Today's Daf Yomi
July 17, 2022 | 讬状讞 讘转诪讜讝 转砖驻状讘
-
This month's learning聽is sponsored by Leah Goldford in loving memory of聽her grandmothers, Tzipporah bat Yechezkiel, Rivka Yoda Bat聽Dovide Tzvi, Bracha Bayla bat Beryl, her father-in-law, Chaim Gershon ben Tzvi Aryeh, her mother, Devorah Rivkah bat Tuvia Hacohen, her cousins, Avrum Baer ben Mordechai, and Sharon bat Yaakov.
-
Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.
Ketubot 11
This week’s learning is sponsored by the Sarna Family in the zechut of a refuah shleima u’mehirah for Maayan Liba bat Bryna Mindi.
The Mishna states that a convert, one taken captive, a maidservant who was converted/freed under the age of three has the presumptive status of a virgin and therefore has a ketuba of 200 zuz. Rav Huna states that a convert can be converted with the consent of the court as one can act on behalf of another if it is in the person’s best interest and converting is in the best interest of the minor. Why? Can our Mishna be used as proof for Rav Huna? According to Rav Yosef, the convert can decide when they become of age that they no longer want to be Jewish. Rava and Abaye each bring sources that would seem to go against this. How are the difficulties resolved? Why did each not bring the source that the other brought? If an adult male had relations with a minor or the reverse, she also receives a ketuba of 200 zuz. Regarding a woman who tore her hymen from an accident (mukat etz), there is a debate between Rabbi Meir and the rabbis – does she get a ketuba of 100 or 200 zuz. If she was married but never had relations, she only receives a ketuba of 100 zuz and if the husband finds that she was not a virgin, he cannot claim that he was misled. A convert, one taken captive, a maidservant who was converted/freed over the age of three is assumed not to be a virgin and her ketuba is 100 zuz. Rav and Shmuel disagreed regarding a minor male who had relations with an adult woman – is she considered a non-virgin or a mukat etz. How does this work with our Mishna that seemed to say the debate was only regarding the mukat etz, but not this case? Rava rereads the Mishna to resolve the issue. Do the rabbis and Rabbi Meir disagree only in a case where he knew she was a mukat etz聽but in a case where he didn’t know before the wedding, she doesn’t receive her ketuba at all? Rami bar Hama suggests this but is rejected by a Mishna. Rava says that Rabbi Meir doesn’t distinguish between whether he knew or not and either way she gets 200 zuz. But the rabbis distinguish and give her 100 if she told him before and nothing if she misled him. However, Rava changed his mind and holds that either way, the rabbis hold she gets 100 zuz. The Gemara brings a braita and a discussion about that braita and Rava’s rereading of it to prove that he changed his mind.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Podcast (讚祝-讬讜诪讬-诇谞砖讬诐): Play in new window | Download
讗祝 讗谞讜 谞讗诪专 讗讬讬诇讜谞讬转 讚讜讻专谞讬转 讚诇讗 讬诇讚讛:
We too will say: Ailonit, a sexually underdeveloped woman, is a term meaning: Like a ram [dukhranit], because like a male sheep [ayyil] she does not bear children.
诪转谞讬壮 讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讜讬砖 诇讛谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬谉:
MISHNA: With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who was freed with regard to the maidservant, when she was less than three years and one day old, for all of these, their marriage contract is two hundred dinars, as their presumptive status is that of a virgin. Even if they were subject to intercourse when they were younger than that age, the hymen remains restored. And they are subject to a claim concerning their virginity.
讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讙专 拽讟谉 诪讟讘讬诇讬谉 讗讜转讜 注诇 讚注转 讘讬转 讚讬谉
GEMARA: Rav Huna said: With regard to a convert who is a minor, one immerses him in a ritual bath with the consent of the court. As a minor lacks the capacity to make halakhic decisions, the court is authorized to make those decisions in his stead.
诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讝讻讜转 讛讜讗 诇讜 讜讝讻讬谉 诇讗讚诐 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 转谞讬谞讗 讝讻讬谉 诇讗讚诐 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讜讗讬谉 讞讘讬谉 诇讗讚诐 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜
What is Rav Huna coming to teach us? Is he teaching that it is a privilege for the minor to convert, and one may act in a person鈥檚 interests even in his absence? We already learned that explicitly in a mishna (Eiruvin 81b): One may act in a person鈥檚 interests in his absence, but one may not act against a person鈥檚 interests in his absence.
诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 讙讜讬 讘讛驻拽讬专讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讬讛 讚讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 讚注讘讚 讜讚讗讬 讘讛驻拽讬专讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讬讛
Rav Huna鈥檚 statement was necessary lest you say: With regard to a gentile, licentiousness is preferable for him, so conversion is contrary to his interests, just as we maintain that with regard to a slave, licentiousness is certainly preferable. Just as a slave has no interest in assuming the restrictions that come with freedom, in that a freed Canaanite slave is a convert to Judaism, a gentile would have the same attitude toward conversion.
拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讙讚讜诇 讚讟注诐 讟注诐 讚讗讬住讜专讗 讗讘诇 拽讟谉 讝讻讜转 讛讜讗 诇讜
Therefore, Rav Huna teaches us: That applies only with regard to an adult, who has experienced a taste of prohibition. Therefore, presumably he prefers to remain a slave and indulge in licentiousness. However, with regard to a minor, who did not yet engage in those activities, it is a privilege for him to convert.
诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讗讟讘诇讬谞讛讜 注诇 讚注转 讘讬转 讚讬谉
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the mishna supports Rav Huna鈥檚 statement: With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who were freed with regard to the maidservant, when she was less than three years and one day old; what, is it not referring to a case where they immersed the minor converts and the maidservants with the consent of the court? Apparently, a conversion of that sort is valid.
诇讗 讛讻讗 讘诪讗讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讘讙专 砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讘谞讬讜 讜讘谞讜转讬讜 注诪讜 讚谞讬讞讗 诇讛讜 讘诪讗讬 讚注讘讬讚 讗讘讜讛讜谉
The Gemara rejects that proof: No, with what are we dealing here? It is with a convert whose minor sons and daughters converted with him, as they are content with whatever their father does in their regard. However, that does not apply to a child who is converting on his own.
讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讛讙讚讬诇讜 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇诪讞讜转 讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讛讙讚讬诇讜 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇诪讞讜转 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 讚讗讝诇讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讘讙讬讜转讛
Rav Yosef said: In any case where minors convert, when they reach majority they can protest and annul their conversion. Abaye raised an objection to his opinion from the mishna: With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant who were ransomed, or who converted, or who were freed when they were less than three years and one day old, their marriage contract is two hundred dinars. And if it enters your mind to say that when they reach majority they can protest and annul their conversion, do we give her the payment of the marriage contract that she will go and consume in her gentile state?
诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 谞诪讬 诪诪讞讬讬讗 讜谞驻拽讗 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讚讬诇讛 砖注讛 讗讞转 讜诇讗 诪讬讞转讛 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讛 讬讻讜诇讛 诇诪讞讜转
The Gemara answers: She receives payment of her marriage contract once she has reached majority and does not protest, but not while still a minor. The Gemara asks: When she reaches majority too, is there not the same concern that she will protest and abandon Judaism? The Gemara answers: Once she reached majority for even one moment and did not protest, she may no longer protest. This mishna poses no difficulty to the opinion of Rav Yosef.
诪转讬讘 专讘讗 讗诇讜 谞注专讜转 砖讬砖 诇讛谉 拽谞住 讛讘讗 注诇 讛诪诪讝专转 讜注诇 讛谞转讬谞讛 讜注诇 讛讻讜转讬转 讜注诇 讛讙讬讜专转 讜注诇 讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜注诇 讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讬砖 诇讛谉 拽谞住 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 讛讙讚讬诇讜 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇诪讞讜转 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讛 拽谞住 讚讗讝诇讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讘讙讬讜转讛
Rava raised an objection from a mishna (29a): These are the cases of young women for whom there is a fine paid to their fathers by one who rapes them: One who engages in intercourse with a mamzeret; or with a Gibeonite woman [netina], who are given [netunim] to the service of the people and the altar (see Joshua 9:27); or with a Samaritan woman [kutit]. In addition, the same applies to one who engages in intercourse with a female convert, or with a captive woman, or with a maidservant, provided that the captives were ransomed or that the converts converted, or that the maidservants were freed when they were less than three years and one day old, as only in that case do they maintain the presumptive status of a virgin. In all of these cases, there is a fine paid to their fathers if they are raped. And if you say that when they reach majority they can protest and annul their conversion, do we give her payment of the fine that she will go and consume in her gentile state?
诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 谞诪讬 诪诪讞讬讬讗 讜谞驻拽讗 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讚讬诇讛 砖注讛 讗讞转 讜诇讗 诪讬讞转讛 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讛 讬讻讜诇讛 诇诪讞讜转
The Gemara answers: Her father receives payment of the fine once she has reached majority and does not protest, but not while she is still a minor. The Gemara asks: When she reaches majority too, is there not the same concern that she will protest and abandon Judaism? The Gemara answers: Once she reached majority for even one moment and did not protest, she may no longer protest.
讗讘讬讬 诇讗 讗诪专 讻专讘讗 讛转诐 拽谞住讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 砖诇讗 讬讛讗 讞讜讟讗 谞砖讻专
Abaye did not state his objection from the same source as did Rava, because there, in the mishna cited by Rava, it is referring to a fine, and in that case this is the reason: So that the sinner will not profit. The Sages did not absolve the rapist from payment of the fine merely due to the concern that the woman he raped may ultimately negate the conversion.
专讘讗 诇讗 讗诪专 讻讗讘讬讬 讻转讜讘讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 砖诇讗 转讛讗 拽诇讛 讘注讬谞讬讜 诇讛讜爪讬讗讛:
Rava did not state his objection from the same source as did Abaye, as with regard to a marriage contract, this is the reason that the Sages instituted it: So that his wife will not be inconsequential in his eyes, enabling him to easily divorce her. As long as this woman does not negate her conversion, she is a Jewish woman and the Sages saw to her interests.
诪转谞讬壮 讛讙讚讜诇 砖讘讗 注诇 讛拽讟谞讛 讜拽讟谉 砖讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 讜诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转讛 诪谞讛
MISHNA: With regard to an adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old; or a minor boy less than nine years old who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman; or a woman who had her hymen ruptured by wood or any other foreign object, for all these women their marriage contract is two hundred dinars, as their legal status is that of a virgin. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The marriage contract of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood is one hundred dinars, as physically, since her hymen is not intact, she is no longer a virgin.
讘转讜诇讛 讗诇诪谞讛 讙专讜砖讛 讜讞诇讜爪讛 诪谉 讛谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讻转讜讘转谉 诪谞讛
With regard to a virgin who is either a widow, a divorc茅e, or a 岣lutza who achieved that status from a state of marriage, for all these women their marriage contract is one hundred dinars,
讜讗讬谉 诇讛谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬诐
and they are not subject to a claim concerning their virginity. Since they were married, even if they did not engage in intercourse with their husband, their presumptive status is that of non-virgins, and the second husband cannot claim that he was misled with regard to their status as virgins.
讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 讬转讬专讜转 注诇 讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讻转讜讘转谉 诪谞讛 讜讗讬谉 诇讛谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬谉:
And similarly, with regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who were freed with regard to the maidservant, when she was more than three years and one day old, for all of these, their marriage contract is one hundred dinars and they are not subject to a claim concerning their virginity. When they married, their presumptive status was that of a non-virgin.
讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 注砖讗讛 诪讜讻转 注抓 讻讬 讗诪专讬转讛 拽诪讬讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻转 注抓 讘讘砖专
GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: A minor boy who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman renders her as one whose hymen was ruptured by wood, as the act is not considered full-fledged intercourse. Rav Yehuda continues: When I said this statement before Shmuel, he said to me: A woman does not achieve the status of one whose hymen was ruptured by wood by means of flesh, i.e., intercourse.
讗讬讻讗 讚诪转谞讬 诇讛 诇讛讗 砖诪注转讗 讘讗驻讬 谞驻砖讛 拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 专讘 讗诪专 注砖讗讛 诪讜讻转 注抓 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻转 注抓 讘讘砖专
Some teach this halakha independent of Rav Yehuda: With regard to a minor boy who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman, Rav said: He renders her as one whose hymen was ruptured by wood. And Shmuel said: A woman does not achieve the status of one whose hymen was ruptured by wood by means of flesh.
诪转讬讘 专讘 讗讜砖注讬讗 讙讚讜诇 砖讘讗 注诇 讛拽讟谞讛 讜拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 讜诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转讛 诪谞讛
Rav Oshaya raised an objection to the opinion of Rav from the mishna: With regard to an adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old, or a minor boy less than nine years old who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman, or a woman who had her hymen ruptured by wood or any other foreign object, the marriage contract for each of these women is two hundred dinars. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The marriage contract of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood is one hundred dinars. Contrary to Rav鈥檚 opinion, the Rabbis distinguish between the halakha in the case of the intercourse of a minor boy and the halakha in the case of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood.
讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讙讚讜诇 讛讘讗 注诇 讛拽讟谞讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 讚驻讞讜转 诪讻讗谉 讻谞讜转谉 讗爪讘注 讘注讬谉 讚诪讬 讜拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 注砖讗讛 诪讜讻转 注抓 讜诪讜讻转 注抓 讙讜驻讗 驻诇讜讙转讗 讚专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜专讘谞谉
Rava said that this is what the mishna is saying: An adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old has done nothing, as intercourse with a girl less than three years old is tantamount to poking a finger into the eye. In the case of an eye, after a tear falls from it another tear forms to replace it. Similarly, the ruptured hymen of the girl younger than three is restored. And a young boy who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman renders her as one whose hymen was ruptured by wood. And with regard to the case of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood itself, there is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis. Rabbi Meir maintains that her marriage contract is two hundred dinars, and the Rabbis maintain that it is one hundred dinars.
讗诪专 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诪讞诇讜拽转 讻砖讛讻讬专 讘讛 讚专讘讬 诪讗讬专 诪讚诪讬 诇讛 诇讘讜讙专转 讜专讘谞谉 诪讚诪讜 诇讛 诇讘注讜诇讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐
Rami bar 岣ma said: This dispute is specifically in a case where the husband was aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood, as in that case Rabbi Meir likens her to a grown woman, whose hymen does not completely obstruct the orifice as a result of the maturation process. Nevertheless, her marriage contract is that of a virgin, two hundred dinars. And the Rabbis liken her to a non-virgin who engaged in intercourse in the past. Her marriage contract is one hundred dinars. However, if he was not aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood and was under the impression that she was a full-fledged virgin, everyone agrees that she receives no marriage contract at all when he becomes aware of her condition, as the marriage was a mistaken transaction.
讜专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗诪讗讬 诪讚诪讬 诇讛 诇讘讜讙专转 谞讚诪讬讬讛 诇讘注讜诇讛 讘注讜诇讛 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讛讗 诇讗 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讜专讘谞谉 讗讚诪讚诪讜 诇讛 诇讘注讜诇讛 谞讚诪讬讬讛 诇讘讜讙专转 讘讜讙专转 诇讗 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛 讻诇诇 讛讗 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛
The Gemara asks: And why does Rabbi Meir liken her to a grown woman? Let him liken her to a non-virgin, who engaged in intercourse in the past. The Gemara answers: In the case of a non-virgin, an action was performed on her by a person; but with regard to this woman, whose hymen was ruptured by wood, an action was not performed on her by a person. The Gemara asks: And with regard to the Rabbis, rather than likening her to a non-virgin, let them liken her to a grown woman. The Gemara answers: In the case of a grown woman, no action was performed on her; but with regard to this woman, whose hymen was ruptured by wood, an action was performed on her.
讗讘诇 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 诇讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 诪转讬讘 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛讬讗 讗讜诪专转 诪讜讻转 注抓 讗谞讬 讜讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讻讬 讗诇讗 讚专讜住转 讗讬砖 讗转 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞讗诪谞转
Rami bar 岣ma concluded his statement: However, if he was not aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood, everyone agrees that she receives no marriage contract at all. Rav Na岣an raised an objection from a mishna (13a): In a case where she says: I am one whose hymen was ruptured by wood, i.e., she admits that her hymen is not intact but claims that it was not ruptured through intercourse, and the groom says: No; rather, you are one who was violated by a man and you are no longer a virgin, Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: She is deemed credible and her claim is accepted. In that case, she is claiming that she is entitled to a marriage contract. Despite the fact that the groom had no prior awareness of her condition, Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer maintain that she is deemed credible and receives a marriage contract of at least one hundred dinars. Apparently, not everyone agrees that in that case she receives nothing at all.
讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讘讬谉 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讜讘讬谉 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 诇专讘讬 诪讗讬专 诪讗转讬诐 诇专讘谞谉 讛讻讬专 讘讛 诪谞讛 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐
Rather, Rava said: This is what the mishna is saying: Whether the husband was aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood and whether he was not aware of her condition, according to Rabbi Meir she receives a marriage contract of two hundred dinars and it is not a mistaken transaction. According to the Rabbis, if he was aware of her condition she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars like a non-virgin; if he was not aware of her condition she receives no marriage contract at all, since it is a mistaken transaction, as when he married her he believed that her hymen was intact. According to this explanation, the mishna cited by Rav Na岣an is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.
讜讛讚专 讘讬讛 专讘讗 讚转谞讬讗 讻讬爪讚 讛讜爪讗转 砖诐 专注 讘讗 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜讗诪专 驻诇讜谞讬 诇讗 诪爪讗转讬 诇讘转讱 讘转讜诇讬诐 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讘转 住拽讬诇讛 讛讬讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讘住拽讬诇讛 讝讬谞转讛 诪注讬拽专讗 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛
And Rava retracted his opinion, as it is taught in a baraita: How does the slander described in the Torah come about? If the groom comes to court and says: So-and-so, father of the bride, I did not find in your daughter an intact hymen. If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under the husband鈥檚 jurisdiction after betrothal, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. The Gemara asks: If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under his jurisdiction after betrothal, she is subject to execution by stoning. Obviously, she is in no position to receive a marriage contract. The Gemara answers that this is what the mishna is saying: If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under his jurisdiction after betrothal, she is subject to execution by stoning. However, if she engaged in intercourse initially, prior to betrothal, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars, like any non-virgin.
讜讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讝讗转 讗讜诪专转 讻谞住讛 讘讞讝拽转 讘转讜诇讛 讜谞诪爪讗转 讘注讜诇讛 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛 讜诪转讬讘 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛谞讜砖讗 讗转 讛讗砖讛 讜诇讗 诪爪讗 诇讛 讘转讜诇讬诐 讛讬讗 讗讜诪专转 诪砖讗专住转谞讬 谞讗谞住转讬 讜谞住转讞驻讛 砖讚讛讜 讜讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讻讬 讗诇讗 注讚 砖诇讗 讗讬专住转讬讱 讜讛讬讛 诪拽讞讬 诪拽讞 讟注讜转 讜诇讬转 诇讛 讻诇诇
And Rav 岣yya bar Avin said that Rav Sheshet said: That is to say, if the groom married a woman with the presumptive status of a virgin and she is found to be a non-virgin, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. And Rav Na岣an raised an objection to the statement of Rav Sheshet from a mishna (12b): There is a case of one who marries a woman and did not find her hymen intact, and she says: After you betrothed me I was raped, and his, i.e., her husband鈥檚, field was inundated, meaning that it is his misfortune that she is not a virgin, as she was raped after betrothal. And he says: No; rather, you were raped before I betrothed you, and my transaction was a mistaken transaction. The betrothal was predicated on your presumptive status as a virgin and in fact, you were not a virgin then. In that case, she does not receive any marriage contract at all.
讜讗诪专 诇讛讜 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讗驻砖专 专讘 注诪专诐 讜讻诇 讙讚讜诇讬 讛讚讜专 讬转讘讬 讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 诇讛讗 砖诪注转讗 讜拽砖讬讗 诇讛讜 讜砖谞讬 诪讗讬 诪拽讞 讟注讜转 谞诪讬 诪诪讗转讬诐 讗讘诇 诪谞讛 讗讬转 诇讛 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬转 诇讛 讻诇诇
And Rav 岣yya bar Avin said to those present: Is it possible that Rav Amram and all the prominent Sages of the generation were sitting when Rav Sheshet said this halakha, and Rav Na岣an鈥檚 question was difficult for them, and they answered: What is the meaning of mistaken transaction in this context? It too means that he is absolved from his commitment to pay the marriage contract of a virgin, two hundred dinars, because she is not entitled to that sum. However, she is entitled to one hundred dinars. And, contrary to that consensus, you say that she does not receive any marriage contract at all?
讜讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗谉 讚拽讗 诪讜转讬讘 砖驻讬专 拽讗 诪讜转讬讘 诪拽讞 讟注讜转 诇讙诪专讬 诪砖诪注 讜讗诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讱 转专讬抓 讜讗讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讘住拽讬诇讛 讝讬谞转讛 诪注讬拽专讗 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 谞诪爪讗转 诪讜讻转 注抓 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛
And Rava said: The one who raised the objection, Rav Na岣an, raises the objection well, as the term: Mistaken transaction, indicates that the betrothal is dissolved totally. The Gemara asks: But that baraita with regard to slander remains difficult, as in that case, if he discovered that she was not a virgin, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. The Gemara answers: Resolve the apparent contradiction and say this in the text of the baraita: If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under his jurisdiction after betrothal, she is subject to execution by stoning. If she engaged in intercourse initially, prior to betrothal, she receives nothing at all. If she was discovered to be one whose hymen was ruptured by wood, she is entitled to a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.
讜讛讗 专讘讗 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 诇专讘谞谉 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讛讚专 讘讬讛 专讘讗 诪讛讛讬讗
But isn鈥檛 it Rava himself who said that according to the Rabbis, in the case of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood, if he was not aware of her condition she receives no marriage contract at all? Rather, conclude from it that Rava retracted that statement, and he holds that even according to the Rabbis, even if he was unaware of her condition she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.
转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讻谞住讛 专讗砖讜谉 诇砖讜诐 谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讜讬砖 诇讛 注讚讬诐 砖诇讗 谞住转专讛 讗讬 谞诪讬 谞住转专讛 讜诇讗 砖讛转讛 讻讚讬 讘讬讗讛 讗讬谉 讛砖谞讬 讬讻讜诇 诇讟注讜谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬诐 砖讛专讬 讻谞住讛 专讗砖讜谉
搂 The Sages taught: If her first husband brought her into his home for the purpose of marriage, and she has witnesses who testified that she did not seclude herself with him, or alternatively, they testified that she secluded herself with him and did not stay in seclusion with him for a period equivalent to the time required to engage in intercourse, if the first husband dies or divorces her and she remarries, despite the testimony of the witnesses, the second husband cannot make a claim concerning virginity, and say the betrothal was predicated on the assumption that she was a virgin and she should lose her marriage contract. Since the first husband brought her into his home, the second husband should have considered that a woman who entered her husband鈥檚 home is no longer a virgin.
-
This month's learning聽is sponsored by Leah Goldford in loving memory of聽her grandmothers, Tzipporah bat Yechezkiel, Rivka Yoda Bat聽Dovide Tzvi, Bracha Bayla bat Beryl, her father-in-law, Chaim Gershon ben Tzvi Aryeh, her mother, Devorah Rivkah bat Tuvia Hacohen, her cousins, Avrum Baer ben Mordechai, and Sharon bat Yaakov.
-
Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.
Subscribe to Hadran's Daf Yomi
Want to explore more about the Daf?
See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners
Ketubot 11
The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria
讗祝 讗谞讜 谞讗诪专 讗讬讬诇讜谞讬转 讚讜讻专谞讬转 讚诇讗 讬诇讚讛:
We too will say: Ailonit, a sexually underdeveloped woman, is a term meaning: Like a ram [dukhranit], because like a male sheep [ayyil] she does not bear children.
诪转谞讬壮 讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讜讬砖 诇讛谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬谉:
MISHNA: With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who was freed with regard to the maidservant, when she was less than three years and one day old, for all of these, their marriage contract is two hundred dinars, as their presumptive status is that of a virgin. Even if they were subject to intercourse when they were younger than that age, the hymen remains restored. And they are subject to a claim concerning their virginity.
讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讙专 拽讟谉 诪讟讘讬诇讬谉 讗讜转讜 注诇 讚注转 讘讬转 讚讬谉
GEMARA: Rav Huna said: With regard to a convert who is a minor, one immerses him in a ritual bath with the consent of the court. As a minor lacks the capacity to make halakhic decisions, the court is authorized to make those decisions in his stead.
诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讝讻讜转 讛讜讗 诇讜 讜讝讻讬谉 诇讗讚诐 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 转谞讬谞讗 讝讻讬谉 诇讗讚诐 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜 讜讗讬谉 讞讘讬谉 诇讗讚诐 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬讜
What is Rav Huna coming to teach us? Is he teaching that it is a privilege for the minor to convert, and one may act in a person鈥檚 interests even in his absence? We already learned that explicitly in a mishna (Eiruvin 81b): One may act in a person鈥檚 interests in his absence, but one may not act against a person鈥檚 interests in his absence.
诪讛讜 讚转讬诪讗 讙讜讬 讘讛驻拽讬专讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讬讛 讚讛讗 拽讬讬诪讗 诇谉 讚注讘讚 讜讚讗讬 讘讛驻拽讬专讗 谞讬讞讗 诇讬讛
Rav Huna鈥檚 statement was necessary lest you say: With regard to a gentile, licentiousness is preferable for him, so conversion is contrary to his interests, just as we maintain that with regard to a slave, licentiousness is certainly preferable. Just as a slave has no interest in assuming the restrictions that come with freedom, in that a freed Canaanite slave is a convert to Judaism, a gentile would have the same attitude toward conversion.
拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讙讚讜诇 讚讟注诐 讟注诐 讚讗讬住讜专讗 讗讘诇 拽讟谉 讝讻讜转 讛讜讗 诇讜
Therefore, Rav Huna teaches us: That applies only with regard to an adult, who has experienced a taste of prohibition. Therefore, presumably he prefers to remain a slave and indulge in licentiousness. However, with regard to a minor, who did not yet engage in those activities, it is a privilege for him to convert.
诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讚讗讟讘诇讬谞讛讜 注诇 讚注转 讘讬转 讚讬谉
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the mishna supports Rav Huna鈥檚 statement: With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who were freed with regard to the maidservant, when she was less than three years and one day old; what, is it not referring to a case where they immersed the minor converts and the maidservants with the consent of the court? Apparently, a conversion of that sort is valid.
诇讗 讛讻讗 讘诪讗讬 注住拽讬谞谉 讘讙专 砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讘谞讬讜 讜讘谞讜转讬讜 注诪讜 讚谞讬讞讗 诇讛讜 讘诪讗讬 讚注讘讬讚 讗讘讜讛讜谉
The Gemara rejects that proof: No, with what are we dealing here? It is with a convert whose minor sons and daughters converted with him, as they are content with whatever their father does in their regard. However, that does not apply to a child who is converting on his own.
讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讛讙讚讬诇讜 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇诪讞讜转 讗讬转讬讘讬讛 讗讘讬讬 讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讛讙讚讬诇讜 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇诪讞讜转 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 讚讗讝诇讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讘讙讬讜转讛
Rav Yosef said: In any case where minors convert, when they reach majority they can protest and annul their conversion. Abaye raised an objection to his opinion from the mishna: With regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant who were ransomed, or who converted, or who were freed when they were less than three years and one day old, their marriage contract is two hundred dinars. And if it enters your mind to say that when they reach majority they can protest and annul their conversion, do we give her the payment of the marriage contract that she will go and consume in her gentile state?
诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 谞诪讬 诪诪讞讬讬讗 讜谞驻拽讗 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讚讬诇讛 砖注讛 讗讞转 讜诇讗 诪讬讞转讛 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讛 讬讻讜诇讛 诇诪讞讜转
The Gemara answers: She receives payment of her marriage contract once she has reached majority and does not protest, but not while still a minor. The Gemara asks: When she reaches majority too, is there not the same concern that she will protest and abandon Judaism? The Gemara answers: Once she reached majority for even one moment and did not protest, she may no longer protest. This mishna poses no difficulty to the opinion of Rav Yosef.
诪转讬讘 专讘讗 讗诇讜 谞注专讜转 砖讬砖 诇讛谉 拽谞住 讛讘讗 注诇 讛诪诪讝专转 讜注诇 讛谞转讬谞讛 讜注诇 讛讻讜转讬转 讜注诇 讛讙讬讜专转 讜注诇 讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜注诇 讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 驻讞讜转讜转 诪讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讬砖 诇讛谉 拽谞住 讜讗讬 讗诪专转 讛讙讚讬诇讜 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇诪讞讜转 讬讛讘讬谞谉 诇讛 拽谞住 讚讗讝诇讛 讜讗讻诇讛 讘讙讬讜转讛
Rava raised an objection from a mishna (29a): These are the cases of young women for whom there is a fine paid to their fathers by one who rapes them: One who engages in intercourse with a mamzeret; or with a Gibeonite woman [netina], who are given [netunim] to the service of the people and the altar (see Joshua 9:27); or with a Samaritan woman [kutit]. In addition, the same applies to one who engages in intercourse with a female convert, or with a captive woman, or with a maidservant, provided that the captives were ransomed or that the converts converted, or that the maidservants were freed when they were less than three years and one day old, as only in that case do they maintain the presumptive status of a virgin. In all of these cases, there is a fine paid to their fathers if they are raped. And if you say that when they reach majority they can protest and annul their conversion, do we give her payment of the fine that she will go and consume in her gentile state?
诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 诇讻讬 讙讚诇讛 谞诪讬 诪诪讞讬讬讗 讜谞驻拽讗 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讚讬诇讛 砖注讛 讗讞转 讜诇讗 诪讬讞转讛 砖讜讘 讗讬谞讛 讬讻讜诇讛 诇诪讞讜转
The Gemara answers: Her father receives payment of the fine once she has reached majority and does not protest, but not while she is still a minor. The Gemara asks: When she reaches majority too, is there not the same concern that she will protest and abandon Judaism? The Gemara answers: Once she reached majority for even one moment and did not protest, she may no longer protest.
讗讘讬讬 诇讗 讗诪专 讻专讘讗 讛转诐 拽谞住讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 砖诇讗 讬讛讗 讞讜讟讗 谞砖讻专
Abaye did not state his objection from the same source as did Rava, because there, in the mishna cited by Rava, it is referring to a fine, and in that case this is the reason: So that the sinner will not profit. The Sages did not absolve the rapist from payment of the fine merely due to the concern that the woman he raped may ultimately negate the conversion.
专讘讗 诇讗 讗诪专 讻讗讘讬讬 讻转讜讘讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 砖诇讗 转讛讗 拽诇讛 讘注讬谞讬讜 诇讛讜爪讬讗讛:
Rava did not state his objection from the same source as did Abaye, as with regard to a marriage contract, this is the reason that the Sages instituted it: So that his wife will not be inconsequential in his eyes, enabling him to easily divorce her. As long as this woman does not negate her conversion, she is a Jewish woman and the Sages saw to her interests.
诪转谞讬壮 讛讙讚讜诇 砖讘讗 注诇 讛拽讟谞讛 讜拽讟谉 砖讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 讜诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转讛 诪谞讛
MISHNA: With regard to an adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old; or a minor boy less than nine years old who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman; or a woman who had her hymen ruptured by wood or any other foreign object, for all these women their marriage contract is two hundred dinars, as their legal status is that of a virgin. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The marriage contract of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood is one hundred dinars, as physically, since her hymen is not intact, she is no longer a virgin.
讘转讜诇讛 讗诇诪谞讛 讙专讜砖讛 讜讞诇讜爪讛 诪谉 讛谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讻转讜讘转谉 诪谞讛
With regard to a virgin who is either a widow, a divorc茅e, or a 岣lutza who achieved that status from a state of marriage, for all these women their marriage contract is one hundred dinars,
讜讗讬谉 诇讛谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬诐
and they are not subject to a claim concerning their virginity. Since they were married, even if they did not engage in intercourse with their husband, their presumptive status is that of non-virgins, and the second husband cannot claim that he was misled with regard to their status as virgins.
讛讙讬讜专转 讜讛砖讘讜讬讛 讜讛砖驻讞讛 砖谞驻讚讜 讜砖谞转讙讬讬专讜 讜砖谞砖转讞专专讜 讬转讬专讜转 注诇 讘谞讜转 砖诇砖 砖谞讬诐 讜讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讻转讜讘转谉 诪谞讛 讜讗讬谉 诇讛谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬谉:
And similarly, with regard to a female convert, or a captive woman, or a maidservant, who were ransomed with regard to the captive, or who converted with regard to the convert, or who were freed with regard to the maidservant, when she was more than three years and one day old, for all of these, their marriage contract is one hundred dinars and they are not subject to a claim concerning their virginity. When they married, their presumptive status was that of a non-virgin.
讙诪壮 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 注砖讗讛 诪讜讻转 注抓 讻讬 讗诪专讬转讛 拽诪讬讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻转 注抓 讘讘砖专
GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: A minor boy who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman renders her as one whose hymen was ruptured by wood, as the act is not considered full-fledged intercourse. Rav Yehuda continues: When I said this statement before Shmuel, he said to me: A woman does not achieve the status of one whose hymen was ruptured by wood by means of flesh, i.e., intercourse.
讗讬讻讗 讚诪转谞讬 诇讛 诇讛讗 砖诪注转讗 讘讗驻讬 谞驻砖讛 拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 专讘 讗诪专 注砖讗讛 诪讜讻转 注抓 讜砖诪讜讗诇 讗诪专 讗讬谉 诪讜讻转 注抓 讘讘砖专
Some teach this halakha independent of Rav Yehuda: With regard to a minor boy who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman, Rav said: He renders her as one whose hymen was ruptured by wood. And Shmuel said: A woman does not achieve the status of one whose hymen was ruptured by wood by means of flesh.
诪转讬讘 专讘 讗讜砖注讬讗 讙讚讜诇 砖讘讗 注诇 讛拽讟谞讛 讜拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 讜诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转谉 诪讗转讬诐 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 诪讜讻转 注抓 讻转讜讘转讛 诪谞讛
Rav Oshaya raised an objection to the opinion of Rav from the mishna: With regard to an adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old, or a minor boy less than nine years old who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman, or a woman who had her hymen ruptured by wood or any other foreign object, the marriage contract for each of these women is two hundred dinars. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: The marriage contract of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood is one hundred dinars. Contrary to Rav鈥檚 opinion, the Rabbis distinguish between the halakha in the case of the intercourse of a minor boy and the halakha in the case of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood.
讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讙讚讜诇 讛讘讗 注诇 讛拽讟谞讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 讚驻讞讜转 诪讻讗谉 讻谞讜转谉 讗爪讘注 讘注讬谉 讚诪讬 讜拽讟谉 讛讘讗 注诇 讛讙讚讜诇讛 注砖讗讛 诪讜讻转 注抓 讜诪讜讻转 注抓 讙讜驻讗 驻诇讜讙转讗 讚专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜专讘谞谉
Rava said that this is what the mishna is saying: An adult man who engaged in intercourse with a minor girl less than three years old has done nothing, as intercourse with a girl less than three years old is tantamount to poking a finger into the eye. In the case of an eye, after a tear falls from it another tear forms to replace it. Similarly, the ruptured hymen of the girl younger than three is restored. And a young boy who engaged in intercourse with an adult woman renders her as one whose hymen was ruptured by wood. And with regard to the case of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood itself, there is a dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis. Rabbi Meir maintains that her marriage contract is two hundred dinars, and the Rabbis maintain that it is one hundred dinars.
讗诪专 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 诪讞诇讜拽转 讻砖讛讻讬专 讘讛 讚专讘讬 诪讗讬专 诪讚诪讬 诇讛 诇讘讜讙专转 讜专讘谞谉 诪讚诪讜 诇讛 诇讘注讜诇讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐
Rami bar 岣ma said: This dispute is specifically in a case where the husband was aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood, as in that case Rabbi Meir likens her to a grown woman, whose hymen does not completely obstruct the orifice as a result of the maturation process. Nevertheless, her marriage contract is that of a virgin, two hundred dinars. And the Rabbis liken her to a non-virgin who engaged in intercourse in the past. Her marriage contract is one hundred dinars. However, if he was not aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood and was under the impression that she was a full-fledged virgin, everyone agrees that she receives no marriage contract at all when he becomes aware of her condition, as the marriage was a mistaken transaction.
讜专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗诪讗讬 诪讚诪讬 诇讛 诇讘讜讙专转 谞讚诪讬讬讛 诇讘注讜诇讛 讘注讜诇讛 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讛讗 诇讗 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛 讘讬讚讬 讗讚诐 讜专讘谞谉 讗讚诪讚诪讜 诇讛 诇讘注讜诇讛 谞讚诪讬讬讛 诇讘讜讙专转 讘讜讙专转 诇讗 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛 讻诇诇 讛讗 讗讬转注讘讬讚 讘讛 诪注砖讛
The Gemara asks: And why does Rabbi Meir liken her to a grown woman? Let him liken her to a non-virgin, who engaged in intercourse in the past. The Gemara answers: In the case of a non-virgin, an action was performed on her by a person; but with regard to this woman, whose hymen was ruptured by wood, an action was not performed on her by a person. The Gemara asks: And with regard to the Rabbis, rather than likening her to a non-virgin, let them liken her to a grown woman. The Gemara answers: In the case of a grown woman, no action was performed on her; but with regard to this woman, whose hymen was ruptured by wood, an action was performed on her.
讗讘诇 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 诇讚讘专讬 讛讻诇 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 诪转讬讘 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛讬讗 讗讜诪专转 诪讜讻转 注抓 讗谞讬 讜讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讻讬 讗诇讗 讚专讜住转 讗讬砖 讗转 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞讗诪谞转
Rami bar 岣ma concluded his statement: However, if he was not aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood, everyone agrees that she receives no marriage contract at all. Rav Na岣an raised an objection from a mishna (13a): In a case where she says: I am one whose hymen was ruptured by wood, i.e., she admits that her hymen is not intact but claims that it was not ruptured through intercourse, and the groom says: No; rather, you are one who was violated by a man and you are no longer a virgin, Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: She is deemed credible and her claim is accepted. In that case, she is claiming that she is entitled to a marriage contract. Despite the fact that the groom had no prior awareness of her condition, Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer maintain that she is deemed credible and receives a marriage contract of at least one hundred dinars. Apparently, not everyone agrees that in that case she receives nothing at all.
讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讘讬谉 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讜讘讬谉 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 诇专讘讬 诪讗讬专 诪讗转讬诐 诇专讘谞谉 讛讻讬专 讘讛 诪谞讛 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐
Rather, Rava said: This is what the mishna is saying: Whether the husband was aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood and whether he was not aware of her condition, according to Rabbi Meir she receives a marriage contract of two hundred dinars and it is not a mistaken transaction. According to the Rabbis, if he was aware of her condition she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars like a non-virgin; if he was not aware of her condition she receives no marriage contract at all, since it is a mistaken transaction, as when he married her he believed that her hymen was intact. According to this explanation, the mishna cited by Rav Na岣an is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.
讜讛讚专 讘讬讛 专讘讗 讚转谞讬讗 讻讬爪讚 讛讜爪讗转 砖诐 专注 讘讗 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜讗诪专 驻诇讜谞讬 诇讗 诪爪讗转讬 诇讘转讱 讘转讜诇讬诐 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讘转 住拽讬诇讛 讛讬讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讘住拽讬诇讛 讝讬谞转讛 诪注讬拽专讗 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛
And Rava retracted his opinion, as it is taught in a baraita: How does the slander described in the Torah come about? If the groom comes to court and says: So-and-so, father of the bride, I did not find in your daughter an intact hymen. If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under the husband鈥檚 jurisdiction after betrothal, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. The Gemara asks: If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under his jurisdiction after betrothal, she is subject to execution by stoning. Obviously, she is in no position to receive a marriage contract. The Gemara answers that this is what the mishna is saying: If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under his jurisdiction after betrothal, she is subject to execution by stoning. However, if she engaged in intercourse initially, prior to betrothal, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars, like any non-virgin.
讜讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讝讗转 讗讜诪专转 讻谞住讛 讘讞讝拽转 讘转讜诇讛 讜谞诪爪讗转 讘注讜诇讛 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛 讜诪转讬讘 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讛谞讜砖讗 讗转 讛讗砖讛 讜诇讗 诪爪讗 诇讛 讘转讜诇讬诐 讛讬讗 讗讜诪专转 诪砖讗专住转谞讬 谞讗谞住转讬 讜谞住转讞驻讛 砖讚讛讜 讜讛讜讗 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讻讬 讗诇讗 注讚 砖诇讗 讗讬专住转讬讱 讜讛讬讛 诪拽讞讬 诪拽讞 讟注讜转 讜诇讬转 诇讛 讻诇诇
And Rav 岣yya bar Avin said that Rav Sheshet said: That is to say, if the groom married a woman with the presumptive status of a virgin and she is found to be a non-virgin, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. And Rav Na岣an raised an objection to the statement of Rav Sheshet from a mishna (12b): There is a case of one who marries a woman and did not find her hymen intact, and she says: After you betrothed me I was raped, and his, i.e., her husband鈥檚, field was inundated, meaning that it is his misfortune that she is not a virgin, as she was raped after betrothal. And he says: No; rather, you were raped before I betrothed you, and my transaction was a mistaken transaction. The betrothal was predicated on your presumptive status as a virgin and in fact, you were not a virgin then. In that case, she does not receive any marriage contract at all.
讜讗诪专 诇讛讜 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讬谉 讗驻砖专 专讘 注诪专诐 讜讻诇 讙讚讜诇讬 讛讚讜专 讬转讘讬 讻讬 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 诇讛讗 砖诪注转讗 讜拽砖讬讗 诇讛讜 讜砖谞讬 诪讗讬 诪拽讞 讟注讜转 谞诪讬 诪诪讗转讬诐 讗讘诇 诪谞讛 讗讬转 诇讛 讜讗转 讗诪专转 诇讬转 诇讛 讻诇诇
And Rav 岣yya bar Avin said to those present: Is it possible that Rav Amram and all the prominent Sages of the generation were sitting when Rav Sheshet said this halakha, and Rav Na岣an鈥檚 question was difficult for them, and they answered: What is the meaning of mistaken transaction in this context? It too means that he is absolved from his commitment to pay the marriage contract of a virgin, two hundred dinars, because she is not entitled to that sum. However, she is entitled to one hundred dinars. And, contrary to that consensus, you say that she does not receive any marriage contract at all?
讜讗诪专 专讘讗 诪讗谉 讚拽讗 诪讜转讬讘 砖驻讬专 拽讗 诪讜转讬讘 诪拽讞 讟注讜转 诇讙诪专讬 诪砖诪注 讜讗诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讱 转专讬抓 讜讗讬诪讗 讛讻讬 讗诐 讬砖 注讚讬诐 砖讝讬谞转讛 转讞转讬讜 讘住拽讬诇讛 讝讬谞转讛 诪注讬拽专讗 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 谞诪爪讗转 诪讜讻转 注抓 讬砖 诇讛 讻转讜讘讛 诪谞讛
And Rava said: The one who raised the objection, Rav Na岣an, raises the objection well, as the term: Mistaken transaction, indicates that the betrothal is dissolved totally. The Gemara asks: But that baraita with regard to slander remains difficult, as in that case, if he discovered that she was not a virgin, she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. The Gemara answers: Resolve the apparent contradiction and say this in the text of the baraita: If there are witnesses that she committed adultery while under his jurisdiction after betrothal, she is subject to execution by stoning. If she engaged in intercourse initially, prior to betrothal, she receives nothing at all. If she was discovered to be one whose hymen was ruptured by wood, she is entitled to a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.
讜讛讗 专讘讗 讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 诇专讘谞谉 诇讗 讛讻讬专 讘讛 讜诇讗 讻诇讜诐 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讛讚专 讘讬讛 专讘讗 诪讛讛讬讗
But isn鈥檛 it Rava himself who said that according to the Rabbis, in the case of a woman whose hymen was ruptured by wood, if he was not aware of her condition she receives no marriage contract at all? Rather, conclude from it that Rava retracted that statement, and he holds that even according to the Rabbis, even if he was unaware of her condition she receives a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.
转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讻谞住讛 专讗砖讜谉 诇砖讜诐 谞讬砖讜讗讬谉 讜讬砖 诇讛 注讚讬诐 砖诇讗 谞住转专讛 讗讬 谞诪讬 谞住转专讛 讜诇讗 砖讛转讛 讻讚讬 讘讬讗讛 讗讬谉 讛砖谞讬 讬讻讜诇 诇讟注讜谉 讟注谞转 讘转讜诇讬诐 砖讛专讬 讻谞住讛 专讗砖讜谉
搂 The Sages taught: If her first husband brought her into his home for the purpose of marriage, and she has witnesses who testified that she did not seclude herself with him, or alternatively, they testified that she secluded herself with him and did not stay in seclusion with him for a period equivalent to the time required to engage in intercourse, if the first husband dies or divorces her and she remarries, despite the testimony of the witnesses, the second husband cannot make a claim concerning virginity, and say the betrothal was predicated on the assumption that she was a virgin and she should lose her marriage contract. Since the first husband brought her into his home, the second husband should have considered that a woman who entered her husband鈥檚 home is no longer a virgin.
