Torah Community Connections

Week 63 - Tuesday - 6 February 2001

KETUBOT: CHAPTER 6: MISHNAH 1

A woman's find and her handiwork belong to her husband, and her inheritance -- he enjoys the fruits during her lifetime. Her shame and her pegam are hers. Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteira says, When hidden -- two parts are hers, and one is his. And when exposed -- two parts are his and one is hers. His is given to him immediately; but with hers land is purchased and he enjoys the fruits.

Kehati

Whoever injures another person is obligated to pay him for damage, pain, healing, loss of time, and shame (B.K. 8:1). If a person injures a married woman -- what are the husband's rights to these payments? Our mishnah discusses this issue in the wake of what has been taught (4:4, above), regarding his rights to his wife's finds and handiwork and to his share in the fruits of her usufructuary property. Evidently, the payments for healing and loss of time belong to the husband: healing -- because he is obligated to heal her, and is therefore entitled to compensation, and loss of time -- because she is idle from her handiwork which belongs to him. Obviously, the payment for pain belongs to the woman, whose body suffers the pain (Rambam; Rabbeinu Nissim; see Tosefot Yom Tov). Our mishnah therefore deals solely with the payments for shame and damage; the husband's right to these amounts is in dispute among Tannaim.

A woman's finds and her handiwork belong to her husband -- as taught above (4:4), and her inheritance -- if she inherits property after her marriage, which becomes hers, he -- the husband, enjoys the fruits -- of this property -- during her lifetime -- as was taught: "the husband has an advantage over him (the father) in that he enjoys fruits during her lifetime."

But the payments for her shame and pegam -- are hers -- and the husband has no right to them; pegam is the loss incurred by the injury; we assess her in terms of a bondwoman sold in the marketplace, and the difference in her worth before and after her injury.

Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteira says, When -- the injury is hidden -- in a covered part of her body, and he did not embarrass her publicly, two parts are hers -- the woman receives two thirds of the payments for shame and pegam, and -- the husband receives one third of these payments, since the woman suffers most of the shame and pegam.

And when -- the injury is on an -- exposed -- part of her body, and she is embarrassed in public -- two parts are his -- the husband receives two thirds of the payments for shame and pegam, and one is hers -- the wife receives one third, since the husband's shame and suffering are greater.

His -- the husband's share in the payments for shame and pegam, is given to him immediately -- to use as he wishes; but with hers -- the wife's share of these payments, land is purchased, and he -- the husband, enjoys the fruits -- of this land, as is the law regarding property which she inherits (as will be explained below 28:3). According to the First Tanna, the law of "land is purchased with it, and he enjoys the fruits" applies to all monies received for her shame and pegam. The halakhah follows Rabbi Yehudah (Rambam, Hil. Hovel u-Mazik 4:15).

KETUBOT: CHAPTER 6: MISHNAH 2

One who decides to give money to his son-in-law, and his son-in-law died -- the Sages said, He may say, "To your brother I agreed to give, but to you I am not willing to give."

Kehati

The Sages taught that a person should assign a substantial dowry for his daughter, to encourage suitors. Support for this was found in the verse, "Take wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands" (Jer. 29:6). Surely it is not within a father's power to "give" his daughter to a husband, neither is it customary for a woman to court a man! Accordingly, this verse teaches us that the father ought to give his daughter clothing and provide her with a significant dowry to attract suitors (Ket. 52b). If the father withholds the promised dowry from his son-in-law, some rule that the son-in-law may say to him, "Give me the stipulated sum or let her sit in her father's house until her hair turns white" (13:5, below); others, however, rule that he son-in-law may not say this. Rather, he weds her, and collects the dowry from her father through the Court, for such things are acquired by declaration (i.e., the father's oral undertaking is legally binding). The halakhah follows the latter opinion (see Ket. 102b).

Our mishnah teaches that if the bridegroom (arus) dies and the betrothed girl (arusah) is required to undergo yibum (Levirate marriage) with his brother, the latter cannot claim the dowry stipulated for his deceased brother.

One who decides to give money to his son-in-law -- as a dowry, and his son-in-law died -- prior to the marriage before receiving the money, and the arusah is required to undergo yibum with his brother (the yavam),

The Sages said, He -- the father, may say -- to the yavam (the deceased's brother), to whom the betrothed girl now reverts, "To your brother I agreed to give -- money as a dowry, but to you I am not willing to give" -- but rather, perform halitzah or yibum! The Gemara cites a baraita which teaches that the father can say this even if the first son-in-law is uneducated and the second one is a scholar. Rambam adds, "and even though the daughter wants him" (Hil. Ishut 23:15).

The Jerusalem Talmud asks: Is this not something which is acquired by declaration i.e., does not the dowry which was acquired by the bridegroom through the father's oral commitment now belong to his brother who inherits him?
The Talmud answers "he agrees to give him in order to wed," i.e, the father agrees to give a dowry to his son-in-law only on condition that he wed his daughter, but he died before he wed her (Hameiri).

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives