Torah Community Connections

Week 64 - Wednesday - 14 February 2001

KETUBOT: CHAPTER 7: MISHNAH 10

And these are the ones they compel to divorce: one afflicted with shehin, and one who has a polipus, and one who collects, and one who mines copper, and the tanner -- whether they had these before they wed, or they arose after they wed. And regarding all of these, Rabbi Meir said, Even though he stipulated with her, she can say, "I thought that I could accept, but now I cannot accept." But the Sages say, She must accept against her will, except one afflicted with shehin because she weakens him. It once happened in Sidon that a certain tanner died, and he had a brother who was a tanner -- the Sages said, She can declare, "I could accept your brother, but you I cannot accept."

Kehati

Our mishnah, continuing the preceding mishnah, deals with those defects in the husband for which, according to all opinions, he is compelled to divorce his wife.

And these -- bearers of defects -- are the ones they compel to divorce -- because of their bodily defects or repugnant occupation, we compel them to divorce their wives and pay them their ketubah: one afflicted with shehin -- leprosy, and one who has a polipus -- the Greek term for a morbid growth in the nose which impedes the breath; the Gemara explains that an offensive odor issues from his nose; and one who collects -- the excrement of dogs used in the tanning of hides; and one who mines copper -- whose skin is adversely affected; and the tanner -- who processes hides, for all these exude a bad odor whether they had these -- defects -- before they wed -- but the wife did not know about them, or they arose -- in them, after they wed -- since the wife cannot tolerate these defects, they compel the husband to divorce her.

And regarding all of these -- the above mentioned defects -- Rabbi Meir said, Even though he stipulated with her -- before their marriage he informed her of these defects, and she condoned them and agreed to marry him, she can say -- after the marriage, "I thought that I could accept -- i.e., tolerate his defect and stay with him, but now I cannot accept" -- and she is therefore entitled to demand a get from him.

But the Sages say, She must accept against her will -- i.e., in all cases in which her husband possessed defects prior to the nisu'in, and she knew about the defects, before her marriage, and certainly if he stipulated with her, she must put up with him, and they do not compel him to divorce her, except one afflicted with Shehin -- whom they compel to divorce her, because she weakens him -- cohabitation aggravates the decay and endangers his life, and even if she agrees to live with him, she is not heeded (Gemara). The halakhah follows the Sages.

It once happened in Sidon that a certain tanner died -- childless, and he had a brother who was a tanner -- and the widow became liable to yibum, the Sages said, She can declare, "I could accept your brother -- and be with him, but you I cannot accept" -- he is therefore enjoined to perform halitzah, rather than yibum, and pays her the ketubah.

KETUBOT: CHAPTER 8: MISHNAH 1

A woman to whom property fell before she was betrothed -- Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that she may sell and she may give, and it is valid. If it fell to her after she was betrothed -- Bet Shammai say, She may sell, but Bet Hillel say, She may not sell. These and these agree that if she sold or if she gave -- it is valid. Rabbi Yehudah said, They said before Rabban Gamliel: Since he acquired the woman, should he not acquire the property? He said to them, We are embarrassed regarding the new, and you impose on us the old! If it fell to her after she wed -- these and these agree that if she sold or she gave, that the husband seizes it from the hand of the purchasers. Before she wed, and she wed -- Rabban Gamliel says, If she sold or she gave, it is valid. Rabbi Hanina ben Akavya said, They said before Rabban Gamliel: Since he acquired the woman, should he not acquire the property? He said to them, We are embarrassed regarding the new, and you impose on us the old!

Kehati

A woman to whom property fell -- as an inheritance or as a gift (Tosefot Yom Tov), before she was betrothed -- Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that -- after her betrothal, as long as she has not wed, she may sell -- this estate, and -- or -- she may give -- it away as a gift, and it is valid -- her acts are effective, since this estate is in her rightful possession until she weds, and her betrothed has no claim on it. If it -- the property -- fell to her after she was betrothed --

Bet Shammai say, as long as she is betrothed, she may sell -- it; but Bet Hillel say, She may not sell -- as of principle, she may not sell this estate, since it came into her possession after her betrothal, and she might wed the betrothed and it could be considered as already belonging to him (Ket. 78a, Gemara and Rashi).

These and these agree -- Bet Hillel and Bet Shammai, that if she sold or if she gave it, the sale or the giving, is valid -- after the fact. Rabbi Yehudah said, They said before Rabban Gamliel: Since he acquired the woman -- she became his betrothed and is considered as his wife, should he not acquire the property -- her assets as well? So why is her sale valid? He -- Rabban Gamliel, said to them, We are embarrassed regarding the new -- property that fell to her after marriage, i.e., the ruling (taught below) that the husband can seize the property from the buyers if the wife sold it does not appear to us to be correct, and you impose on us the old! -- and you wish to declare regarding the old, i.e., concerning property which came into the wife's possession prior to marriage, that if she sold it during her betrothal, her sale should be invalid. If it -- property, fell to her -- as an inheritance or as a gift, after she wed -- these -- Bet Shammai -- and these -- Bet Hillel -- agree -- that if she sold or she gave -- away this property that fell to her after her marriage, that the husband seizes -- may recover -- it from the hand of the purchasers -- because the property that fell to her after marriage is pledged to the husband, and if she sells or gives it away, the husband may extract it from the purchasers or the recipients of the gift. The Gemara explains that since this is nikhsei melug, usufructuary property, wherein the wife owns the assets and the husband enjoys the dividends, he may during the wife's lifetime only take the usufruct of the purchasers, but not the actual property; however, if his wife predeceases him, he may seize the property as well. If property fell to her before she wed, and she wed -- later on, Rabban Gamliel says, If she sold and she gave -- after the marriage -- it -- her transaction, is valid.

Rabbi Hanina ben Akavya said, They said before Rabban Gamliel: Since he acquired the woman -- after the nisu'in, should he not acquire -- also -- the -- her -- property? He said to them, We are embarrassed regarding the new -- we object to the above ruling whereby the husband may seize from the purchasers his wife's "new" property which fell to her after marriage, and consider it incorrect, and you impose on us the old -- you wish to permit the husband to seize the wife's "old" property which fell to he before her marriage as well!

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives