Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

September 9, 2022 | 讬状讙 讘讗诇讜诇 转砖驻状讘

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

  • 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 65

Today’s daf is sponsored by Risa and Zev Gewurz in loving memory of Risa鈥檚 father, Rephael Ben Mordechai, Ralph Loebenberg, z鈥漧 on his 16th yahrzeit.聽
If a husband is supporting his wife through a third party, they are not to provide her with wine. Support for this is brought from a verse about Chana (Shmuel 1 1:9). However, there are exceptions to this rule. A number of stories are brought of women who demanded wine, such as, Abaye’s widow Chuma who came to Rava’s court to demand wine from the heirs, and accidentally revealed her arm, showing off her beauty. This led Rava to go back home to his wife desirous of her, but when his wife understood what had happened, she got angry at Chuma and kicked her out of town. In addition to food, the husband also needs to provide his wife (when supporting through an agent), a bed, a soft mat and a hard mat. Why all three? There is a debate about whether he needs to provide her with a pillow and cushion. What is the root of the debate? Why does the woman get shoes three times a year and clothes only once? The amount of clothes is 50 zuz, but this amount refers to simple zuzim that are worth much less than the zuzim normally referred to in the Gemara (zuz tzuri). Leftover food belongs to the husband but leftover clothes belong to her – why? However, the law is different for a widow – why? According to the Mishna, even if the husband appoints someone to be in charge during the week, he eats with her on Friday night. Does “eat” mean food or having marital relations? A father needs to sustain one’s children until the age of six as until that age, the child is considered an appendage of the mother and the husband needs to support the mother and therefore the child as well. Why? Can this be learned from the law in our Mishna regarding a nursing mother who is entitled to extra food – is it not for her child? No! It is for her as she needs to eat more since the nursing weakens her. The Mishna states that items a woman finds or salary she makes goes to her husband. Inherited property goes to her, but profits are his during his lifetime. There is a debate regarding payment of humiliation or damage caused to a woman – does she receive it all or does part go to her husband. Weren’t most of these laws already taught in a Mishna in Chapter 4 (Ketubot 46b)?

讗讬谉 驻讜住拽讬谉 讬讬谞讜转 诇讗砖讛 讜讗诐 转讗诪专 讗诇讻讛 讗讞专讬 诪讗讛讘讬 谞讜转谞讬 诇讞诪讬 讜诪讬诪讬 爪诪专讬 讜驻砖转讬 砖诪谞讬 讜砖拽讜讬讬 讚讘专讬诐 砖讛讗砖讛 诪砖转讜拽拽转 注诇讬讛谉 讜诪讗讬 谞讬谞讛讜 转讻砖讬讟讬谉

Wines are not allotted to a wife. And if you say that in the verse: 鈥淚 will go after my lovers who give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink鈥 (Hosea 2:7), 鈥渄rink [shikkuyai]鈥 is apparently a reference to wine, which indicates that it is usual for a woman to receive wine, this is invalid, since actually shikkuyai is not referring to wine but rather to items that a woman desires [mishtokeket]. And what are these? Jewelry or other ornaments, not wine.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 谞讘讬专讬讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 谞驻讜专 讞讬诇 诪谞讬谉 砖讗讬谉 驻讜住拽讬谉 讬讬谞讜转 诇讗砖讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜转拽诐 讞谞讛 讗讞专讬 讗讻诇讛 讘砖讬诇讛 讜讗讞专讬 砖转讛 砖转讛 讜诇讗 砖转转

Rabbi Yehuda of the village of Neviraya, and some say of the village of Nefor 岣yil, interpreted a verse: From where is it derived that one does not allot wines for a woman? As it is stated: 鈥淪o Hannah rose up after she had eaten in Shiloh and after he had drunk鈥 (I聽Samuel 1:9). It states: 鈥淗e had drunk,鈥 and not: She had drunk. This teaches that although she ate, she did not drink wine.

讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讗讻诇讛 讜诇讗 讗讻诇 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讗谞谉 诪讚砖谞讬 拽专讗 讘讚讘讜专讬讛 拽讗诪专讬谞谉 诪讻讚讬 讘讙讜讛 拽讗 注住讬拽 讜讗转讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 砖谞讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 砖转讛 讜诇讗 砖转转

The Gemara asks: However, if that is so, by the same reasoning, should the phrase 鈥渟he had eaten,鈥 which is in the feminine, indeed be interpreted to mean that only she ate, and that he did not eat? The Gemara answers: We say this interpretation from the fact that the verse changed its language. Since the verse was already dealing with her, what is the reason that it changed the terminology and did not state: And had drunk, in the feminine? One can learn from this that 鈥渉e had drunk鈥 means that he drank, but she did not drink.

诪讬转讬讘讬 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 专讙讬诇讛 砖讗谞讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 讞讬谞谞讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻讜住 讗讞讚 砖讗讬谞讛 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 砖谞讬 讻讜住讜转

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: If a woman is accustomed to wine, she is given wine. The Gemara explains: If the woman is accustomed to wine it is different, as Rav 岣nnana bar Kahana said that Shmuel said: If a woman is accustomed to drinking wine, she is given one cup, and if she is not accustomed to wine, she is given two cups.

诪讗讬 拽讗诪专 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 专讙讬诇讛 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 砖谞讬 讻讜住讜转 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻讜住 讗讞讚 讗讬谞讛 专讙讬诇讛 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 讗诇讗 讻讜住 讗讞讚 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻诇 注讬拽专

The Gemara asks: What is Shmuel saying? His statement is the opposite of what one would logically expect. Abaye said: This is what he is saying: If she is accustomed to wine, then in the presence of her husband she is given two cups, and if she is not in the presence of her husband she is given one cup. If she is not accustomed to drinking wine, then in the presence of her husband she is given only one cup, and if she is not in the presence of her husband she is not given wine at all.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 诇爪讬拽讬 拽讚讬专讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪注砖讛 讘讻诇转讜 砖诇 谞拽讚讬诪讜谉 讘谉 讙讜专讬讜谉 砖驻住拽讜 诇讛 讞讻诪讬诐 住讗转讬诐 讬讬谉 诇爪讬拽讬 拽讚专讛 诪注专讘 砖讘转 诇注专讘 砖讘转 讗诪专讛 诇讛谉 讻讱 转驻住拽讜 诇讘谞讜转讬讻诐 转谞讗 砖讜诪专转 讬讘诐 讛讬转讛 讜诇讗 注谞讜 讗讞专讬讛 讗诪谉

And if you wish, say instead: If she is accustomed to wine, she is given wine, but not for drinking, rather for meat pudding [tzikei], made with wine, flour, and leftover meat in a pot. As Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: An incident occurred involving the daughter-in-law of Nakdimon ben Guryon, whose husband had died. The Sages apportioned for her from his estate two se鈥檃 of wine for pudding, from one Shabbat eve to another. She said to them, as a blessing out of gratitude: So may you apportion for your own daughters an amount as large as this. It was taught: She was a widow waiting for her yavam, and consequently, the Sages did not answer amen after her blessing, as they did not want their daughters to reach her unfortunate state.

转谞讗 讻讜住 讗讞讚 讬驻讛 诇讗砖讛 砖谞讬诐 谞讬讜讜诇 讛讜讗 砖诇砖讛 转讜讘注转 讘驻讛 讗专讘注讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讞诪讜专 转讜讘注转 讘砖讜拽 讜讗讬谞讛 诪拽驻讚转 讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 讘注诇讛 注诪讛 讗讘诇 讘注诇讛 注诪讛 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛

It was taught in a baraita: One cup of wine is good for a woman; two cups is a disgrace, as she will start to become drunk; after three cups, she will become lustful and verbally request sexual intercourse, which is unseemly; after four cups of wine, she will even request intercourse from a donkey in the marketplace, as at this stage she is so drunk that she is not particular about with whom she has relations. Rava said: They taught that a woman should not drink much wine only if her husband is not with her. However, if her husband is with her, we have no problem with it. If she feels an urge for intercourse her husband is available.

讜讛讗 讞谞讛 讚讘注诇讛 注诪讛 讛讜讗讬 讗讻住谞讗讬 砖讗谞讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪谞讬谉 诇讗讻住谞讗讬 砖讗住讜专 讘转砖诪讬砖 讛诪讟讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬砖讻讬诪讜 讘讘拽专 讜讬砖转讞讜讜 诇驻谞讬 讛壮 讜讬砖讜讘讜 讜讬讘讗讜 讗诇 讘讬转诐 讛专诪转讛 讜讬讚注 讗诇拽谞讛 讗转 讞谞讛 讗砖转讜 讜讬讝讻专讛 讛壮 讛砖转讗 讗讬谉 诪注讬拽专讗 诇讗

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But the case of Hannah was one in which her husband was with her, and yet this episode is cited as a source for the halakha that a woman should not drink wine. The Gemara answers: The case of a guest is different, as Rav Huna said: From where is it derived that a guest is prohibited from engaging in conjugal relations? As it is stated: 鈥淎nd they rose up in the morning early, and worshipped before the Lord, and returned, and came to their house to Ramah; and Elkanah knew Hannah his wife; and the Lord remembered her鈥 (I聽Samuel 1:19). This verse indicates that now, after they returned home, yes, they engaged in relations; at the outset, when they were still in Shiloh, no, they did not. Therefore, Hannah did not drink wine in Shiloh.

讞讜诪讗 讚讘讬转讛讜 讚讗讘讬讬 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 诪讝讜谞讬 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 讞诪专讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讬讚注谞讗 讘讬讛 讘谞讞诪谞讬 讚诇讗 讛讜讛 砖转讬 讞诪专讗 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 讞讬讬 讚诪专 讚讛讜讬 诪砖拽讬 诇讬讛 讘砖讜驻专讝讬 讻讬 讛讗讬 讘讛讚讬 讚拽讗 诪讞讜讬讗 诇讬讛 讗讬讙诇讬 讚专注讗 谞驻诇 谞讛讜专讗 讘讘讬 讚讬谞讗

The Gemara relates: Abaye鈥檚 wife, 岣ma, came before Rava after Abaye died, as Rava was the local judge. She said to him: Apportion sustenance for me, as I am entitled to be sustained by Abaye鈥檚 heirs. Rava apportioned sustenance for her. She subsequently said to him: Apportion wine for me as well. Rava said to her: I know that Na岣ani, i.e., Abaye, did not drink wine. Since you were not accustomed to drinking wine during your husband鈥檚 lifetime, you are not entitled to it after his death. She said to him: By the Master鈥檚 life, this is not correct. In fact, he would give me wine to drink in cups [shufrazei] as large as this. She gestured with her hands to show how large the cups were. While she was showing him the size of the cups, her arm became uncovered, and she was so beautiful that it was as though a light had shined in the courtroom.

拽诐 专讘讗 注诇 诇讘讬转讬讛 转讘注讛 诇讘转 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 讘转 专讘 讞住讚讗 诪讗谉 讛讜讬 讛讗讬讚谞讗 讘讘讬 讚讬谞讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讞讜诪讗 讚讘讬转讛讜 讚讗讘讬讬 谞驻拽讗 讗讘转专讛 诪讞转讗 诇讛 讘拽讜诇驻讬 讚砖讬讚讗 注讚 讚讗驻拽讛 诇讛 诪讻讜诇讬 诪讞讜讝讗 讗诪专讛 诇讛 拽讟诇转 诇讬讱 转诇转讗 讜讗转转 诇诪讬拽讟诇 讗讞专讬谞讗

Rava arose, went home, and requested intercourse from his wife, the daughter of Rav 岣sda. The daughter of Rav 岣sda said to him: Who was just now in the courtroom? Noticing his unusual behavior, she suspected that there must have been a woman in the court. He said to her: 岣ma, Abaye鈥檚 wife, was there. Upon hearing this, Rava鈥檚 wife went after 岣ma and struck her with the lock of a chest [kulpei deshida] until she drove her out of the entire city of Me岣za, saying to her: You have already killed three men, as Abaye was your third husband, and now you come to kill another one, my husband Rava? Since you showed him your beauty, he will want to marry you.

讚讘讬转讛讜 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 谞讞诪讬讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 诪讝讜谞讬 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 讞诪专讗 驻住拽 诇讛 讗诪专 诇讛 讬讚注谞讗 讘讛讜 讘讘谞讬 诪讞讜讝讗 讚砖转讜 讞诪专讗

The Gemara relates a similar incident: The wife of Rav Yosef, son of Rava, came before Rav Ne岣mya, son of Rav Yosef, for judgment. She said to him: Apportion sustenance for me. Rav Ne岣mya apportioned a certain amount of sustenance for her. She said to him: Apportion wine for me as well. He apportioned wine for her. He said to her: I know that the residents of Me岣za are accustomed to drinking wine, and therefore you, too, are entitled to wine, in accordance with the local custom.

讚讘讬转讛讜 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 诪谞砖讬讗 诪讚讜讬诇 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 诪讝讜谞讬 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 讞诪专讗 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 砖讬专讗讬 讗诪专 诇讛 砖讬专讗讬 诇诪讛 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 诇讱 讜诇讞讘专讱 讜诇讞讘专讜专讱

Similarly, the wife of Rav Yosef, son of Rav Menashya of D鈥檝il, came before Rav Yosef. She said to him: Apportion sustenance for me. He apportioned sustenance for her. She added: Apportion wine for me. He apportioned wine for her. She continued: Apportion silk garments for me. Rav Yosef said to her: Why do you need silk garments? She said to him: For you, for your friends, and for your friends鈥 friends. Even as a widow, I should not have to be ashamed in front of you and your colleagues.

讜谞讜转谉 诇讛 诪讟讛 讜诪驻抓 讜讻讜壮 诪驻抓 讜诪讞爪诇转 诇诪讛 诇讛 讚讬讛讘 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讘讗转专讗 讚谞讛讬讙讬 讚诪诇讜 驻讜专讬讗 讘讞讘诇讬 讚诪讘讙专 诇讛

搂 The mishna taught: And he must give her a bed, a soft mat, and a hard mat. The Gemara asks: Why does he need to give her a soft mat and a hard mat if she already has a bed? Rav Pappa said: The mishna is speaking of a place where it is the custom to fill a bed with ropes. Because these ropes cause her suffering and age [mevager] her, she covers them with a mat, which serves as a kind of mattress upon which she can lie in comfort.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻专 讜讻住转 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗诪专讜 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻专 讜讻住转 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬 讚讗讜专讞讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚转谞讗 拽诪讗 讜讗讬 讚诇讗讜 讗讜专讞讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 谞转谉

The Sages taught: One does not give a poor woman a pillow and a cushion. In the name of Rabbi Natan, they said: One does give her a pillow and a cushion. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? If it is her usual manner to use a pillow and cushion, what is the reason for the opinion of the first tanna that she is not given these items? And if it is not her usual manner, what is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Natan?

诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 讻讙讜谉 讚讗讜专讞讬讛 讚讬讚讬讛 讜诇讗讜 讗讜专讞讛 讚讬讚讛 转谞讗 拽诪讗 住讘专 讗诪专 诇讛 讻讬 讗讝讬诇谞讗 砖拽讬诇谞讗 诇讛讜 讜讻讬 讗转讬谞讗 诪讬讬转讬谞讗 诇讛讜 讘讛讚讗讬 讜专讘讬 谞转谉 住讘专 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚诪讬转专诪讬 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讜诇讗 诪爪讬转 诪讬讬转讬 诇讛讜 讜砖拽诇转 诇讛讜 诇讚讬讚讬 讜诪讙谞讬转 诇讬 注诇 讗专注讗

The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary in a case where it is his manner to use a pillow and cushion, but it is not her manner. The first tanna holds that the husband says to her: When I go away from you, I will take my bedding with me, and when I come back I will bring it with me. And Rabbi Natan holds that she can say to him: Sometimes it happens that you arrive at twilight and you are unable to bring it with you, and you will take my bedding and you will make me lie on the ground. Therefore, I require extra pillows and cushions.

讜谞讜转谉 诇讛 讻驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗讘讬讬

搂 The mishna further taught: And he must give her a cap, and shoes every Festival, and clothes once a year. Rav Pappa said to Abaye:

讛讗讬 转谞讗 砖诇讬讞 注专讟诇讗讬 讜专诪讬 诪住讗谞讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 转谞讗 讘诪拽讜诐 讛专讬诐 拽讗讬 讚诇讗 住讙讬讗 讘诇讗 转诇转讗 讝讜讙讬 诪住讗谞讬 讜讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讬讛 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚谞讬转讘讬谞讛讜 谞讬讛诇讛 讘诪讜注讚 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚谞讬讛讜讬 诇讛 砖诪讞讛 讘讙讜讬讬讛讜

This tanna creates a bizarre situation in which the woman is left naked but wearing shoes, as the husband must give his wife shoes three times a year but new clothing only once a year. Abaye said to him: The tanna is standing, i.e., speaking of, a mountainous region, in which she cannot do without three pairs of shoes, as shoes wear out quickly in hilly areas. And in passing, the tanna teaches us that he should give them to her on a Festival, so that she will rejoice in them during the Festival.

讜讻诇讬诐 砖诇 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝讬 驻砖讬讟讬 诪诪讗讬 诪讚拽转谞讬 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘注谞讬 砖讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讘诇 讘诪讻讜讘讚 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讻讘讜讚讜 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝 诪诪砖 注谞讬 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝 诪谞讗 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝讬 驻砖讬讟讬

搂 The mishna teaches: And he must give her clothes with a value of fifty dinars. Abaye said: This is referring to fifty simple [peshitei] dinars, used as the money of the state, which are worth only one-eighth of Tyrian dinars. From where did Abaye derive this? From the fact that it teaches: In what case is this statement said? It is with regard to the poorest of Jews. However, in the case of a prominent man, all the amounts are increased in accordance with his prominence. And if it enters your mind that the mishna means literally fifty dinars, from where would such a poor man get fifty dinars? How could a pauper afford to give such a large sum to his wife for her clothing? Rather, learn from this that the mishna is referring to fifty simple dinars.

讜讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 诇讗 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讜转专 诪讝讜谞讜转 诇讘注诇 诪讜转专 讘诇讗讜转 诇讗砖讛 诪讜转专 讘诇讗讜转 诇讗砖讛 诇诪讛 诇讛 讗诪专 专讞讘讛 砖诪转讻住讛 讘讛谉 讘讬诪讬 谞讚转讛 讻讚讬 砖诇讗 转转讙谞讛 注诇 讘注诇讛

搂 The mishna further states: And he may not give her new clothes in the summer, nor worn garments in the rainy season, and the leftover, worn clothes belong to her. The Sages taught: Leftover sustenance belongs to the husband, whereas leftover, worn clothes belong to the wife. The Gemara asks: With regard to the statement that worn clothes belong to the wife, why does she need these old clothes? Ra岣va said: She requires them, as she covers herself with them during her days of menstruation, so that she does not become repulsive to her husband. If she wears her normal clothes when she is menstruating, he will later be disgusted by her.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 谞拽讟讬谞谉 诪讜转专 讘诇讗讜转 讗诇诪谞讛 诇讬讜专砖讬讜 讛转诐 讛讜讗 讚诇讗 转转讙谞讬 讘讗驻讬讛 讛讻讗 转转讙谞讬 讜转转讙谞讬

Abaye said: We have a tradition that the leftover, worn clothes of a widow belong to the husband鈥檚 heirs. The reason is that it is only in that case there, concerning a woman whose husband is alive, that the reasoning so that she does not become repulsive to her husband can be applied. Whereas here, when he is dead, let her become repulsive. There is no need to ensure that she find favor in the eyes of his heirs.

谞讜转谉 诇讛 诪注讛 讻住祝 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讗讜讻诇转 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 讗讜讻诇转 诪诪砖 专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 转砖诪讬砖

搂 The mishna teaches that he gives her a silver ma鈥檃, and she eats with him from one Shabbat evening to the next. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: She eats, in this context? Rav Na岣an said: It means literally that she eats with him once a week. Rav Ashi said: This is referring to sexual relations.

转谞谉 讗讜讻诇转 注诪讜 诇讬诇讬 砖讘转 讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讻讬诇讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽转谞讬 讗讜讻诇转 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 转砖诪讬砖 诪讗讬 讗讜讻诇转 诇讬砖谞讗 诪注诇讬讗 讻讚讻转讬讘 讗讻诇讛 讜旨诪讞转讛 驻讬讛 讜讗诪专讛 诇讗 驻注诇转讬 讗讜谉

The mishna states: And she eats with him from Shabbat evening to Shabbat evening. Granted, according to the one who says that it means actual eating, this explanation is consistent with that which is taught: She eats. However, according to the one who says that it is referring to sexual relations, what is the meaning of: She eats? The Gemara explains: It is a euphemism, as it is written: 鈥淪o is the way of an adulterous woman; she eats, and wipes her mouth, and says: I have done no wickedness鈥 (Proverbs 30:20).

诪讬转讬讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗讜讻诇转 讘诇讬诇讬 砖讘转 讜砖讘转 讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讻讬诇讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽转谞讬 讜砖讘转 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 转砖诪讬砖 转砖诪讬砖 讘砖讘转 诪讬 讗讬讻讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讬砖专讗诇 拽讚讜砖讬诐 讛谉 讜讗讬谉 诪砖诪砖讬谉 诪讟讜转讬讛谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讗诪专 专讘讗 讘讘讬转 讗驻诇 诪讜转专

The Gemara raises an objection: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, disagreeing with the tanna of the mishna: She eats on Shabbat evening and on Shabbat. Granted, according to the one who says that it means actual eating, this explanation is consistent with that which is taught: And Shabbat, i.e., she dines with him also on the day of Shabbat. However, according to the one who says that it is referring to sexual relations, are there sexual relations on the day of Shabbat? But didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say: The Jewish people are holy and therefore do not engage in sexual relations during the day? The Gemara answers that Rava said: If they are in a dark house, it is permitted to engage in relations even during the day.

讜讗诐 讛讬转讛 诪谞讬拽讛 讚专砖 专讘讬 注讜诇讗 专讘讛 讗驻讬转讞讗 讚讘讬 谞砖讬讗讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讝谉 讗转 讘谞讬讜 讜讘谞讜转讬讜 讻砖讛谉 拽讟谞讬诐 讗讘诇 讝谉 拽讟谞讬 拽讟谞讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And if she is nursing, the required amount is reduced from her earnings and is added to the sum she receives for her sustenance. Rabbi Ulla the Great taught at the entrance to the house of the Nasi: Although the Sages said that a person is not obligated to sustain his sons and daughters when they are young, still, he must sustain the very young ones.

注讚 讻诪讛 注讚 讘谉 砖砖 讻讚专讘 讗住讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 拽讟谉 讘谉 砖砖 讬讜爪讗 讘注讬专讜讘 讗诪讜

The Gemara asks: Until when are they considered very young? Until the age of six, in accordance with the opinion of Rav Asi, as Rav Asi said: A six-year-old minor may go out by means of his mother鈥檚 eiruv, if she prepared an eiruv on one side of the city. He is included in his mother鈥檚 eiruv rather than that of his father, as he is considered subordinate to his mother.

诪诪讗讬 诪讚拽转谞讬 讛讬转讛 诪谞讬拽讛 驻讜讞转讬谉 诇讛 诪诪注砖讛 讬讚讬讛 讜诪讜住讬驻讬谉 诇讛 注诇 诪讝讜谞讜转讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗讜 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬讻诇 讘讛讚讛 讜讚诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讞讜诇讛 讛讬讗

The Gemara asks: From where is this halakha that Rabbi Ulla taught derived? The Gemara explains that it is derived from the fact that it teaches: If she is nursing, the required amount is reduced from her earnings and is added to the sum she receives for her sustenance. What is the reason for this? Is it not because the baby needs to eat together with her? This shows that a father is responsible to provide for his young child. The Gemara rejects this proof: But perhaps he increases her sustenance not due to the baby but because she is considered ill due to her weakness while nursing, in which case the obligation stems from his obligation to his wife, not to his child.

讗诐 讻谉 诇讬转谞讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 讞讜诇讛 诪讗讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 诪谞讬拽讛 讜讚诇诪讗 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚住转诐 诪谞讬拽讜转 讞讜诇讜转 谞讬谞讛讜 讗讬转诪专 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 诇讛 讬讬谉 砖讛讬讬谉 讬驻讛 诇讞诇讘

The Gemara retorts: If so, let the mishna teach: If she was ill. What is the reason that it specifies: If she was nursing? The reason for this halakha must certainly be due to the child. The Gemara again rejects this answer: But perhaps the mishna teaches us this, that in an ordinary situation, nursing women are considered ill, and that a husband must increase the sustenance all the more so if his wife is actually ill. Consequently, this does not prove that a father is obligated to sustain his very young child. It was stated that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Wine is added for a nursing woman, as wine is good for milk.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬

 

诪转谞讬壮 诪爪讬讗转 讛讗砖讛 讜诪注砖讛 讬讚讬讛 诇讘注诇讛 讜讬专讜砖转讛 讛讜讗 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 讘讞讬讬讛 讘讜砖转讛 讜驻讙诪讛 砖诇讛

MISHNA: A lost object found by a wife and the wife鈥檚 earnings belong to her husband. And with regard to her inheritance, the husband enjoys the profits of this property in her lifetime. If she is humiliated or injured, the perpetrator is liable to pay compensation for her humiliation and her degradation, as relevant. This payment belongs to her.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讗 讗讜诪专 讘讝诪谉 砖讘住转专 诇讛 砖谞讬 讞诇拽讬诐 讜诇讜 讗讞讚 讜讘讝诪谉 砖讘讙诇讜讬 诇讜 砖谞讬 讞诇拽讬诐 讜诇讛 讗讞讚 砖诇讜 讬谞转谉 诪讬讚 讜砖诇讛 讬诇拽讞 讘讛谉 拽专拽注 讜讛讜讗 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: When it is an injury that is in a concealed part of the woman鈥檚 body, she receives two parts, i.e., two-thirds, of the payment for humiliation and degradation, and the husband receives one part, i.e., one-third, as the injury affects him as well. And when it is an injury that is in an exposed part of her body, he receives two parts, as he suffers public humiliation due to her condition, and she receives one part. His payment should be given to him immediately. And with her portion, land should be purchased with it, and he enjoys the profits of that property.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 转谞讬谞讗 讛讗讘 讝讻讗讬 讘讘转讜 讘拽讬讚讜砖讬讛 讘讻住祝 讘砖讟专 讜讘讘讬讗讛 讝讻讗讬 讘诪爪讬讗转讛 讜讘诪注砖讛 讬讚讬讛 讜讘讛驻专转 谞讚专讬讛 诪拽讘诇 讗转 讙讬讟讛 讜讗讬谞讜 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 讘讞讬讬讛 谞讬砖讗转 讬转专 注诇讬讜 讛讘注诇 砖讛讜讗 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 讘讞讬讬讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the mishna teaching us? We already learned in a mishna (46b) that the father is entitled, in the case of his daughter, to authority over her betrothal, whether it is effected with money, with a document, or through sexual intercourse. Furthermore, as long as she is single, her father is entitled to any lost object that she finds, and to her earnings, and to effect nullification of her vows (see Numbers, chapter 30). Her father also receives her bill of divorce on her behalf, but he does not enjoy the profits of her property in her lifetime. If she is married, the rights of the husband are greater than his, as the husband enjoys the profits of her property in her lifetime. What, then, is the mishna teaching beyond that which was taught elsewhere?

讘讜砖转讛 讜驻讙诪讛 讗讬爪讟专讬讻讗 诇讬讛 驻诇讜讙转讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讗 讜专讘谞谉

The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the tanna to mention the halakhot concerning compensation for her humiliation and her degradation, as ownership of these payments is subject to a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira and the Rabbis.

转谞讬 转谞讗 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪爪讬讗转 讛讗砖讛 诇注爪诪讛 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 诇讘注诇讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 讜诪讛 讛注讚驻讛

A tanna teaches a baraita before Rava: A lost object found by a wife belongs to her; Rabbi Akiva says it belongs to her husband. Rava said to that tanna: This baraita is puzzling. Now, if, with regard to the surplus of the wife鈥檚 earnings beyond the minimum sum stipulated by the Sages,

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Ketubot: 63-69 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we are going to learn about the 鈥渞ebellious wife鈥, why she is called rebellious and what are the...
talking talmud_square

Ketubot 65: Real Wives of Abaye and Rava

To what extent do the provisions for a woman include wine? The answer seems to depend on whether she's accustomed...
navoraya lintel byz

A Small Town in the Galilee

The fifth chapter of Ketubot goes in a practical direction: what do a wife and husband owe each other in...

Ketubot 65

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Ketubot 65

讗讬谉 驻讜住拽讬谉 讬讬谞讜转 诇讗砖讛 讜讗诐 转讗诪专 讗诇讻讛 讗讞专讬 诪讗讛讘讬 谞讜转谞讬 诇讞诪讬 讜诪讬诪讬 爪诪专讬 讜驻砖转讬 砖诪谞讬 讜砖拽讜讬讬 讚讘专讬诐 砖讛讗砖讛 诪砖转讜拽拽转 注诇讬讛谉 讜诪讗讬 谞讬谞讛讜 转讻砖讬讟讬谉

Wines are not allotted to a wife. And if you say that in the verse: 鈥淚 will go after my lovers who give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, my oil and my drink鈥 (Hosea 2:7), 鈥渄rink [shikkuyai]鈥 is apparently a reference to wine, which indicates that it is usual for a woman to receive wine, this is invalid, since actually shikkuyai is not referring to wine but rather to items that a woman desires [mishtokeket]. And what are these? Jewelry or other ornaments, not wine.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 谞讘讬专讬讗 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗讬砖 讻驻专 谞驻讜专 讞讬诇 诪谞讬谉 砖讗讬谉 驻讜住拽讬谉 讬讬谞讜转 诇讗砖讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜转拽诐 讞谞讛 讗讞专讬 讗讻诇讛 讘砖讬诇讛 讜讗讞专讬 砖转讛 砖转讛 讜诇讗 砖转转

Rabbi Yehuda of the village of Neviraya, and some say of the village of Nefor 岣yil, interpreted a verse: From where is it derived that one does not allot wines for a woman? As it is stated: 鈥淪o Hannah rose up after she had eaten in Shiloh and after he had drunk鈥 (I聽Samuel 1:9). It states: 鈥淗e had drunk,鈥 and not: She had drunk. This teaches that although she ate, she did not drink wine.

讗诇讗 诪注转讛 讗讻诇讛 讜诇讗 讗讻诇 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讗谞谉 诪讚砖谞讬 拽专讗 讘讚讘讜专讬讛 拽讗诪专讬谞谉 诪讻讚讬 讘讙讜讛 拽讗 注住讬拽 讜讗转讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 砖谞讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 砖转讛 讜诇讗 砖转转

The Gemara asks: However, if that is so, by the same reasoning, should the phrase 鈥渟he had eaten,鈥 which is in the feminine, indeed be interpreted to mean that only she ate, and that he did not eat? The Gemara answers: We say this interpretation from the fact that the verse changed its language. Since the verse was already dealing with her, what is the reason that it changed the terminology and did not state: And had drunk, in the feminine? One can learn from this that 鈥渉e had drunk鈥 means that he drank, but she did not drink.

诪讬转讬讘讬 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 专讙讬诇讛 砖讗谞讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 讞讬谞谞讗 讘专 讻讛谞讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻讜住 讗讞讚 砖讗讬谞讛 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 砖谞讬 讻讜住讜转

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: If a woman is accustomed to wine, she is given wine. The Gemara explains: If the woman is accustomed to wine it is different, as Rav 岣nnana bar Kahana said that Shmuel said: If a woman is accustomed to drinking wine, she is given one cup, and if she is not accustomed to wine, she is given two cups.

诪讗讬 拽讗诪专 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 专讙讬诇讛 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 砖谞讬 讻讜住讜转 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻讜住 讗讞讚 讗讬谞讛 专讙讬诇讛 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 讗诇讗 讻讜住 讗讞讚 砖诇讗 讘驻谞讬 讘注诇讛 讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻诇 注讬拽专

The Gemara asks: What is Shmuel saying? His statement is the opposite of what one would logically expect. Abaye said: This is what he is saying: If she is accustomed to wine, then in the presence of her husband she is given two cups, and if she is not in the presence of her husband she is given one cup. If she is not accustomed to drinking wine, then in the presence of her husband she is given only one cup, and if she is not in the presence of her husband she is not given wine at all.

讜讗讬 讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 专讙讬诇讛 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 诇爪讬拽讬 拽讚讬专讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪注砖讛 讘讻诇转讜 砖诇 谞拽讚讬诪讜谉 讘谉 讙讜专讬讜谉 砖驻住拽讜 诇讛 讞讻诪讬诐 住讗转讬诐 讬讬谉 诇爪讬拽讬 拽讚专讛 诪注专讘 砖讘转 诇注专讘 砖讘转 讗诪专讛 诇讛谉 讻讱 转驻住拽讜 诇讘谞讜转讬讻诐 转谞讗 砖讜诪专转 讬讘诐 讛讬转讛 讜诇讗 注谞讜 讗讞专讬讛 讗诪谉

And if you wish, say instead: If she is accustomed to wine, she is given wine, but not for drinking, rather for meat pudding [tzikei], made with wine, flour, and leftover meat in a pot. As Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: An incident occurred involving the daughter-in-law of Nakdimon ben Guryon, whose husband had died. The Sages apportioned for her from his estate two se鈥檃 of wine for pudding, from one Shabbat eve to another. She said to them, as a blessing out of gratitude: So may you apportion for your own daughters an amount as large as this. It was taught: She was a widow waiting for her yavam, and consequently, the Sages did not answer amen after her blessing, as they did not want their daughters to reach her unfortunate state.

转谞讗 讻讜住 讗讞讚 讬驻讛 诇讗砖讛 砖谞讬诐 谞讬讜讜诇 讛讜讗 砖诇砖讛 转讜讘注转 讘驻讛 讗专讘注讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讞诪讜专 转讜讘注转 讘砖讜拽 讜讗讬谞讛 诪拽驻讚转 讗诪专 专讘讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 讘注诇讛 注诪讛 讗讘诇 讘注诇讛 注诪讛 诇讬转 诇谉 讘讛

It was taught in a baraita: One cup of wine is good for a woman; two cups is a disgrace, as she will start to become drunk; after three cups, she will become lustful and verbally request sexual intercourse, which is unseemly; after four cups of wine, she will even request intercourse from a donkey in the marketplace, as at this stage she is so drunk that she is not particular about with whom she has relations. Rava said: They taught that a woman should not drink much wine only if her husband is not with her. However, if her husband is with her, we have no problem with it. If she feels an urge for intercourse her husband is available.

讜讛讗 讞谞讛 讚讘注诇讛 注诪讛 讛讜讗讬 讗讻住谞讗讬 砖讗谞讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诪谞讬谉 诇讗讻住谞讗讬 砖讗住讜专 讘转砖诪讬砖 讛诪讟讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬砖讻讬诪讜 讘讘拽专 讜讬砖转讞讜讜 诇驻谞讬 讛壮 讜讬砖讜讘讜 讜讬讘讗讜 讗诇 讘讬转诐 讛专诪转讛 讜讬讚注 讗诇拽谞讛 讗转 讞谞讛 讗砖转讜 讜讬讝讻专讛 讛壮 讛砖转讗 讗讬谉 诪注讬拽专讗 诇讗

The Gemara raises a difficulty: But the case of Hannah was one in which her husband was with her, and yet this episode is cited as a source for the halakha that a woman should not drink wine. The Gemara answers: The case of a guest is different, as Rav Huna said: From where is it derived that a guest is prohibited from engaging in conjugal relations? As it is stated: 鈥淎nd they rose up in the morning early, and worshipped before the Lord, and returned, and came to their house to Ramah; and Elkanah knew Hannah his wife; and the Lord remembered her鈥 (I聽Samuel 1:19). This verse indicates that now, after they returned home, yes, they engaged in relations; at the outset, when they were still in Shiloh, no, they did not. Therefore, Hannah did not drink wine in Shiloh.

讞讜诪讗 讚讘讬转讛讜 讚讗讘讬讬 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 诪讝讜谞讬 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 讞诪专讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讬讚注谞讗 讘讬讛 讘谞讞诪谞讬 讚诇讗 讛讜讛 砖转讬 讞诪专讗 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 讞讬讬 讚诪专 讚讛讜讬 诪砖拽讬 诇讬讛 讘砖讜驻专讝讬 讻讬 讛讗讬 讘讛讚讬 讚拽讗 诪讞讜讬讗 诇讬讛 讗讬讙诇讬 讚专注讗 谞驻诇 谞讛讜专讗 讘讘讬 讚讬谞讗

The Gemara relates: Abaye鈥檚 wife, 岣ma, came before Rava after Abaye died, as Rava was the local judge. She said to him: Apportion sustenance for me, as I am entitled to be sustained by Abaye鈥檚 heirs. Rava apportioned sustenance for her. She subsequently said to him: Apportion wine for me as well. Rava said to her: I know that Na岣ani, i.e., Abaye, did not drink wine. Since you were not accustomed to drinking wine during your husband鈥檚 lifetime, you are not entitled to it after his death. She said to him: By the Master鈥檚 life, this is not correct. In fact, he would give me wine to drink in cups [shufrazei] as large as this. She gestured with her hands to show how large the cups were. While she was showing him the size of the cups, her arm became uncovered, and she was so beautiful that it was as though a light had shined in the courtroom.

拽诐 专讘讗 注诇 诇讘讬转讬讛 转讘注讛 诇讘转 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 讘转 专讘 讞住讚讗 诪讗谉 讛讜讬 讛讗讬讚谞讗 讘讘讬 讚讬谞讗 讗诪专 诇讛 讞讜诪讗 讚讘讬转讛讜 讚讗讘讬讬 谞驻拽讗 讗讘转专讛 诪讞转讗 诇讛 讘拽讜诇驻讬 讚砖讬讚讗 注讚 讚讗驻拽讛 诇讛 诪讻讜诇讬 诪讞讜讝讗 讗诪专讛 诇讛 拽讟诇转 诇讬讱 转诇转讗 讜讗转转 诇诪讬拽讟诇 讗讞专讬谞讗

Rava arose, went home, and requested intercourse from his wife, the daughter of Rav 岣sda. The daughter of Rav 岣sda said to him: Who was just now in the courtroom? Noticing his unusual behavior, she suspected that there must have been a woman in the court. He said to her: 岣ma, Abaye鈥檚 wife, was there. Upon hearing this, Rava鈥檚 wife went after 岣ma and struck her with the lock of a chest [kulpei deshida] until she drove her out of the entire city of Me岣za, saying to her: You have already killed three men, as Abaye was your third husband, and now you come to kill another one, my husband Rava? Since you showed him your beauty, he will want to marry you.

讚讘讬转讛讜 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 谞讞诪讬讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 诪讝讜谞讬 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 讞诪专讗 驻住拽 诇讛 讗诪专 诇讛 讬讚注谞讗 讘讛讜 讘讘谞讬 诪讞讜讝讗 讚砖转讜 讞诪专讗

The Gemara relates a similar incident: The wife of Rav Yosef, son of Rava, came before Rav Ne岣mya, son of Rav Yosef, for judgment. She said to him: Apportion sustenance for me. Rav Ne岣mya apportioned a certain amount of sustenance for her. She said to him: Apportion wine for me as well. He apportioned wine for her. He said to her: I know that the residents of Me岣za are accustomed to drinking wine, and therefore you, too, are entitled to wine, in accordance with the local custom.

讚讘讬转讛讜 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 诪谞砖讬讗 诪讚讜讬诇 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 诪讝讜谞讬 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 讞诪专讗 驻住拽 诇讛 驻住讜拽 诇讬 砖讬专讗讬 讗诪专 诇讛 砖讬专讗讬 诇诪讛 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 诇讱 讜诇讞讘专讱 讜诇讞讘专讜专讱

Similarly, the wife of Rav Yosef, son of Rav Menashya of D鈥檝il, came before Rav Yosef. She said to him: Apportion sustenance for me. He apportioned sustenance for her. She added: Apportion wine for me. He apportioned wine for her. She continued: Apportion silk garments for me. Rav Yosef said to her: Why do you need silk garments? She said to him: For you, for your friends, and for your friends鈥 friends. Even as a widow, I should not have to be ashamed in front of you and your colleagues.

讜谞讜转谉 诇讛 诪讟讛 讜诪驻抓 讜讻讜壮 诪驻抓 讜诪讞爪诇转 诇诪讛 诇讛 讚讬讛讘 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讘讗转专讗 讚谞讛讬讙讬 讚诪诇讜 驻讜专讬讗 讘讞讘诇讬 讚诪讘讙专 诇讛

搂 The mishna taught: And he must give her a bed, a soft mat, and a hard mat. The Gemara asks: Why does he need to give her a soft mat and a hard mat if she already has a bed? Rav Pappa said: The mishna is speaking of a place where it is the custom to fill a bed with ropes. Because these ropes cause her suffering and age [mevager] her, she covers them with a mat, which serves as a kind of mattress upon which she can lie in comfort.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻专 讜讻住转 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 谞转谉 讗诪专讜 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 讻专 讜讻住转 讛讬讻讬 讚诪讬 讗讬 讚讗讜专讞讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚转谞讗 拽诪讗 讜讗讬 讚诇讗讜 讗讜专讞讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 谞转谉

The Sages taught: One does not give a poor woman a pillow and a cushion. In the name of Rabbi Natan, they said: One does give her a pillow and a cushion. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? If it is her usual manner to use a pillow and cushion, what is the reason for the opinion of the first tanna that she is not given these items? And if it is not her usual manner, what is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Natan?

诇讗 爪专讬讻讗 讻讙讜谉 讚讗讜专讞讬讛 讚讬讚讬讛 讜诇讗讜 讗讜专讞讛 讚讬讚讛 转谞讗 拽诪讗 住讘专 讗诪专 诇讛 讻讬 讗讝讬诇谞讗 砖拽讬诇谞讗 诇讛讜 讜讻讬 讗转讬谞讗 诪讬讬转讬谞讗 诇讛讜 讘讛讚讗讬 讜专讘讬 谞转谉 住讘专 讗诪专讛 诇讬讛 讝讬诪谞讬谉 讚诪讬转专诪讬 讘讬谉 讛砖诪砖讜转 讜诇讗 诪爪讬转 诪讬讬转讬 诇讛讜 讜砖拽诇转 诇讛讜 诇讚讬讚讬 讜诪讙谞讬转 诇讬 注诇 讗专注讗

The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary in a case where it is his manner to use a pillow and cushion, but it is not her manner. The first tanna holds that the husband says to her: When I go away from you, I will take my bedding with me, and when I come back I will bring it with me. And Rabbi Natan holds that she can say to him: Sometimes it happens that you arrive at twilight and you are unable to bring it with you, and you will take my bedding and you will make me lie on the ground. Therefore, I require extra pillows and cushions.

讜谞讜转谉 诇讛 讻驻讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗讘讬讬

搂 The mishna further taught: And he must give her a cap, and shoes every Festival, and clothes once a year. Rav Pappa said to Abaye:

讛讗讬 转谞讗 砖诇讬讞 注专讟诇讗讬 讜专诪讬 诪住讗谞讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 转谞讗 讘诪拽讜诐 讛专讬诐 拽讗讬 讚诇讗 住讙讬讗 讘诇讗 转诇转讗 讝讜讙讬 诪住讗谞讬 讜讗讙讘 讗讜专讞讬讛 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚谞讬转讘讬谞讛讜 谞讬讛诇讛 讘诪讜注讚 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚谞讬讛讜讬 诇讛 砖诪讞讛 讘讙讜讬讬讛讜

This tanna creates a bizarre situation in which the woman is left naked but wearing shoes, as the husband must give his wife shoes three times a year but new clothing only once a year. Abaye said to him: The tanna is standing, i.e., speaking of, a mountainous region, in which she cannot do without three pairs of shoes, as shoes wear out quickly in hilly areas. And in passing, the tanna teaches us that he should give them to her on a Festival, so that she will rejoice in them during the Festival.

讜讻诇讬诐 砖诇 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝讬 驻砖讬讟讬 诪诪讗讬 诪讚拽转谞讬 讘诪讛 讚讘专讬诐 讗诪讜专讬诐 讘注谞讬 砖讘讬砖专讗诇 讗讘诇 讘诪讻讜讘讚 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讻讘讜讚讜 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝 诪诪砖 注谞讬 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝 诪谞讗 诇讬讛 讗诇讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 讞诪砖讬诐 讝讜讝讬 驻砖讬讟讬

搂 The mishna teaches: And he must give her clothes with a value of fifty dinars. Abaye said: This is referring to fifty simple [peshitei] dinars, used as the money of the state, which are worth only one-eighth of Tyrian dinars. From where did Abaye derive this? From the fact that it teaches: In what case is this statement said? It is with regard to the poorest of Jews. However, in the case of a prominent man, all the amounts are increased in accordance with his prominence. And if it enters your mind that the mishna means literally fifty dinars, from where would such a poor man get fifty dinars? How could a pauper afford to give such a large sum to his wife for her clothing? Rather, learn from this that the mishna is referring to fifty simple dinars.

讜讗讬谉 谞讜转谞讬谉 诇讛 诇讗 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讜转专 诪讝讜谞讜转 诇讘注诇 诪讜转专 讘诇讗讜转 诇讗砖讛 诪讜转专 讘诇讗讜转 诇讗砖讛 诇诪讛 诇讛 讗诪专 专讞讘讛 砖诪转讻住讛 讘讛谉 讘讬诪讬 谞讚转讛 讻讚讬 砖诇讗 转转讙谞讛 注诇 讘注诇讛

搂 The mishna further states: And he may not give her new clothes in the summer, nor worn garments in the rainy season, and the leftover, worn clothes belong to her. The Sages taught: Leftover sustenance belongs to the husband, whereas leftover, worn clothes belong to the wife. The Gemara asks: With regard to the statement that worn clothes belong to the wife, why does she need these old clothes? Ra岣va said: She requires them, as she covers herself with them during her days of menstruation, so that she does not become repulsive to her husband. If she wears her normal clothes when she is menstruating, he will later be disgusted by her.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 谞拽讟讬谞谉 诪讜转专 讘诇讗讜转 讗诇诪谞讛 诇讬讜专砖讬讜 讛转诐 讛讜讗 讚诇讗 转转讙谞讬 讘讗驻讬讛 讛讻讗 转转讙谞讬 讜转转讙谞讬

Abaye said: We have a tradition that the leftover, worn clothes of a widow belong to the husband鈥檚 heirs. The reason is that it is only in that case there, concerning a woman whose husband is alive, that the reasoning so that she does not become repulsive to her husband can be applied. Whereas here, when he is dead, let her become repulsive. There is no need to ensure that she find favor in the eyes of his heirs.

谞讜转谉 诇讛 诪注讛 讻住祝 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讗讜讻诇转 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 讗讜讻诇转 诪诪砖 专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 转砖诪讬砖

搂 The mishna teaches that he gives her a silver ma鈥檃, and she eats with him from one Shabbat evening to the next. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: She eats, in this context? Rav Na岣an said: It means literally that she eats with him once a week. Rav Ashi said: This is referring to sexual relations.

转谞谉 讗讜讻诇转 注诪讜 诇讬诇讬 砖讘转 讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讻讬诇讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽转谞讬 讗讜讻诇转 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 转砖诪讬砖 诪讗讬 讗讜讻诇转 诇讬砖谞讗 诪注诇讬讗 讻讚讻转讬讘 讗讻诇讛 讜旨诪讞转讛 驻讬讛 讜讗诪专讛 诇讗 驻注诇转讬 讗讜谉

The mishna states: And she eats with him from Shabbat evening to Shabbat evening. Granted, according to the one who says that it means actual eating, this explanation is consistent with that which is taught: She eats. However, according to the one who says that it is referring to sexual relations, what is the meaning of: She eats? The Gemara explains: It is a euphemism, as it is written: 鈥淪o is the way of an adulterous woman; she eats, and wipes her mouth, and says: I have done no wickedness鈥 (Proverbs 30:20).

诪讬转讬讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讗讜讻诇转 讘诇讬诇讬 砖讘转 讜砖讘转 讘砖诇诪讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讻讬诇讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽转谞讬 讜砖讘转 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 转砖诪讬砖 转砖诪讬砖 讘砖讘转 诪讬 讗讬讻讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讬砖专讗诇 拽讚讜砖讬诐 讛谉 讜讗讬谉 诪砖诪砖讬谉 诪讟讜转讬讛谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讗诪专 专讘讗 讘讘讬转 讗驻诇 诪讜转专

The Gemara raises an objection: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, disagreeing with the tanna of the mishna: She eats on Shabbat evening and on Shabbat. Granted, according to the one who says that it means actual eating, this explanation is consistent with that which is taught: And Shabbat, i.e., she dines with him also on the day of Shabbat. However, according to the one who says that it is referring to sexual relations, are there sexual relations on the day of Shabbat? But didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say: The Jewish people are holy and therefore do not engage in sexual relations during the day? The Gemara answers that Rava said: If they are in a dark house, it is permitted to engage in relations even during the day.

讜讗诐 讛讬转讛 诪谞讬拽讛 讚专砖 专讘讬 注讜诇讗 专讘讛 讗驻讬转讞讗 讚讘讬 谞砖讬讗讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讝谉 讗转 讘谞讬讜 讜讘谞讜转讬讜 讻砖讛谉 拽讟谞讬诐 讗讘诇 讝谉 拽讟谞讬 拽讟谞讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And if she is nursing, the required amount is reduced from her earnings and is added to the sum she receives for her sustenance. Rabbi Ulla the Great taught at the entrance to the house of the Nasi: Although the Sages said that a person is not obligated to sustain his sons and daughters when they are young, still, he must sustain the very young ones.

注讚 讻诪讛 注讚 讘谉 砖砖 讻讚专讘 讗住讬 讚讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 拽讟谉 讘谉 砖砖 讬讜爪讗 讘注讬专讜讘 讗诪讜

The Gemara asks: Until when are they considered very young? Until the age of six, in accordance with the opinion of Rav Asi, as Rav Asi said: A six-year-old minor may go out by means of his mother鈥檚 eiruv, if she prepared an eiruv on one side of the city. He is included in his mother鈥檚 eiruv rather than that of his father, as he is considered subordinate to his mother.

诪诪讗讬 诪讚拽转谞讬 讛讬转讛 诪谞讬拽讛 驻讜讞转讬谉 诇讛 诪诪注砖讛 讬讚讬讛 讜诪讜住讬驻讬谉 诇讛 注诇 诪讝讜谞讜转讬讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诇讗讜 诪砖讜诐 讚讘注讬 诇诪讬讻诇 讘讛讚讛 讜讚诇诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讞讜诇讛 讛讬讗

The Gemara asks: From where is this halakha that Rabbi Ulla taught derived? The Gemara explains that it is derived from the fact that it teaches: If she is nursing, the required amount is reduced from her earnings and is added to the sum she receives for her sustenance. What is the reason for this? Is it not because the baby needs to eat together with her? This shows that a father is responsible to provide for his young child. The Gemara rejects this proof: But perhaps he increases her sustenance not due to the baby but because she is considered ill due to her weakness while nursing, in which case the obligation stems from his obligation to his wife, not to his child.

讗诐 讻谉 诇讬转谞讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 讞讜诇讛 诪讗讬 讗诐 讛讬转讛 诪谞讬拽讛 讜讚诇诪讗 讛讗 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚住转诐 诪谞讬拽讜转 讞讜诇讜转 谞讬谞讛讜 讗讬转诪专 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 诇讜讬 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 诇讛 讬讬谉 砖讛讬讬谉 讬驻讛 诇讞诇讘

The Gemara retorts: If so, let the mishna teach: If she was ill. What is the reason that it specifies: If she was nursing? The reason for this halakha must certainly be due to the child. The Gemara again rejects this answer: But perhaps the mishna teaches us this, that in an ordinary situation, nursing women are considered ill, and that a husband must increase the sustenance all the more so if his wife is actually ill. Consequently, this does not prove that a father is obligated to sustain his very young child. It was stated that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Wine is added for a nursing woman, as wine is good for milk.

讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬

 

诪转谞讬壮 诪爪讬讗转 讛讗砖讛 讜诪注砖讛 讬讚讬讛 诇讘注诇讛 讜讬专讜砖转讛 讛讜讗 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 讘讞讬讬讛 讘讜砖转讛 讜驻讙诪讛 砖诇讛

MISHNA: A lost object found by a wife and the wife鈥檚 earnings belong to her husband. And with regard to her inheritance, the husband enjoys the profits of this property in her lifetime. If she is humiliated or injured, the perpetrator is liable to pay compensation for her humiliation and her degradation, as relevant. This payment belongs to her.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讗 讗讜诪专 讘讝诪谉 砖讘住转专 诇讛 砖谞讬 讞诇拽讬诐 讜诇讜 讗讞讚 讜讘讝诪谉 砖讘讙诇讜讬 诇讜 砖谞讬 讞诇拽讬诐 讜诇讛 讗讞讚 砖诇讜 讬谞转谉 诪讬讚 讜砖诇讛 讬诇拽讞 讘讛谉 拽专拽注 讜讛讜讗 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: When it is an injury that is in a concealed part of the woman鈥檚 body, she receives two parts, i.e., two-thirds, of the payment for humiliation and degradation, and the husband receives one part, i.e., one-third, as the injury affects him as well. And when it is an injury that is in an exposed part of her body, he receives two parts, as he suffers public humiliation due to her condition, and she receives one part. His payment should be given to him immediately. And with her portion, land should be purchased with it, and he enjoys the profits of that property.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 转谞讬谞讗 讛讗讘 讝讻讗讬 讘讘转讜 讘拽讬讚讜砖讬讛 讘讻住祝 讘砖讟专 讜讘讘讬讗讛 讝讻讗讬 讘诪爪讬讗转讛 讜讘诪注砖讛 讬讚讬讛 讜讘讛驻专转 谞讚专讬讛 诪拽讘诇 讗转 讙讬讟讛 讜讗讬谞讜 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 讘讞讬讬讛 谞讬砖讗转 讬转专 注诇讬讜 讛讘注诇 砖讛讜讗 讗讜讻诇 驻讬专讜转 讘讞讬讬讛

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the mishna teaching us? We already learned in a mishna (46b) that the father is entitled, in the case of his daughter, to authority over her betrothal, whether it is effected with money, with a document, or through sexual intercourse. Furthermore, as long as she is single, her father is entitled to any lost object that she finds, and to her earnings, and to effect nullification of her vows (see Numbers, chapter 30). Her father also receives her bill of divorce on her behalf, but he does not enjoy the profits of her property in her lifetime. If she is married, the rights of the husband are greater than his, as the husband enjoys the profits of her property in her lifetime. What, then, is the mishna teaching beyond that which was taught elsewhere?

讘讜砖转讛 讜驻讙诪讛 讗讬爪讟专讬讻讗 诇讬讛 驻诇讜讙转讗 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讗 讜专讘谞谉

The Gemara answers: It was necessary for the tanna to mention the halakhot concerning compensation for her humiliation and her degradation, as ownership of these payments is subject to a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira and the Rabbis.

转谞讬 转谞讗 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪爪讬讗转 讛讗砖讛 诇注爪诪讛 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗 讗讜诪专 诇讘注诇讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讛砖转讗 讜诪讛 讛注讚驻讛

A tanna teaches a baraita before Rava: A lost object found by a wife belongs to her; Rabbi Akiva says it belongs to her husband. Rava said to that tanna: This baraita is puzzling. Now, if, with regard to the surplus of the wife鈥檚 earnings beyond the minimum sum stipulated by the Sages,

Scroll To Top