6. [If he said,] ‘Lo, here is thy bill of divorce on condition that thou serve my father’, or ‘that thou suckle my son’ (how long must she suckle him? Two years. R. Judah says: Eighteen months), if the son died or if the father died, the bill of divorce remains valid. [If he said,] ‘Lo, here is thy bill of divorce on condition that thou serve my father for two years’, or ‘that thou suckle my son for two years’, and the son died, or the father died or said, ‘I do not w'ish thee to serve me’, without provocation from her, the bill of divorce is not valid. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: Such a bill of divorce remains valid. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel laid down a general rule: if no hindrance arose through her, the bill of divorce remains valid.
7. [If he said,] ‘Here is thy bill of divorce if I come not back within thirty days’, and he was going from Judea to Galilee and went as far as 1 Heb. kordiakot. Gem. 67b: “one bitten by new wine’, or ‘overcome by #11 evil spirit called Kordtakos’. Maim.: ‘a kind of epilepsy’.
Antipatris1 and came back, his condition becomes void. [If he said,] ‘Here is thy bill for divorce if I come not back within thirty days’, and he was going from Galilee to Judea and he went as far as Kefar Othnai2 and then returned, his condition becomes void. [If he said,] ‘Here is thy bill of divorce if I come not back within thirty days’, and he was going beyond the sea, and he went as far as Acre and then returned, his condition becomes void. [If he said,] ‘Here is thy bill of divorce if I remain away from thy presence thirty days’, and he was all the time coming and going, since he did not continue together with her the bill of divorce is valid.
8. [If he said,] ‘Here is thy bill of divorce if I come not back within twelve months’, and he died within twelve months, the bill of divorce is not valid. [But if he said,] ‘Here is thy bill of divorce from now onward if I come not back within twelve months’, and he died within twelve months, the bill of divorce is vaiid.
9. [If he said,] ‘If I have not returned before twelve months, write out and deliver a bill of divorce to my wife', and they wrote out the bill of divorce before the twelve months and delivered it after the twelve months, it is not valid. [If he said,] ‘Write out and deliver a bill of divorce to my wife if I have not returned before twelve months’, and they wrote it out before the twelve months and delivered it after the twelve months, it is not valid. R. Jose says: Such a bill of divorce is valid. If they wrote it out after the twelve months and delivered it afterthe twelve months, and the husband died, if the bill of divorce was [delivered] before his death it is valid; but if he died before the bill of divorce was delivered, it is not valid. And if it is not known, this is a case of which they have said: She counts both as divorced and as not divorced.
8. 1. If a man threw a bill of divorce to his wife while she was within her house or her courtyard, she is divorced. If he threw it to her while she was in his house or his courtyard, even though he was with her in bed, she is not divorced; but if [he threw it] into her bosom or into her basket, she is divorced.
2. If he said to her, ‘Collect this bond of indebtedness’, or if she found it behind him and read it and, lo, it was her bill of divorce, it is not valid unless he shall say to her, ‘Here is thy bill of divorce’. If he put it into her hand while she was asleep and she awoke and read it, and, lo, it was her bill of divorce, it is not valid unless he shall say to her, ‘Here is thy bill of divorce’. If she was standing in the public domain and he threw it to her and it fell nearer to her, she is divorced, but if nearer to him she is not divorced; if half-way, she counts both as divorced and as not divorced.
3. So, too, in a matter of betrothal and in a matter of a debt: if a man’s creditor said to him, ‘Throw me my debt’, and he threw it to him and it fell nearer the lender, the borrower is no longer liable; if nearer to the borrower, the borrower is still liable; if half-way, they share in the sum. If she was standing on top of the roof and he threw up to her [her bill of divorce] and it reached the level of the roof, she is divorced. If he was above and she below and he threw it down to her, once it had left the region of the roof, even if its writing was blotted out, or if it was burnt, she is divorced.
4. The School of Shammai say:3 A man may dismiss his wife with an old bill of divorce. And the School of Hillel forbid it. What is an old bill divorce? If he continued alone with her after he had written it for her [it becomes an ‘old’ bill of divorce], 1 On the borders of Judea and Galilee. 1 See above, i5. 3 Eduy. 47, THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM 5. If he wrote it [dating it] according to another era,1 according to the era of the Medes, or the era of Macedon,2 or ‘after the building of the Temple’, or ‘after the destruction of the Temple’; [or] if he was in the east and he inscribed it ‘In the west’, or in the west and he inscribed it ‘In the east’, then she must be divorced by him and by her next husband, and she must receive a bill of divorce both from him and from her next husband; and she cannot lay claim3 to her Ketubah or to the increase [on her melog property], or to alimony, or to indemnity [for the loss on her melog pro¬ perty], whether against him or against her next husband. If she had taken them from either she must restore them, and the child begotten by either is a bastard; neither of them may contract uncleanness because of her;4 neither has any right over what she finds or the work of her hands, or any power to annul her vows. If she was an Israelite’s daughter she is rendered ineligible for marriage with a priest; if the daughter of a levite — to eat of Tithe; if a priest’s daughter — to eat of Heave-offering; and the heirs of neither husband can inherit her Ketubah; and if the husbands die their brothers must submit to halitzah and may not contract levirate marriage.
[In like manner] if he had changed his name or her name, or the name of his city or the name of her city [in the bill of divorce], she is married neither to him nor to her next husband, and all the above conditions apply.
6. Concerning any of the forbidden degrees of whom it is enjoined5 that their co-wives are exempt [from levirate marriage], if their co-wives went and married while they themselves are found to be barren, such a one is married neither to the first husband nor to the second, and all the above conditions apply.
7. If a man consummated marriage with his deceased brother’s wife, and her co-wife went and married another, and she6 was found to be barren, she7 is married8 neither to the first9 husband nor to the second,10 and all the above conditions apply.
8. If the scribe wrote a bill of divorce for the husband and a deed of quittance11 for the wife, and erred and gave the bill of divorce to the wife and the quittance to the husband, and these gave them one to the other, and afterward [when she married again] the bill of divorce was found in the possession of the man and the quittance in the possession of the woman, she is married neither to the first husband nor to the second, and all the above conditions apply. R. Eliezer says: If the error became known immediately it is not a valid bill of divorce, but if afterward, it is valid: because it is not altogether within the power of the first [husband] to render void the right of the second.12 If a man wrote [a bill of divorce] to divorce his wife and he changed his mind, the School of Shammai say: She is already rendered ineligible for marriage with a priest. And the School of Hillel say: Even if he gave it to her on a condition and the condition was not fulfilled, she is not rendered ineligible for marriage with a priest.
9. If13 a man divorced his wife and she then lodged with him in an inn, 1 A manner of dating not current in his own country but current elsewhere.
1 Some texts read 'Greece', and some ‘the gentiles’. 3 Cf. Yeb. 95; Ket. u*.
♦ If they are priests (Lev. ai1*.). * Yeb. i*.
6 Who married her deceased husband’s brother. 7 The co-wife.
8 Since the other’s levirate marriage was not valid, therefore the co-wife was not free to marry elsewhere.
9 Her present husband. 10 The deceased husband’s brother.
1 1 The receipt which she gives her husband in exchange for her Ketubah.
11 He may have conspired with his wife. 13 Eduy. 4’.
the School of Shammai say: She does not need from him a second bill of divorce. And the School of Hillel say: She needs a second bill of divorce from him. This applies when she was divorced after wedlock; but they agree that if she was divorced after betrothal [only] she does not need a second bill of divorce from him, since he is not yet shameless before her. If a man married a woman having a defectively witnessed1 bill of divorce, she is married neither to the first husband nor to the second, and all the above conditions apply.1 10. As for a defectively witnessed bill of divorce, any person may com¬ plete it.3 So Ben Nanos. R. Akiba says: Only they may complete it who, though near of kin, are in other respects fitted to bear witness. What is accounted a defectively witnessed bill of divorce? One that has more folds than witnesses.4 9. 1. If a man divorced his wife and said to her,s ‘Thou art free to marry any man excepting such-a-one’, R. Eliezer permits it, but the Sages forbid it. Whaf should he do? He should take it from her and give it to her again and say, ‘Lo, thou art free to marry any man’; but if he had so written therein, even if he erased it, it remains invalid.
2. [If he said,] ‘Thou art free to marry any man excepting my father and thy father, my brother and thy brother, a slave or a gentile’, or any one with whom she may not contract betrothal, it is valid. [If he said,] ‘Thou art free to marry any man excepting6 a High Priest (if she was a widow), or a common priest (if she was a divorced woman or had performed halitzah), or an Israelite (if she was a bastard or a Nethinah), or a bastard or a Nothin (if she was an Israelite’s daughter)’, or any one with whom she may, how- beit through transgression, contract betrothal, the bill of divorce is invalid.
3. The essential formula in the bill of divorce is, ‘Lo, thou art free to marry any man’. R. Judah says:7 ‘Let this be from me thy writ of divorce and letter of dismissal and deed of liberation, that thou mayest marry' whatsoever man thou wilt’. The essential formula in a writ of emancipa¬ tion is, ‘Lo, thou art a freedwoman: lo, thou belongest to thyself’.
4. Three kinds of bills of divorce are invalid, yet if she married again the offspring is legitimate: one that a man wrote with his own hand but there were no witnesses to it; one to which there were witnesses but which bore no date; and one which bore the date but had one witness only. Lo, these three bills of divorce are invalid, yet if she married again the offspring is legitimate. R. Eliezer says: Even though it was not signed by witnesses yet was delivered before witnesses, it is valid, and she may exact her Ketuhah from mortgaged property; for the witnesses sign only as a precaution for the general good.
5. If two persons sent two bills of divorce with like names, and they became confused, the messenger must give both to each woman. There¬ fore if one of them was lost, the other becomes void. If five wrote altogether in the [same] bill of divorce, ‘Such a man divorces such a woman, and such a man divorces such a woman [and so forth]’, and the names of the wit¬ nesses were subscribed, they are all valid, and it must be delivered to each woman. If the formula was written [anew in full] for each of them and 3 By word of mouth, but not in the written document.
6 On these unions see [5, 220, nn. iff. 7 His formula is given in Aramaic.
THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM 3 [then] the names of the witnesses were subscribed, that alone is valid to which the names of the witnesses were subscribed.
b. If two bills of divorce were written out together side by side, and there were two names of witnesses written in Hebrew running from under the one to the other, and two names of witnesses written in Greek running from under the one to the other,1 that bill of divorce together with which the first witnesses’ names are read is [alone] valid;2 but if there was the name of a witness written in Hebrew and then the name of a witness written in Greek, and again the name of a witness written in Hebrew and then the name of a witness written in Greek, running from under the one to the other, both bills of divorce are invalid.3 7. If part of the ftext of the] bill of divorce remained over and was written in the second column, and the names of the witnesses were subscribed ^eneath tt.+ it is valid. If the witnesses signed at the top of the column, at the side,3 or on the back of an unfolded bill of divorce, it is invalid. If the; top of one was joined to the top of the other,0 with the witnesses between, both are invalid.7 If8 the bottom of one was joined to the bottom of the other, with the witnesses between, that one together with which the names of the witnesses are read’ is [alone] valid. If the top of one was joined to the bottom of the other, with the witnesses between, that at the bottom of which the names of the witnesses are read is [alone] valid.
8. If a bill of divorce was written in Hebrew and the names of the witnesses in Greek, or if it was written in Greek and the names of the wit¬ nesses in Hebrew, or if one witness signed in Hebrew and the other in Greek, or if it was signed by the scribe and one witness, it is valid. [If it was written,] ‘Such-a-one, witness’, it is valid; [if] ‘Son of such-a-one, witness’, it is valid; [if] ‘Such-a-one, son of such-a-one’, without ‘witness’ being written, it is valid. And so used the more scrupulous in Jerusalem to; write. If a man wrote [only] his family name10 and her family name, it is; valid. A bill of divorce given under compulsion is valid if it is ordered by an Israelitish court, but if by a gentile court it is invalid; but if the gentiles beat a man and say to him, ‘Do w'hat the Israelites bid thee’, it is valid.
9. If the report goes forth in the city concerning a woman that she is betrothed, she is deemed to be betrothed; if that she is divorced, she is deemed to be divorced, provided that there is not cause enough to gainsay j it. What is accounted cause enough to gainsay it? If such a man had divorced his wife subject to some condition, or had thrown to her her betrothal gift and it was in doubt whether it fell nearer to him or nearer to her, such counts as ‘cause enough to gainsay it’.
In Hebrew the first names of the two signatories, c.g. Reuben and Simon, would come under the formula of the first bill in the right-hand column, and the remainder of each of their names, e.g. ( Reuben! ‘the son of Isaac', and (Simon) ‘the son of Abraham’, would come under the formula on the second bill in the left-hand column. The reverse would be the case with the names of the signatories written in Greek.
- i.e. the right-hand text will have two first names written immediately below it, and will be valid; the left-hand text will have two first names written in Greek, but not immediately oeneath it, so will not be validly signed.
> Neither has two first names subscribed immediately below it.
* Under the second column. s Right- or left-hand margins.
0 So that one is upside down.
7 Because the signatories are signed under neither of them.
* Some texts omit the following case.
9 Without needing to turn the text upside down.
10 Or a commonly used descriptive name, denoting a person’s trade, characteristics, or native town.
10. The School of Shammai say: A man may not divorce his wife unless he has found unchastity in her, for it is written, Because he hath found in her indecency in anything. * And the School of Hillel say: [He may divorce her] even if she spoiled a dish for him, for it is written, Because he hath found in her indecency in anything. R. Akiba says: Even if he found another fairer than she, for it is written, And it shall be if she find no favour in his KIDDUSHIN (‘BETROTHALS’) 1. 1. By three means is the woman acquired3 and by two means she ac¬ quires her freedom.4 She is acquired by money5 or by writ6 or by inter¬ course.7 ‘By money’ — the School of Shammai say: By a denar6 or a denar's worth. And the School of Hillel say: By a perutah* or a perutah's worth. And how much is a perutah r The eighth part of an Italian issar. g And she acquires her freedom by a bill of divorce or by the death of her husband. A deceased brother’s wife9 is acquired by intercourse10 and she acquires her freedom by halitzah 11 or by the death of her deceased husband’s brother.
2. A Hebrew bondman* 2 is acquired by money or by writ;* 3 and he acquires his freedom by [service lasting six] years*4 or by [the entering in of] the year of Jubilee,sor by [redeeming himself at] hisoutstandingvalue.*6 The Hebrew bondmaid has the advantage of him in that she acquires her freedom also through [manifesting] the tokens [of puberty].17 The bondman that has his ear bored through*8 is acquired by the act of boring, and he acquires his freedom by [the entering in of] the year of Jubilee or by the death 'of his master.
3. A Canaanitish bondman*9 is acquired by money or by writ or by usu- caption;20 and he acquires his freedom by money paid by others or by a writ [of indebtedness] uttered by himself.1* So R. Meir. But the Sages say: By money paid by himself or by a writ uttered by others, provided that the money is that of others.
4. Large cattle are acquired bythe act of delivery22 and small cattle 'by the act of lifting up.23 So R. Meir and R. Eliezer. But the Sages say: Small cattle are acquired by the act of drawing.24 3 By a man, so that he can only put her away by a bill of divorce.
s On his saying to her, ‘Be thou betrothed to me by this money’.
4 A document stating 'Be thou betrothed to me’, delivered to her by him in the presence of witnesses.
7 Cf. Ket. 4*. According to Maim, and Bert, it must be ‘in the presence of witnesses’, but (Tif. Yis.) 'not literally, but that there must be witnesses to their being alone together, and to his saying, Thou art betrothed to me by this intercourse’.
*3 The bondman writes, ‘Behold, I am sold to thee’. Cf. Lev. 25".
16 He is worth proportionately less two years before the Jubilee year (or before the expiry of his six years) than he is five years earlier.
17 After she has reached the age of twelve years and a day. Cf. Ex. 2 1 4_n.
** Lev. as44. He is there called a ‘possession’; therefore since ground -property is also called a ‘possession’ (cf. Lev. 2714), the same conditions which apply to ground-property (see below, par. 5, ‘property for which there is security’) apply also to him.
22 The buyer taking hold of it by the bit or hair in the presence and at the bidding of the seller. 22 To a height of not less than three handbreadths.
24 Shebi. to*; B.M. 4J; B.B. 57. The purchaser draws the article towards himself.
322 THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM 5. Property for which there is security* can be acquired by money or by writ or by usucaption; and that for which there is no security can be ac¬ quired only by the act of drawing. Property for which there is no security in conjunction with property for which there is security1 2 can be acquired by money, by writ, or by usucaption, and3 imposes the need for an oath also on property for which there is security.
6. If one thing was assessed as full value in exchange for another thing, so soon as the one party has acquired the one thing, the other party becomes answerable for what is given in exchange.4 Thus if a man bartered a bullock for a cow or an ass for a bullock, so soon as the one party has acquired the one thing, the other party is answerable for what is given in exchange. The Temple’s right to property is acquired by payment of money5 [alone, no matter where is the property], but a common person’s right to property is acquired only through real possession. Dedication to the Temple by word of mouth is equal to the act of delivery to a common person.
7. All the obligations of a father towards his son6 enjoined in the Law are incumbent on men but not on women, and all obligations of a son to¬ wards his father7 enjoined in the Law are incumbent both on men and on women. The observance of all the positive ordinances that depend on the time of year8 is incumbent on men but not on women, and the observance of all the positive ordinances that do not depend on the time of the year9 is incumbent both on men and on women. The observance of all the negative ordinances, whether they depend on the time of year or not, is incumbent both on men and on women, excepting the ordinances Thou shalt not mar [ the comers of thy beard ] and Ye shall not round [ the corners of your heads,]10 and, Thou shalt not become unclean because of the dead.'1 8. The rites of the laying on of hands,12 waving,13 bringing-near [the Meal -offering], taking the Handful and burning it,14 and wringing the necks of the Bird-offerings, 15 sprinkling the blood16 and receiving the blood17 are performed by men but not by women, excepting in the Meal-offerings of the Suspected Adulteress18 and of the female Nazirite,19 for which they themselves perform the act of waving.
9. Any religious duty that does not depend on the Land [of Israel]20 may be observed whether in the Land or outside of it; and any religious duty that depends on the Land21 maybe observed in the Land [alone]; excepting the laws of Orlah- fruit22 and of Diverse Kinds.23 E. Eliezer says: Also the law of new produce.24 J Some texts here repeat ‘the property for which there is no security’.
4 i.e. when one party to an act of barter acquires (by drawing to himself) the object which he is taking in exchange, the other party thereby becomes the responsible owner of the other object, without the formal act of drawing it into his possession.
5 Contrary to the principle laid down in B.M. 41.
6 Such as circumcision or redeeming the Firstborn. 2 Honour and fear.
* Such as carrying the Lulab, living in booths at the Feast of Tabernacles.
• Such as putting up the Mezuzah, letting the young go free with the mother-bird.
12 On the beast’s head before it is slaughtered, by those who bring a private offering; 14 Lev. a*. is Lev. iI!; 5*. 16 Of the offerings on the Altar.
12 By the priest in a bason (cf. Pes. 5*). i» See Sot. 31.
14 Num. 6*. That she waves her own Meal-offering is deduced by comparison of Num. 5" with 61*.
20 Sabbath, circumcision, and all laws affecting personal conduct.
21 Such as Heave-offering, Tithes, the Seventh Year law, Gleanings.
10. If a man performs but a single commandment it shall be well with him and he shall have length of days and shall inherit the Land; but if he neglects a single commandment it shall be ill with him and he shall not have length of days and shall not inherit the Land. He that has a know¬ ledge of Scripture and Mishnah and right conduct will not soon fall into sin, for it is wTitten, And a threefold cord is not quickly broken.1 But he that has no knowledge of Scripture and Mishnah and right conduct has no part in the habitable world.
2. 1. A man may betroth a woman either by his own act or by that of his agent; and a woman may become betrothed either by her own act or by that of her agent. A man may give his daughter in betrothal while she is still in her girlhood2 either by his own act or by that of his agent. If a man said to a woman, ‘Be thou betrothed to me with this date, or be thou betrothed to me with this’, and one of them was worth a perutah, her betrothal is valid; otherwise it is not valid. If [he said, ‘Be thou betrothed to me] with this and with this and with this’, and they were together worth a perutah, her betrothal is valid; otherwise it is not valid. If she was eating them one after the other, her betrothal is not valid unless one of them was worth a perutah.
2. [If he said,] ‘Be thou betrothed to me with this cup of wine’, and it was found to be honey; or ‘with this cup of honey’, and it was found to be wine; or ‘with this silver denar', and it was found to be gold; or ‘with this golden denar', and it was found to be silver; or [if he said, ‘Be thou betrothed to me] on the condition that I am rich’, and he was found to be poor; or ‘that I am poor’, and he was found to be rich; her betrothal is not valid. R. Simeon says: If he deceived her to her advantage her be¬ trothal is valid.
3. [If he said, ‘Be thou betrothed to me] on the condition that I am a priest’, and he was found to be a levite; or ‘that I am a levite’, and he was found to be a priest; or ‘that I am a Nothin',3 and he was found to be a bastard; or ‘that I am a bastard’, and he was found to be a Nothin; or ‘that I am from a town’, and he was found to be from a city; or ‘that I am from a city’, and he was found to be from a town; or ‘on the condition that my house is near to a bath-house’, and it was found to be far off; or ‘that it is far off from a bath-house’, and it was found to be near; or ‘on the condition that I have a daughter or bondwoman that is a hairdresser’, and he had them not; or ‘on condition that I have them not’, and he had them; or ‘on condition that I have no children’, and he had them; or ‘on condition that I have them’, and he had them not; — in all such cases even though she said, ‘It was in my heart to be betrothed to him’, her betrothal is not valid. And so, too, if it was she that deceived him.
4. If he said to his agent, ‘Go and betroth to me such a woman at such a place’, and he went and betrothed her at another place, her betrothal is not valid; but if he had said, ‘Lo, she is at such a place’, and he betrothed her at another place, her betrothal is valid.
5. If4 a man betrothed a woman on the condition that she lay 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 1 Eccles. 4”.
* While she is a naarah, i.e. during six months after she has become of age, twelve years and a day. Cf. Ket. 31. i App. I. 39. ♦ The paragraph is repeated in Ket. 7’.
324 THIRD DIVISION: NASHIM 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 blemishes which disqualify priests disqualify women also.
6. If a man betrothed two women writh what was worth a perutah, or one woman with what was worth less than a perutah, the betrothal is not valid, even if he afterward sent her presents, since he sent them by reason of the first betrothal. So, too, if a minor betrothed a woman [and sent her presents after he came of age].
7. If a man betrothed a woman and her daughter or a woman and her sister at the same time, their betrothal is not valid.1 It once happened to five women among which were two sisters, that a man took a basket of figs that belonged to them and that contained Seventh Year produce,2 and said, ‘Lo, ye are all betrothed to me with this basketful’. And one of them accepted it on behalf of them all. And the Sages said: The betrothal of the sisters was not valid.