ื ืคืชื— ื‘ื›ืจื˜ื™ืกื™ื™ื” ื—ื“ืฉื”
Mishnah.org Logo
ืœืžื“ ืžืฉื ื™ื•ืช
ื–ืจืขื™ื
ืžื•ืขื“
ื ืฉื™ื
ื ื–ื™ืงื™ืŸ
ืงื“ืฉื™ื
ื˜ื”ืจื•ืช
ื˜ื‘ืœืื•ืช ืžืฉื ื™ื•ืช
ืžืฉื ื” ื™ื•ืžื™ืชืื”ืœื•ืช ื™ืดื‘:ื’ืณ - ื™ืดื‘:ื“ืณ

Mishnayos Kesuvos Perek 8 Mishnah 7

ื›ืชื•ื‘ื•ืช ืคืจืง ื—ืณ ืžืฉื ื” ื–ืณ

7
If his deceased brother left money as part of his estate, land to be used as a lien on her marriage contract is acquired with it, and the yavam consumes the produce. Similarly, if the deceased brother left produce that is detached from the ground, land is acquired with it and the yavam consumes the produce. If he left behind produce that is attached to the ground, Rabbi Meir says: One evaluates the properties to determine how much they are worth with the produce, and how much they are worth without the produce. And as for the surplus, which is the value of the produce, land is acquired with it and the yavam consumes the produce. And the Rabbis say: Produce that is attached to the ground is his. Therefore, it is not used in the purchase of land, but the yavam may eat it. As for the produce that is detached from the ground, which is not mortgaged to her marriage contract, whoever takes possession first has acquired it. If the yavam takes possession of the property first, he has acquired it and may use it as he wishes, but if she is first, land is acquired with it and he consumes the produce. After the yavam has married her, her legal status is that of his wife in every sense, except that the responsibility for payment of her marriage contract is carried out through mortgaging the property of her first husband, not that of the yavam.
ื”ึดื ึผึดื™ื—ึท ืึธื—ึดื™ื• ืžึธืขื•ึนืช, ื™ึดืœึผึธืงึทื— ื‘ึผึธื”ึถืŸ ืงึทืจึฐืงึทืข ื•ึฐื”ื•ึผื ืื•ึนื›ึตืœ ืคึผึตืจื•ึนืช. ืคึผึตืจื•ึนืช ื”ึทืชึผึฐืœื•ึผืฉืึดื™ืŸ ืžึดืŸ ื”ึทืงึผึทืจึฐืงึทืข, ื™ึดืœึผึธืงึทื— ื‘ึผึธื”ึถืŸ ืงึทืจึฐืงึทืข ื•ึฐื”ื•ึผื ืื•ึนื›ึตืœ ืคึผึตืจื•ึนืช. ื”ึทืžึฐื—ึปื‘ึผึธืจึดื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึทืงึผึทืจึฐืงึทืข, ืึธืžึทืจ ืจึทื‘ึผึดื™ ืžึตืึดื™ืจ, ืฉืึธืžึดื™ืŸ ืื•ึนืชึธืŸ ื›ึผึทืžึผึธื” ื”ึตืŸ ื™ึธืคึดื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึฐืคึตืจื•ึนืช ื•ึฐื›ึทืžึผึธื” ื”ึตืŸ ื™ึธืคึดื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึฐืœึนื ืคึตืจื•ึนืช, ื•ึฐื”ึทืžึผื•ึนืชึธืจ, ื™ึดืœึผึธืงึทื— ื‘ึผึธื”ึถืŸ ืงึทืจึฐืงึทืข ื•ึฐื”ื•ึผื ืื•ึนื›ึตืœ ืคึผึตืจื•ึนืช. ื•ึทื—ึฒื›ึธืžึดื™ื ืื•ึนืžึฐืจึดื™ื, ืคึผึตืจื•ึนืช ื”ึทืžึฐื—ึปื‘ึผึธืจึดื™ื ื‘ึผึทืงึผึทืจึฐืงึทืข, ืฉืึถืœึผื•ึน. ื•ึฐื”ึทืชึผึฐืœื•ึผืฉืึดื™ืŸ ืžึดืŸ ื”ึทืงึผึทืจึฐืงึทืข, ื›ึผึธืœ ื”ึทืงึผื•ึนื“ึตื ื–ึธื›ึธื” ื‘ึธื”ึถืŸ. ืงึธื“ึทื ื”ื•ึผื, ื–ึธื›ึธื”. ืงึธื“ึฐืžึธื” ื”ึดื™ื, ื™ึดืœึผึธืงึทื— ื‘ึผึธื”ึถืŸ ืงึทืจึฐืงึทืข ื•ึฐื”ื•ึผื ืื•ึนื›ึตืœ ืคึผึตืจื•ึนืช. ื›ึผึฐื ึธืกึธื”ึผ, ื”ึฒืจึตื™ ื”ึดื™ื ื›ึฐืึดืฉืึฐืชึผื•ึน ืœึฐื›ึธืœ ื“ึผึธื‘ึธืจ, ื•ึผื‘ึดืœึฐื‘ึทื“ ืฉืึถืชึผึฐื”ึตื ื›ึฐืชึปื‘ึผึธืชึธื”ึผ ืขึทืœ ื ึดื›ึฐืกึตื™ ื‘ึทืขึฐืœึธื”ึผ ื”ึธืจึดืืฉืื•ึนืŸ:
ื–ืณ
ื‘ืจื˜ื ื•ืจื

ื™ืœืงื— ื‘ื”ืŸ ืงืจืงืข โ€“ because her Ketubah is based upon the property of her first husband; therefore, the property of the dead is surety for her Ketubah but the levir eats from the usufruct and if he performs levirate marriage with her, and [and holds] that movable possessions are mortgaged to the Ketubah.

ืฉืžื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื โ€“ all that grew in the domain of the dead [brother] is surety to the Ketubah.

ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืคื™ืจื•ืช ื”ืžื—ื•ื‘ืจื™ื ืœืงืจืงืข ืฉืœื• โ€“ In the Gemara (Tractate Ketubot 82a) it raises the question: but arenโ€™t all his landed property a surety and a pledge for her Ketubah? And it answers (in the words of Resh Lakish): Read, โ€œbelongs to herโ€ (the Sagesโ€™ dispute is limited to detached produce and money which, they maintain, as movables and not pledged to the Ketubah).

ื›ืœ ื”ืงื•ื“ื ื–ื›ื” โ€“ for they hold that movables are not mortgaged to the Ketubah other than if she took hold of them and we require from the lifetime of the husband is the taking hold/possession and the same law applies regarding money, for is the difference of money from detached produce, and the Halakha is according to the Sages.

ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ืืฉืชื• โ€“ for when he divorces her with a Jewish bill of divorce and restores her [as his wife], and we donโ€™t speak about (Deuteronomy 25:5): โ€œand perform the levirโ€™s duty,โ€ the All-Merciful said, and still the first levirate marriages are upon her and a Jewish bill of divorce is not sufficient for her, and that is so, that she was divorced, we would say that it a Mitzvah that the All-Merciful cast upon her that when she performs it and established upon her the prohibition of the wife of a brother , and he cannot bring her back, this comes to teach us that the All-Merciful stated (Deuteronomy 25:5): โ€œhe shall take her as his wife and perform the levirโ€™s duty.โ€ Since he took her, she is like his wife.

ื™ืœืงื— ื‘ื”ืŸ ืงืจืงืข. ืœืคื™ ืฉื›ืชื•ื‘ืชื” ืขืœ ื ื›ืกื™ ื‘ืขืœื” ื”ืจืืฉื•ืŸ, ืœืคื™ื›ืš ื ื›ืกื™ ื”ืžืช ืื—ืจืื™ืŸ ืœื›ืชื•ื‘ืชื” ืืœื ืฉื”ื™ื‘ื ืื•ื›ืœ ืคื™ืจื•ืช ืื ืžื™ื‘ื ืื•ืชื”, ื•ืกื‘ืจ ืžื˜ืœื˜ืœื™ ืžืฉืชืขื‘ื“ื™ ืœื›ืชื•ื‘ื”:

ืฉืžื™ืŸ ืื•ืชื. ื“ื›ืœ ืžื” ืฉื’ื“ืœ ื‘ืจืฉื•ืช ื”ืžืช ืื—ืจืื™ืŸ ืœื›ืชื•ื‘ื”:

ื•ื—ื›ืžื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ืคื™ืจื•ืช ื”ืžื—ื•ื‘ืจื™ื ืœืงืจืงืข ืฉืœื•. ื‘ื’ืžืจื ืคืจื™ืš, ื•ื”ื ื›ืœ ื ื›ืกื™ื• ืื—ืจืื™ืŸ ื•ืขืจื‘ืื™ืŸ ืœื›ืชื•ื‘ื”, ื•ืžืฉื ื™, ืชื ื™ ืฉืœื”:

ื›ืœ ื”ืงื•ื“ื ื–ื›ื”. ืงืกื‘ืจื™, ืžื˜ืœื˜ืœื™ ืœื›ืชื•ื‘ื” ืœื ืžืฉืชืขื‘ื“ื™ ืืืดื› ืชืคืกื”. ื•ืžื—ื™ื™ื ื“ื‘ืขืœ ื‘ืขื™ื ืŸ ืชืคื™ืกื”. ื•ื”ื•ื ื”ื“ื™ืŸ ื ืžื™ ื“ืคืœื™ื’ื™ ืื›ืกืคื™ื, ื“ืžืื™ ืฉื ื ื›ืกืคื™ื ืžืคื™ืจื•ืช ืชืœื•ืฉื™ืŸ. ื•ื”ืœื›ื” ื›ื—ื›ืžื™ื:

ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ืืฉืชื•. ืฉืžื’ืจืฉื” ื‘ื’ื˜, ื•ืžื—ื–ื™ืจื”. ื•ืœื ืืžืจื™ื ืŸ ื•ื™ื‘ืžื” ืืžืจ ืจื—ืžื ื ื•ืขื“ื™ื™ืŸ ื™ื‘ื•ืžื™ืŸ ืจืืฉื•ื ื™ื ืขืœื™ื” ื•ืœื ืชืกื’ื™ ืœื” ื‘ื’ื˜. ื•ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ื›ืฉื’ื™ืจืฉื” ื”ื•ื” ืืžื™ื ื ืžืฆื•ื” ื“ืจืžื™ื ืจื—ืžื ื ืขืœื™ื” ื”ื ืงืขื‘ื“ื”, ื•ืชื™ืงื• ืขืœื™ื” ื‘ืื™ืกื•ืจ ืืฉืช ืื— ื•ืœื ืžืฆื™ ืœื”ื—ื–ื™ืจื”, ืงืžืดืœ ื“ืืžืจ ืจื—ืžื ื (ื“ื‘ืจื™ื ื›ืดื”:ื”ืณ) ื•ืœืงื—ื” ืœื• ืœืืฉื”, ื›ื™ื•ืŸ ืฉืœืงื—ื” ื”ืจื™ ื”ื™ื ื›ืืฉืชื•: