Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

כתובות י״ג:א׳ - י״ג:ב׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Monday, November 4, 2019 is כתובות י״ג:א׳ - י״ג:ב׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Kesuvos Perek 13 Mishnah 1

כתובות פרק י"ג משנה א׳

1
There were two prominent judges who issued decrees in Jerusalem, Admon and Ḥanan ben Avishalom. Ḥanan states two matters about which the Sages disagreed; Admon states seven. The mishna elaborates: With regard to the case of one who went overseas and his wife is demanding sustenance, claiming that her husband left her without funds and she is seeking a ruling that would provide for her from her husband’s property, Ḥanan says: She takes an oath at the end of their marriage, i.e., when she learns that her husband died. The oath is to the effect that he did not leave her any funds when he departed overseas, as she is claiming full payment of her marriage contract. And she does not take an oath at the outset of his trip overseas, when she demands support soon after his departure. The sons of High Priests disagreed with Ḥanan’s opinion and said: She takes an oath both at the outset and at the end. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said: The halakha is in accordance with their statement, i.e., that of the sons of the High Priests. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said that Ḥanan spoke well: She takes an oath only at the end.
שְׁנֵי דַיָּנֵי גְזֵרוֹת הָיוּ בִירוּשָׁלַיִם, אַדְמוֹן וְחָנָן בֶּן אֲבִישָׁלוֹם. חָנָן אוֹמֵר שְׁנֵי דְבָרִים, אַדְמוֹן אוֹמֵר שִׁבְעָה. מִי שֶׁהָלַךְ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וְאִשְׁתּוֹ תוֹבַעַת מְזוֹנוֹת, חָנָן אוֹמֵר, תִּשָּׁבַע בַּסּוֹף וְלֹא תִשָּׁבַע בַּתְּחִלָּה. נֶחְלְקוּ עָלָיו בְּנֵי כֹהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים וְאָמְרוּ, תִּשָּׁבַע בַּתְּחִלָּה וּבַסּוֹף. אָמַר רַבִּי דוֹסָא בֶן הַרְכִּינָס כְּדִבְרֵיהֶם. אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, יָפֶה אָמַר חָנָן, לֹא תִשָּׁבַע אֶלָּא בַסּוֹף:
א׳
ברטנורא

שני דייני גזילות (note that the opening words of this comment are different from what is written in the Mishnah, and seem to reflect a different manuscript in the hands of Rabbi Obadiah of Bertinoro) – they were making decrees regarding thieves and imposing fines upon them.

שני דברים – that the Sages do not agree with him.

תשבע בסוף – when they heard regarding him that he (i.e., the husband) had died, and she (i.e., the wife, now the widow) comes to collect her Ketubah, she takes an oath that she has not held back any property of her husband at all (after her husband’s death).

ולא תשבע בתחלה – at the time of collection of support. But Maimonides explained that she should take an oath at the end when her husband would come and contradict her and say, “I left you support,” she should take an oath claiming that he had not left her anything.

רבי יוחנן בן זכאי אומר – and the Halakha is according to him, and especially after three months from the husband departing, they provide/assign support to the wife if she claimed support, but not prior to this time, for it is a legal presumption that a man does not leave his house empty and leaves.

שני דייני גזילות. שהיו גוזרין גזירות על הגזלנים וקונסים עלינן קנסות:

שני דברים. שאין חכמים מודים לו:

תשבע בסוף. כשישמעו בו שמת ותבוא לגבות כתובתה, תשבע שלא עיכבה בידה משל בעלה כלום:

ולא תשבע בתחלה. בשעת גביית מזונות. ורמב״ם פירש, תשבע בסוף, כשיבא בעלה ויכחישנה ויאמר הנחתי לך מזונות, תשבע שלא הניח לה כלום:

רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אומר. והלכה כמותו. ודוקא אחר שלשה חדשים ליציאת הבעל פוסקין מזונות לאשה אם תבעה מזונות, אבל קודם זמן זה לא, שחזקה אין אדם מניח ביתו ריקן ויוצא:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Kesuvos Perek 13 Mishnah 2

כתובות פרק י"ג משנה ב׳

2
In the case of a husband who went overseas, and someone arose and sustained his wife in his absence, and upon the husband’s return the provider demands from him the money he spent on his wife, Ḥanan says: He has lost his money, i.e., the husband is not obligated to repay him, as the provider acted of his own free will and was not instructed to do so by the husband. The sons of High Priests disagreed with Ḥanan’s opinion and said: The man swears how much he spent on behalf of the woman, and he takes that sum from the husband. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said that the halakha is in accordance with their statement. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said: Ḥanan spoke well in this case, as this man is like one who placed his money on the horn of a deer in midflight, i.e., he has no reasonable expectation of reimbursement.
מִי שֶׁהָלַךְ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם וְעָמַד אֶחָד וּפִרְנֵס אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, חָנָן אוֹמֵר, אִבֵּד אֶת מְעוֹתָיו. נֶחְלְקוּ עָלָיו בְּנֵי כֹהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים וְאָמְרוּ, יִשָּׁבַע כַּמָּה הוֹצִיא וְיִטֹּל. אָמַר רַבִּי דוֹסָא בֶן הַרְכִּינָס כְּדִבְרֵיהֶם. אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, יָפֶה אָמַר חָנָן, הִנִּיחַ מְעוֹתָיו עַל קֶרֶן הַצְּבִי:
ב׳
ברטנורא

אבד את מעותיו – that he said, “I did not say to you, lend me and I will pay it back,” but if he lent the woman money for her support/maintenance on the condition that she should pay him, he makes a claim [against her] and she makes a claim the husband and he pays. But if the husband claims, “I left her support,” and she states, “he did not leave me, and wants to remove [money] from him, the husband takes an oath of inducement (an oath instituted by the Sages where the defendant completely denies a claim, based upon the tradition of Rav Nahman – to clear himself of suspicion), and he is exempted, and the moneys would be liability upon her when she becomes a widow or a divorcee, and in this Mishnah also, the Halakha is according to Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai.

איבד את מעותיו. דאמר, לא אמרתי לך הלויני ואני אפרע. אבל אם הלוה את האשה מעות למזונותיה על מנת שתשלם לו, הוא תובעה והיא תובעת את הבעל וישלם. ואם הבעל טוען הנחתי לה מזונות, והיא אומרת לא הניח ורוצה להוציא ממנו, נשבע הבעל שבועת היסת ונפטר, ויהיו המעות חוב עליה לכשתתאלמן או תתגרש. ובהא מתניתין נמי הלכה כרבן יוחנן בן זכאי:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר