cannot be enforced by foreclosure.. Rebbi Ḥanania said, “since her status is that of a creditor”! Is that not based on a document? Here also based on the document³⁶The wife’s daughter’s claim is also based on her mother’s ketubah document and is enforceable as a creditor’s claim but her mother’s own claim to sustenance as a widow is based on the same document and not thus enforceable..

How do we hold? If she⁸¹The female Hebrew slave who when she becomes an adult either is a wife or a free adult; cf. Note 75. The Babli (Giṭṭin 65a) restricts the female Hebrew slave to redeeming heave of produce not grown in the soil (in a flower pot without a hole). This answer is very questionable for many reasons. is an adult, she acquired [her freedom] by the signs [of puberty]⁸²It is argued (Mekhilta Mišpaṭim3) that the verse (Ex. 21:7) which gave the father the right to sell his daughter also restricted her servitude to the period in which the father had this right, before she became an adult.; if she is a minor, may a minor acquire? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said before Rebbi Yose, explain it following him who said, a minor may give heave⁸³Cf. Terumot 1:1, Notes 56–58.. He said to him, even following him who said, a minor may give heave, may a minor acquire? Following the opinion of the rabbis there⁸⁴In Babylonia. it is acceptable since there, they say in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: One to whom one gives a nut and he throws it away, a pebble and he keeps it, what is found in his hand is as if found on a garbage heap; a nut and he keeps it, a pebble and he throws it away, what is robbed from him is robbed because of communal peace; a nut or a pebble he takes, hides them, and produces them later, what is robbed from him is total robbery. He can acquire for himself but not for others⁸⁵In the Babli, Giṭṭin 65a, the formulation (by Rava, student of Rav Naḥman) is: “There are three stages for minors. If he throws away a pebble and takes a nut, he can acquire for himself but not for others; for school children, their buying is buying and their selling selling, for movables; if they reached the time of vows (cf. Terumot, Mishnah 1:3, Note 105) their vows and dedications are valid; but to sell inherited real estate {without permission of the court} one must be 20 years old.”. Rav Huna said, just as he can acquire for himself so he can acquire for others. Everybody agrees⁸⁶The Babli, Baba Qama 106b, concurs. that his gift is not a gift since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “If a man give.” The gift of a man is a gift, but the gift of a minor is no gift, the words of the Sages. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, robbing from him is not total robbery unless he grew two pubic hairs. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that is, to recover from him by a law suit, but to have to bring a sacrifice for [a false] oath only if he grew two pubic hairs⁸⁷The minor, or an adult representing him, can successfully prosecute the robber from a minor in court but if in the course of the proceedings the accused swears falsely that he did not take anything, he is not obliged to bring (or, if he has a guilty conscience, he is barred from bringing) a guilt sacrifice since his robbery was forbidden by police law, not biblical law.. But following the rabbis here, Rebbi Yose asked that even for himself he should not be able to acquire since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “To his neighbor”, until he be like his neighbor. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Samuel ben Rav Isaac explained it by the method of small children. As we have stated there⁸⁸Mishnah Giṭṭin 5:9. The quote here shows that ה and א were both silent.: “For school children, their buying is buying and their selling selling, for movables.” But did we not state⁸⁹Mishnah Eruvin 7:6. In order to turn a dead-end street into a private domain for the purpose of carrying on the Sabbath, one has to affix to it a symbolic gate and then all residents of the dead-end street have to contribute to the food for a common meal. It is acceptable that one person designate the food, e. g., a wine barrel, and then appoints somebody to acquire for the other dwellers their part for this Sabbath. The qualifications in that Mishnah are the same as in the Mishnah here, with the same questions about the qualifications of the female Hebrew slave. {Since the devices of participation and eruv are ascribed to King Solomon, the mention of the Hebrew slave can be justified in that case.}: “He cannot make them acquire through his minor son or daughter or his Canaanite male or female slave, because their hand is like his hand.” The rabbis of Caesarea say, here a minor with knowledge⁹⁰It seems that a “minor with knowledge” is a minor who reached the time of vows, cf. Tosaphot Sanhedrin68b, s. v. קטן., there a minor without knowledge.

Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: One stated this only for the ketubah of a mina or 200 [zuz]⁵⁴The amount the husband has to promise from his own money.. But a ketubah of 1’000 denar⁵⁵The greatest part of which is represented by the dowry, her own family’s contribution. she collects forever⁵⁶Mortmain dowry is secured by a general mortgage on the husband’s properties; there seems to be no reason to treat this mortgage differently from the mortgage executed for a third party lender.. Rebbi Abbahu quoted in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Even a ketubah of 1’000 denar she can collect only up to 25 years. This disagreement parallels the following disagreement, as was stated there: “Torts are estimated from choice land, creditor’s claims from average, and a woman’s ketubah from the least valuable.⁵⁷Mishnah Giṭṭin 5:1. Since mortgages were usually not written on specific parcels, there are general rules governing foreclosures if the debtor cannot pay cash. The categories mentioned here are explained in Chapter 9, Note 195.” Rebbi Jeremiah said to him, this was stated only for the ketubah of a mina or 200 [zuz], but a ketubah of 1’000 denar is evaluated in terms of average quality land⁵⁶Mortmain dowry is secured by a general mortgage on the husband’s properties; there seems to be no reason to treat this mortgage differently from the mortgage executed for a third party lender.. But Rebbi Yose said, even a ketubah of 1’000 denar she collects only from the least valuable land. It turns out that Rebbi Yose follows Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Jeremiah Rebbi Joshua ben Levi. As we have stated there⁵⁸Mishnah Peah 3:9, Note 151.: “If somebody signs over his property to his sons and signs over some real estate to his wife, she lost her claim to ketubah.” ⁵⁹This text is a slightly shortened version of a text in Peah 3:9, explained there in Notes 182–189. Rav said, if he lets them acquire through her. Samuel says, if he distributes in her presence. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, they stated here a relaxation of the laws of ketubah. Rebbi Abba said, the reason of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina is that it applies not only to a ketubah of a mina or two hundred, but even regarding a ketubah of one thousand denar they proclaimed a relaxation of the laws of ketubah.