7. If9 a man betrothed a woman on the condition that she was under no vow and she was found to be under a vow, her betrothal is not valid. If he married her making no conditions, and she was found to be under a vow, she may be put away without her Ketubah. [If he betrothed her] on the condition that there were no defects in her, and defects were found in her, her betrothal is not valid. If he married her making no conditions and defects were found in her, she may be put away without her Ketubah. All defects which disqualify priests'0 disqualify women also.
8. If defects were found in her while she was yet in her father’s house, the father must bring proof that these defects arose in her after she was betrothed, and that his field was laid waste." If she had entered into the control of the husband, the husband must bring proof that these defects were in her before she was betrothed, and that his bargain was a bargain made in error. So R. Meir. But the Sages say: This applies only to secret defects; but he may not make complaint of manifest defects. And if there was a bath-house in that town he may not make complaint even of secret defects, since he can inquire about her from her women kinsfolk.
9. If defects arose in the husband they may not compel him to put away his wife. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel said: This applies only to the lesser defects, but for the greater defects they can compel him to put away his wife.
10. And these are they that are compelled to put away their wives: he that is afflicted with boils, or that has a polypus, or that collects [dog’s excrements], or that is a coppersmith or a tanner, whether these defects were in them before they married or whether they arose after they married. And of all these R. Meir said: Although the husband made it a condition with her [to marry him despite his defects], she may say, ‘I thought that I could endure it, but now I cannot endure it’. But the Sages say: She must endure him in spite of herself, save only him that is afflicted with boils, because she will enervate him. It once happened in Sidon that a tanner died and had a brother who was a tanner. The Sages said: She may say, ‘Thy brother I could endure; but thee I cannot endure’.
1 e.g. that lewd folk frequented such a place.
1 ‘Thy vow shall be annulled only on condition...’
3 e.g. certain foolish talk. 4 Transgressing Nura. i8,lf.
5 Transgressing Lev. i8**. 4 Transgressing Num. isuff.
7 Transgressing Deut. 23“. * The Cambridge text reads: ‘and this is an addition’.
256 THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM 8. I. If a woman inherited goods before she was betrothed, the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel agree that she may sell them or give them away and that her act is valid. If she inherited them after she was betrothed, the School of Shammai say: She may sell them. And the School of Hillel say: She may not sell them. But they agree that if she sold them or gave them away her act is valid. R. judah said: They inquired before Rabban Gamaliel, ‘Since [the betrothed husband] gets possession of the woman, does he not get possession of her goods also?’ He answered: ‘We are at a loss [to find reason for giving him right] over her new [possessions],1 and would ye even burden us with the old also!’ If she inherited [goods] after she was married, both agree that if she sold them or gave them away the husband may take them out of the hands of the buvers. If [she inherited them] before she married and she then married, Rabban Gamaliel says: If she sold them or gave them away her act is valid. R. Hanamah b. Akabya said: They inquired before Rabban Gamaliel, ‘Since he gets possession of the woman, does he not get possession of her goods also?’ He answered, ‘We are at a loss [to lind reason for giving him right] over her new [possessions], and would ye even burden us with the old also!’
2. R. Simeon makes distinction between one kind of goods and another: goods that are known to the husband she may not sell, and if she sold them or gave them away the act is void; and goods that are not known to the husband she may not sell, but if she sold them or gave them away her act is valid.
3. If she inherited money, land should be bought therewith, and the husband has the use of it. [If she inherited] produce that was already reaped, land should be bought therewith, and the husband has the use of it; and if it was still unreaped, R. Meir says: They estimate how much the land is worth with the produce and how much without it; with the differ¬ ence land is bought and the husband has the use of it. But the Sages say: What is unreaped falls to him and what is reaped falls to the wife, and with it land is bought and the husband has the use of it.
4. Whereinsoever he has advantage at her coming in [to him in marriage], therein he suffers disadvantage at her going forth; and whereinsoever he suffers disadvantage at her coming in, therein he has advantage at her go¬ ing forth. At her coming in unreaped produce falls to him, and at her going forth it falls to her; and at her coming in reaped produce falls to her, and at her going forth it falls to him.
5. If she inherited old bondmen and bondwomen they should be sold and land bought with their price, and the husband has the use of it. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: She should not sell them, because they are the pride of her father’s house. If she inherited old olive-trees or vines they should be sold as wood and land bought with their price, and the husband has the use of it. R. Judah says: She should not sell them, because they are the pride of her father’s house. If a man spent aught on his wife’s property,2 whether he spent much and gained little, or spent little and gained much, what he has spent he has spent, and what he has gained he has gained. But if he spent and gained naught, let him swear how much he has spent and take [compensation from the property].
: To justify his claim on property which she newly inherits after marriage.
3 Of which he has the use, namely melog property. See App. I. 24; Yeb. 7*.
b. If1 a woman awaiting levirate marriage inherited property, the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel agree that she may sell it or give it away and the act will be valid. If she died what should be done with her Ketubah and property that comes in and goes out with her? The School of Shammai say: The heirs of her [deceased] husband share with the heirs of her father. But the School of Hillel say: Her [yon bcarzel] property falls [equally] to them [both]; the Ketubah falls to the [deceased] husband’s heirs, and the property that comes in and goes out with her falls into the possession of her father’s heirs.
7. If his brother2 left money, land is bought therewith and he has the use of it. [If he left] produce that was already reaped, land is bought therewith, and he has the use of it; if unreaped produce, R. Meir says: They estimate how much the land is worth with the produce and how much without it, and with the difference iand is bought and he has the use of it. But the Sages say: The unreaped produce falls to him, and as for the reaped produce, whosoever comes first gets possession: if he came first he gets possession; if she came first land is bought therewith and he has the use of it. But3 if he had consummated marriage with her, she counts as his wife in all respects save that her Ketubah is a charge on her first husband’s goods.
8. He may not say to her, ‘Here lies thy Ketubah on the table’,4 but all his goods5 are surety for her Ketubah. So, too,6 a man may not say to his wife, ‘Here lies thy Ketubah on the table’, but all his goods are surety for her Ketubah. If he divorced her, she may claim only her Ketubah. If he married her again she is like to all other wives;7 and she may claim naught save only her Ketubah.8 9. 1. If a man declared to his [betrothed] wife in writing, ‘I will have neither right nor claim to thy property’,9 he may yet have the use of it during her lifetime and inherit her property when she dies. If so, to what purpose did he declare to her in writing, ‘I will have neither right nor claim to thy property?’ — so that if she sold it or gave it away her act should be valid. If he declared to her in writing, ‘I will have neither right nor claim to thy property or to the fruits10 thereof’, he may not enjoy the fruits during her lifetime, but he may inherit her property when she dies. R. Judah says: He can in anywise enjoy the fruits of the fruits11 unless he declared to her in writing, ‘I will have neither right nor claim to thy property or to the fruits thereof, or to the fruits of the fruits thereof, and so on without end’. If he declared to her in writing, ‘I will have neither right nor claim to thy property or to the fruits thereof, or to the fruits of the fruits thereof during thy lifetime or at thy death’, he may not enjoy the fruits during her lifetime and when she dies he may not inherit her property. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: If she dies he may still inherit her property because he made a condition contrary to what is enjoined in the 1 His brother who died childless ieaving a widow with whom he contracts levirate marriage.
J Yeb. 4*. 4 ‘And the rest of what I have inherited from my brother 1 will sell.’
s Inherited from the brother. 6 Many texts omit the following sentence.
7 All his property remains as surety for her Ketubah.
% She cannot claim her old one and a new one also. See below, 9*.
4 ‘When thou art married to me.' 10 The use and consequent profits.
1 1 The use of what he had added to the value of the original property.
258 THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM Law,1 and if a man makes a condition contrary to what is enjoined in the Law, his condition is void.2 2. If a man died and left a wife, a creditor, and heirs, and had goods on deposit or on loan in the hand of others,3 R. Tarfon says: The property should be given to the one that is at the [greatest legal] disadvantage. R. Akiba says: They may not show pity in a legal suit: but, rather, it must be given to the heirs; for all the others need to swear to their claim on oath, but not so the heirs.
3. If a man left reaped produce, whosoever comes first gets possession thereof. If the wife gained possession of more than her Ketubah assigned to her, or a creditor more than his due, the surplus, R. Tarfon says, should be given to the one that is at the [greatest legal] disadvantage. R. Akiba says: They may not show pity in a legal suit: but, rather, it is given to the heirs; for all the others need to swear to their claim on oath, but not so the heirs.
4. If a man set up his wife as a shopkeeper or appointed her a guardian, he may exact of her an oath whensoever he will.4 R. Eliezer says: Even5 concerning her spindle or her dough.
5. If he declared to her in writing, ‘I will require of thee neither vow nor oath’, he may not exact of her an oath, but he may exact an oath of her heirs and her lawful successors. [If he said,] T will require neither vow nor oath of thee, thine heirs, or lawful successors’, he may not exact an oath of her, her heirs, or her legal successors, but his heirs may exact an oath of her, her heirs, or her lawful successors. [If he said,] ‘Neither I, nor my heirs, nor my lawful successors will require a vow or an oath of thee, thy heirs, or thy lawful successors’, he may not exact an oath of her, nor may his heirs or lawful successors, whether of her or her heirs or her lawful successors.
6. If she went from her husband’s grave to her father’s house, or returned to her father-in-law’s house and was not made a guardian, the heirs may not exact an oath of her. But if she was made a guardian the heirs may exact an oath of her concerning [her trust during] the time after [her husband’s death], but not the time before.
7. If6 a woman impaired her Ketubah, the rest may not be paid to her unless she swears [to her claim] on oath; if one witness testified against her that it had been paid [in full], she may not receive payment unless she swears [to her claim] on oath; she may not receive payment from the property of orphans or from assigned property or from property of one that is not present, unless she swears [to her claim] on oath.
8. How does it apply ‘if a woman impaired her Ketubah ’? If her Ketubah was a thousand zuz, and he said to her, ‘Thou didst receive thy Ketubah [in full]’, and she said, ‘I received but one mina', the rest may not be paid to her unless she swears [to her claim] on oath. How does it apply if one witness testified against her that it had been paid [in full]’? If her Ketubah was a thousand zuz and he said to her, ‘Thou didst receive thy Ketubah [in full]’, and she said, ‘I have not received it’, and a witness testi¬ fied against her that it had been paid, she may not be paid unless she swears 1 Num. 2711 has a superfluous ‘and he shall possess it (f.)’, interprcted to mean ‘and a man shall inherit from his wife'. 2 Cf. B.M. 7“; B.B. 8*.
3 Who lay claim to payment out of a deceased's estate. See Shebu. 7,B.
4 Shebu. 7*. 5 Of his wife when she is not a shopkeeper or guardian.
* Shebu. 7 [to her claim] on oath. How does it apply with ‘assigned property’? If a man had sold his property to others and she seeks to be paid by them that had bought it, she may not be paid unless she swears [to her claim] on oath. How does it apply with ‘the property of orphans’? If the husband died and left his property to [his] orphans and she seeks to be paid by the orphans, she may not be paid unless she swears [to her claim] on oath. How does it apply with ‘property of one that is not present’? If a man went beyond the sea and she seeks to be paid in his absence, she may not be paid unless she swears [to her claim] on oath. R. Simeon says: If she claims her Ketubah the heirs may exact an oath of her, but if she does not claim her Ketubah the heirs may not exact an oath of her.
9. If she brought forth a bill of divorce without a Ketubah she is entitled to her Ketubah; but if [she brought forth] a Ketubah without a bill of divorce and said, ‘My bill of divorce is lost’, but he said, ‘My quittance is lost’,1 (so, too, if a creditor produced a bill of indebtedness without a prozbol),2 the like of these may not be paid. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Since the time of danger3 a woman is entitled to her Ketubah without a bill of divorce, and a creditor is entitled to his due without a prozbol. [If a woman brought forth] two bills of divorce and two Ketubahs, she is entitled to two Ketubahs. [If she brought forth] two Ketubahs and one bill of divorce, or one Ketubah and two bills of divorce, or a Ketubah and a bill of divorce and a [proof of her husband’s] death,4 she is entitled only to one Ketubah; for if a man puts away his wife and then receives her back, he receives her back only on the conditions of her first Ketubah. If a father gave his son, that was a minor, in marriage, her Ketubah 5 remains valid, since on this condition6 he took her for his wife. If a man became a prose¬ lyte and his wife with him, her Ketubah remains valid, since on this condi¬ tion he has kept her as his wife.
10. 1. If a man was married to two wives and died, the [claim of the] first wife [to payment of her Ketubah ] comes before [the claim of] the second, and [the claim of] the heirs of the first wife before the [claim of the] heirs of the second. If he married a first wife and she died, and he married a second wife and then himself died, [the claim of] the second wife and her heirs comes before [the claim of] the heirs of the first wife.
2. If a man was married to two wives and they died and he then died, and the orphans claim the Ketubah of their mother, and there is but [enough for] the two Ketubahs, they share equally. If there was a surplus of one denar, each of them takes the Ketubah of their mother.7 If the orphans said, ‘We reckon the value of the property of our father at one denar more’, so that they may take their mother’s Ketubah, they do not listen to them, but they estimate the value of the property before the court.
3. If there was property destined to accrue8 [to the heirs] it does not count as property [already] held in possession. R. Simeon says: Even if 1 ‘But I have paid her her Ketubah.' 1 App. I. 34.
J When oppressive edicts forbade the observance of Jewish rites, including the issue of bills of divorce and prozbols. Cf. M.Sh. 41'.
* He had married her, divorced her, married her again, and then died.
s Written when she was a virgin, assigning her 200 zuz; it is still valid for that amount although when he came of age she was no longer virgin. 6 The assigning of 200 zuz.
7 And share the remaining denar with the other heirs. See Ket. 4'”.
6 Ilians, business profits, and the like. Cf. Bckh. S’.
260 THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM there was also movable property, it is of none account unless there was also there immovable property wforth one denar more than the charge of the two Ketubahs.
4. If a man was married to three wives and he died and the Ketubah of one was one mina, of another 200 denars, and of the other 300 denars, and he left property worth only one mina, they divide this equally. If he left 200 denars, the one whose Ketubah was one mina takes 50 denars, while they whose Ketubahs were 200 denars and 300 denars take each three golden denars.1 If he left 300 denars, she whose Ketubah was one mina takes 50 denars, she whose Ketubah was 200 denars takes one mina, and she whose Ketubah was 300 denars takes six golden denars.2 So, too, if three persons put money into a fund, and make a loss or a profit, they share in the like fashion.
5. If a man was married to four wives and he died, the [claim of the] first wife comes before that of the second, that of the second before that of the third, and that of the third before that of the fourth. The first must swear on oath to the second, and the second to the third, and the third to the fourth [that she has not received her Ketubah]; and the fourth may be paid without swearing [to her claim] on oath. Ben Nanos says: And should she have this advantage because she is the last? — she, too, may not be paid unless she has sworn [to her claim] on oath. If they were all put away on the same day, whosoever preceded her fellow even by an hour acquires [first] right. Thus in Jerusalem they used to declare in writing the hour [of the divorce]. If they were all put away in the same hour, and there was property worth only one mina, they share equally.
6. If a man was married to two wives and he then sold his field,3 and the first wife had declared to the buyer in writing, ‘I have neither right nor claim against thee,’ the second wife may take [her due] from the buyer, and the first wife from the second wife, and the buyer from the first wife, and so they may go on in turn until they make some compromise between them. So, too, with a creditor,4 or a woman that is a creditor.5 11. x. The widow receives her maintenance from the property of the orphans, and the work of her hands belongs to them; but they are not responsible for her burial. Her heirs that inherit her Ketubah are respon¬ sible for her burial.
2. A widow, whether she became a widow after betrothal or after wed¬ lock, may sell [property that was security for her Ketubah ] without the consent of the court. R. Simeon says: [If she became a widow] after wed¬ lock she may sell without the consent of the court; but if after betrothal [only], she may not sell save with the consent of the court, since she has no claim to maintenance, and she that has no claim to maintenance may not sell save with the consent of the court.
3. If a widow sold her Ketubah or part of it, of if she pledged her ~ 5 silver denars. App. II, A. 1 150 silver denars.
3 Which was security lor both their Ketubahs.
4 e.g. if a debtor sold his two fields, whose value covered his debt, to two buyers, and the creditor declared to the second buyer that he had no claim against him, the creditor may seize the property of the first buyer, and the first the property of the second, and then the second can recover from the creditor, the creditor from the first, and so forth.
s For her Ketubah. If the husband sold two fields, worth the value of her Ketubah, and she declared to the second buyer that she had no claim against him, she may satisfy her claim from the property of the first, 3cc.
Ketubah or part of it, or if she gave away her Ketubah or part of it, she may not sell what is left save with the consent of the court. But the Sages say: She may sell it [piecemeal] even four or five times, or sell it for the sake of maintenance without the consent of the court and declare in writing, ‘I have sold it for the sake of maintenance’. If she was divorced she may only sell with the consent of the court.
4. If a widow whose Ketubah was 200 denars sold1 what was worth one mina for 200 denars, or what was worth 200 denars for one mina, she has [thereby] received her Ketubah. If her Ketubah was one mina and she sold what was worth one mina and a denar for one mina, her bargain is void. Even if she said, ‘I will repay the denar to the heirs’, her bargain is void. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Her bargain remains valid always so long as there is [property] enough for her to leave from a field an area of nine kabs,2 or from a garden an area of a half-&z&; or, according to R. Akiba, an area of a quarter-&t6. If her Ketubah was 400 zuz and she sold [part]3 * * * to one person for one mina and [a second part] to another person for one mina* and to another what was worth one mina and a denar for one mina,s the bargain with the last person is void, but all the rest remain valid.
5. If the judges’ assessment0 valued the property at one-sixth too little or one-sixth too much, their bargain is void. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Their bargain remains valid: otherwise of what worth is the power of a court? But if they drew up a deed-of-inspection,7 even if they sold for 200 denars what was worth one mina, or for one mina what was worth 200 denars, their bargain remains valid.
6. If a woman had exercised right of Refusal,8 or was within the secondary grade9 [of kinship to her husband], or was sterile, she may not lay claim to her Ketubah or to the increase10 [on her melog property], or to alimony, or to indemnity [for loss on her melog property]; but if at the out¬ set he married her with the knowledge that she was sterile she may lay claim to her Ketubah. If a widow" was married to a High Priest, or a divorced woman or one that had performed halitzah was married to a common priest, or a bastard or a Nethinah to an Israelite, or the daughter of an Israelite to a Nathin or a bastard, these may lay claim to their Ketubah.
12. 1. If a man married a woman and she stipulated that he should main¬ tain her daughter for five years, he is bound to maintain her for five years. If she was [afterward] married to another and she stipulated to him also that he should maintain her daughter for five years, he, too, is bound to maintain her for five years. The first husband may not say, ‘If she comes to my house I will maintain her’, but he must send her her maintenance to the place where her mother is.12 So, too, the two husbands may not say, ‘We will maintain her jointly’, but the one must maintain her and the other must give her the cost of her maintenance.
2. When she is married her husband must give her maintenance, while 1 Land from her husband’s estate. 2 App. II, E.
3 Of the ground that was security for her Ketubah.
4 Add: ‘and a third part to another for one mina'.
3 So realizing more than the claim of her Ketubah.
6 When they valued and sold the deceased husband’s property to pay his widow’s Ketubah.
7 Proclaiming the sale and permitting public scrutiny of the property.
10 Profits gained through the use of her property. " See Yeb. 2*.
12 Variant: ‘where she is (with her mother)'.
262 THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM they each give her the cost of her maintenance; when they die their [own] daughters receive maintenance from the unassigned property, while she receives maintenance from property [thereto] assigned, since she is, as it were, a creditor. The prudent-minded used to declare in writing, *...on condition that I maintain thy daughter five years, such time [only] as thou continuest with me’.
3. If a widow said, ‘I do not wish to leave my husbands house’, the heirs cannot say to her, ‘Go to thy father’s house and we will maintain thee’, but they must maintain her in her husband’s house and give her a dwelling befitting her condition. If she said, ‘I do not wish to leave my father’s house’, the heirs may say to her, ‘If thou continuest with us thou wilt receive maintenance; but if thou continuest not with us thou wilt not receive maintenance’. If she so pleaded because she was but a child and they were but children, they must maintain her even while she is in her father’s house.
4. So long as she continues in her father’s house she may claim her Ketubah at any time; so long as she continues in her husband’s house she may claim her Ketubah only at the end of twenty-five years, since in twenty- five years she can render a seemly return for her Ketubah. So R. Meir, who spoke in the name of Rabban Gamaliel. But the Sages say: So long as she is in her husband’s house she may claim her Ketubah at any time; so long as she is in her father’s house she may claim her Ketubah only at the end of twenty-five years. If she died her heirs must lay their claim to her Ketubah within twenty-five years.
13. 1. There were two judges of civil law1 in Jerusalem, Admon and Hanan b. Abishalom. Hanan gave two decisions and Admon seven. If a man went beyond the sea and his wife claimed maintenance, Hanan says: Let her swear [to her claim] at the end [of the time] and let her not swear at the beginning. But the Sons of the High Priests2 disputed with him and said, ‘Let her swear- at the beginning and let her not swear at the end’. R. Dosa b. Harkinas decided according to their opinion. R. Johanan b. Zakkai said: Hanan said well: let her swear only at the the end.3 2. If a man went beyond the sea and another rose up and maintained his wife, Hanan said: His money is lost to him. But the Sons of the High Priests disputed with him and said, ‘Let him swear on oath how much he has expended and let him recover it’. R. Dosa b. Harkinas decided accord¬ ing to their opinion. R. Johanan b. Zakkai said: Hanan said well: the man laid his money on the horn of the gazelle.
3. Admon gave seven decisions. If4 a man died and left sons and daughters, and the property was great, the sons inherit and the daughters receive maintenance;s but if the property was small the daughters receive maintenance and the sons go a-begging. Admon says: [The son may say] ‘Must I suffer loss because I am a male!’ Rabban Gamaliel said: I approve the words of Admon.
4. If6 a man claimed from his fellow jars of oil and the other admitted [his claim] to the [empty] jars, Admon says: Since he admits the claim in part he must take an oath [in denial of the rest]. But the Sages say: This 1 Heb. gezeroth, ‘decrees’. Variant: gezeloth, ‘robberies' or ‘malpractices’.
* See Ohol. 17*; cf. Ket. ia ‘Court of the Priests’.
J That she had not been maintained from her husband’s property.
is not an admission in like kind to the claim. Rabban Gamaliel said: I approve the words of Admon.
5. If a man undertook to give money to his [prospective] son-in-law and then stretched out the leg,1 she may sit down [and remain unmarried] until her hair grows grey. Admon says: She can say, ‘Had I myself undertaken it I would sit down until my hair grows grey; but since now it is my father that undertook it because of me, what can I do? Either marry me or set me free’. Rabban Gamaliel said: I approve the words of Admon.
6. If a man contested another’s ownership of a field,z but had himself signed [the deed of sale] as a witness, Admon says: He may say, ‘The second was amenable to me and the first was harsher than he’.3 But the Sages say: He has lost his title. If he4 made his field a [boundary-jmark for another,5 he has lost his title.