| |||||
- 
- ב"ה - Today in Judaism - Today is Sunday, 22 Kislev, 5778 · December 10, 2017Today in Jewish History:
• Passing of Rabbi Eliezer ben Eliyahu Ashkenazi (1585)Rabbi Eliezer ben Eliyahu Ashkenazi (1512-1585) was a highly regarded Talmudist, as well as a physician. He authored various works, including Ma'ase ha-Shem -- a commentary on the historical portions of the Pentateuch, also including a commentary on the Passover Hagaddah -- and Yosef Lekach, dedicated and named after Don Yosef Nasi, the Duke of Naxos.
Daily Quote: A soul may descend to earth and live seventy or eighty years for the sole purpose of doing a favor for another -- a spiritual favor, or even a material favor (Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov)
Daily Torah Study:
Chumash: Mikeitz, 1st Portion Genesis 41:1-41:14 with Rashi
• English / Hebrew Linear Translation
• Video Class
• Daily Wisdom (short insight)
Genesis Chapter 41
1It came to pass at the end of two full years, that Pharaoh was dreaming, and behold, he was standing by the Nile. אוַיְהִ֕י מִקֵּ֖ץ שְׁנָתַ֣יִם יָמִ֑ים וּפַרְעֹ֣ה חֹלֵ֔ם וְהִנֵּ֖ה עֹמֵ֥ד עַל־הַיְאֹֽר:
It came to pass at the end: Heb. מִקֵץ. The Targum renders: מִסוֹף, at the end, and every expression of קֵץ means end.
ויהי מקץ: כתרגומו מסוף, וכל לשון קץ סוף הוא:
by the Nile: Heb. עַל-הַיְאֹר, lit., by the canal. No other rivers are called יְאוֹרִים except the Nile, because the entire land is covered with many man-made canals (יְאוֹרִים), and the Nile rises in their midst and waters them, for it does not usually rain in Egypt as it does in other countries.
על היאור: כל שאר נהרות אינם קרוים יאורים חוץ מנילוס, מפני שכל הארץ עשויין יאורים יאורים בידי אדם ונילוס עולה בתוכם ומשקה אותם, לפי שאין גשמים יורדין במצרים תדיר כשאר ארצות:
2And behold, from the Nile were coming up seven cows, of handsome appearance and robust flesh, and they pastured in the marshland. בוְהִנֵּ֣ה מִן־הַיְאֹ֗ר עֹלֹת֙ שֶׁ֣בַע פָּר֔וֹת יְפ֥וֹת מַרְאֶ֖ה וּבְרִיאֹ֣ת בָּשָׂ֑ר וַתִּרְעֶ֖ינָה בָּאָֽחוּ:
of handsome appearance: This was a symbol of the days of plenty, when creatures appear handsome to one another, for no one envies his fellow. — [from Gen. Rabbah 89:4]
יפות מראה: סימן הוא לימי שובע, שהבריות נראות יפות זו לזו, שאין עין בריה צרה בחברתה:
in the marshland: Heb. בָּאָחוּ, in the marsh, maresc in Old French, like“Can the reed-grass (אָחוּ) grow…” (Job 8:11).
באחו: באגם, מריש"ק בלע"ז [ביצה], כמו (איוב ח יא) ישגא אחו:
3And behold, seven other cows were coming up after them from the Nile, of ugly appearance and lean of flesh, and they stood beside the cows [which were] on the Nile bank. גוְהִנֵּ֞ה שֶׁ֧בַע פָּר֣וֹת אֲחֵר֗וֹת עֹל֤וֹת אַֽחֲרֵיהֶן֙ מִן־הַיְאֹ֔ר רָע֥וֹת מַרְאֶ֖ה וְדַקּ֣וֹת בָּשָׂ֑ר וַתַּֽעֲמֹ֛דְנָה אֵ֥צֶל הַפָּר֖וֹת עַל־שְׂפַ֥ת הַיְאֹֽר:
and lean of flesh: Heb. וְדַקוֹת, tenves in Old French, a term meaning thin.
ודקות בשר: טינבי"ש בלע"ז [דקות], לשון דק:
4And the cows of ugly appearance and lean of flesh devoured the seven cows that were of handsome appearance and healthy; then Pharaoh awoke. דוַתֹּאכַ֣לְנָה הַפָּר֗וֹת רָע֤וֹת הַמַּרְאֶה֙ וְדַקֹּ֣ת הַבָּשָׂ֔ר אֵ֚ת שֶׁ֣בַע הַפָּר֔וֹת יְפֹ֥ת הַמַּרְאֶ֖ה וְהַבְּרִיאֹ֑ת וַיִּיקַ֖ץ פַּרְעֹֽה:
devoured: A sign that all the joy of the plenty will be forgotten during the days of the famine.
ותאכלנה: סימן שתהא כל שמחת השובע נשכחת בימי הרעב:
5And he fell asleep and dreamed again, and behold, seven ears of grain were growing on one stalk, healthy and good. הוַיִּישָׁ֕ן וַיַּֽחֲלֹ֖ם שֵׁנִ֑ית וְהִנֵּ֣ה | שֶׁ֣בַע שִׁבֳּלִ֗ים עֹל֛וֹת בְּקָנֶ֥ה אֶחָ֖ד בְּרִיא֥וֹת וְטֹבֽוֹת:
on one stalk: Heb. בָּקָנֶה אֶחָד, tudel , tuiel , or tue(i)l, in Old French, stalk.
בקנה אחד: טודי"ל בלע"ז [גבעול]:
healthy: Heb. בְּרִיאוֹת sains in French, healthy.
בריאות: שייני"ש בלע"ז [בריאות]:
6And behold, seven ears of grain, thin and beaten by the east wind, were growing up after them. ווְהִנֵּה֙ שֶׁ֣בַע שִׁבֳּלִ֔ים דַּקּ֖וֹת וּשְׁדוּפֹ֣ת קָדִ֑ים צֹֽמְח֖וֹת אַֽחֲרֵיהֶֽן:
and beaten: Heb. וּשְׁדוּפוֹת. hasled(e)s in Old French, burnt up, parched; וּשְׁקִיפָן קִדּוּם [in Targum Onkelos], beaten, an expression similar to מַשְׁקוֹף, lintel, which is constantly beaten by the door, which knocks against it.
ושדופת: השלידי"ש בלע"ז [מיובשות] ושקיפן קדום, חבוטות לשון משקוף החבוט תמיד על ידי הדלת המכה עליו:
the east wind: Heb. קָדִים, the east wind, called Bise in French. (Early editions read: the southeast wind.)
קדים: רוח מזרחית שקורין ביש"א [רוח יבשה]:
7And the thin ears of grain swallowed up the seven healthy and full ears of grain; then Pharaoh awoke, and behold, a dream. זוַתִּבְלַ֨עְנָה֙ הַשִּׁבֳּלִ֣ים הַדַּקּ֔וֹת אֵ֚ת שֶׁ֣בַע הַשִּׁבֳּלִ֔ים הַבְּרִיא֖וֹת וְהַמְּלֵא֑וֹת וַיִּיקַ֥ץ פַּרְעֹ֖ה וְהִנֵּ֥ה חֲלֽוֹם:
healthy: Heb. בְּרִיאוֹת, sains in French, healthy.
הבריאות: שייני"ש בלע"ז [בריאות]:
and behold, a dream: And behold, a whole dream was completed before him, and it required interpreters.
והנה חלום: והנה נשלם חלום שלם לפניו והוצרך לפותרים:
8Now it came to pass in the morning that his spirit was troubled; so he sent and called all the necromancers of Egypt and all its sages, and Pharaoh related to them his dream, but no one interpreted them for Pharaoh. חוַיְהִ֤י בַבֹּ֨קֶר֙ וַתִּפָּ֣עֶם רוּח֔וֹ וַיִּשְׁלַ֗ח וַיִּקְרָ֛א אֶת־כָּל־חַרְטֻמֵּ֥י מִצְרַ֖יִם וְאֶת־כָּל־חֲכָמֶ֑יהָ וַיְסַפֵּ֨ר פַּרְעֹ֤ה לָהֶם֙ אֶת־חֲלֹמ֔וֹ וְאֵֽין־פּוֹתֵ֥ר אוֹתָ֖ם לְפַרְעֹֽה:
that his spirit was troubled: Heb. וַתִּפָּעֶם [Onkelos renders:] that his spirit was agitated, knocking within him like a bell (כְּפַעִמוֹן) (Tanchuma Buber, Mikeitz 4). Concerning Nebuchadnezzar, however, Scripture says:“and his spirit was agitated (וַתִּתְפָּעֶם)” (Dan. 2:1). There were two [reasons for this] agitation: forgetting the dream and ignorance of its interpretation. — [from Tanchuma Mikeitz 2]
ותפעם רוחו: ומטרפא רוחה מקשקשת בתוכו כפעמון. ובנבוכדנצר הוא אומר (דניאל ב א) ותתפעם רוחו, לפי שהיו שם שתי פעימות שכחת החלום והעלמת פתרונו:
the necromancers: Heb. חַרְטֻמֵי, those who would arouse themselves (נֶחֱרִים) with the bones (טִימֵי) of the dead, so that they would [be able to] inquire of the bones. ([The word] טִימֵי means “bones” in Aramaic. In the Mishnah (Oholoth 17:3), we find: A house that was full of “timia,” meaning “full of bones.”)
חרטמי: הנחרים בטימי מתים, ששואלים בעצמות. טימי, הן עצמות בלשון ארמי, ובמשנה בית שהוא מלא טמיא, מלא עצמות:
but no one interpreted them for Pharaoh: They did interpret them, but not for Pharaoh, for their voice did not reach his ears, and he had no satisfaction from their interpretation, for they said, “You will beget seven daughters, and you will bury seven daughters.” - [from Gen. Rabbah 89:6]
ואין פותר אותם לפרעה: פותרים היו אותם, אבל לא לפרעה, שלא היה קולן נכנס באזניו, ולא היה לו קורת רוח בפתרונם, שהיו אומרים שבע בנות אתה מוליד, שבע בנות אתה קובר:
9Now the chief cupbearer spoke with Pharaoh, saying, "I call to mind my faults today. טוַיְדַבֵּר֙ שַׂ֣ר הַמַּשְׁקִ֔ים אֶת־פַּרְעֹ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר אֶת־חֲטָאַ֕י אֲנִ֖י מַזְכִּ֥יר הַיּֽוֹם:
10Pharaoh was angry with his servants, and he put me in prison, in the house of the chief slaughterer, me and the chief baker. יפַּרְעֹ֖ה קָצַ֣ף עַל־עֲבָדָ֑יו וַיִּתֵּ֨ן אֹתִ֜י בְּמִשְׁמַ֗ר בֵּ֚ית שַׂ֣ר הַטַּבָּחִ֔ים אֹתִ֕י וְאֵ֖ת שַׂ֥ר הָֽאֹפִֽים:
11And we dreamed a dream on the same night, I and he; each one according to the interpretation of his dream, we dreamed. יאוַנַּֽחַלְמָ֥ה חֲל֛וֹם בְּלַ֥יְלָה אֶחָ֖ד אֲנִ֣י וָה֑וּא אִ֛ישׁ כְּפִתְר֥וֹן חֲלֹמ֖וֹ חָלָֽמְנוּ:
each one according to the interpretation of his dream: A dream fit for the interpretation that was interpreted for us and similar to it. [I.e., a dream for which the interpretation given was appropriate, and which was similar to that interpretation.]
איש כפתרון חלומו: חלום הראוי לפתרון שנפתר לו ודומה לו:
12And there with us was a Hebrew lad, a slave of the chief slaughterer, and we told him, and he interpreted our dreams for us; [for] each [of us], he interpreted according to his dream. יבוְשָׁ֨ם אִתָּ֜נוּ נַ֣עַר עִבְרִ֗י עֶ֚בֶד לְשַׂ֣ר הַטַּבָּחִ֔ים וַנְּסַ֙פֶּר־ל֔וֹ וַיִּפְתָּר־לָ֖נוּ אֶת־חֲלֹֽמֹתֵ֑ינוּ אִ֥ישׁ כַּֽחֲלֹמ֖וֹ פָּתָֽר:
a Hebrew lad, a slave: Cursed are the wicked, for their favors are incomplete. He mentions him with expressions of contempt:
נער עברי עבד: ארורים הרשעים שאין טובתם שלמה. מזכירו בלשון בזיון:
a lad: a fool, unfit for a high position;
נער: שוטה ואין ראוי לגדולה:
a Hebrew: he does not even understand our language;
עברי: אפילו לשוננו אינו מכיר:
a slave: and in the statutes of Egypt it is written that a slave may neither reign nor wear princely raiment. — [from Gen. Rabbah 89:7]
עבד: וכתוב בנמוסי מצרים שאין עבד מולך ולא לובש בגדי שרים:
[for] each [of us]…according to his dream: According to the dream and close to its contents. — [from Ber. 55b]
איש כחלומו: לפי החלום וקרוב לענינו:
13And it came to pass that just as he had interpreted, so it was; me he restored to my position, and him he hanged." יגוַיְהִ֛י כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר פָּֽתַר־לָ֖נוּ כֵּ֣ן הָיָ֑ה אֹתִ֛י הֵשִׁ֥יב עַל־כַּנִּ֖י וְאֹת֥וֹ תָלָֽה:
me he restored to my position: [“He” refers to] Pharaoh, mentioned above, as he said,“Pharaoh was angry with his servants” (verse 10). Hence, the verse is elliptical: it did not specify who restored, because it is not necessary to specify who restored, [for it could only be] the one who has the power to restore, namely Pharaoh. This is customary for all elliptical verses. Concerning the one who is to do [the thing], they leave the matter unspecified.
השיב על כני: מי שבידו להשיב, והוא פרעה הנזכר למעלה, כמו שאמר (לעיל פסוק י) פרעה קצף על עבדיו, הרי מקרא קצר ולא פירש מי השיב, לפי שאין צריך לפרש מי השיב, וכן דרך כל מקראות קצרים על מי שעליו לעשות הם סותמים את הדבר:
14So Pharaoh sent and called Joseph, and they rushed him from the dungeon, and he shaved and changed his clothes, and he [then] came to Pharaoh. ידוַיִּשְׁלַ֤ח פַּרְעֹה֙ וַיִּקְרָ֣א אֶת־יוֹסֵ֔ף וַיְרִיצֻ֖הוּ מִן־הַבּ֑וֹר וַיְגַלַּח֙ וַיְחַלֵּ֣ף שִׂמְלֹתָ֔יו וַיָּבֹ֖א אֶל־פַּרְעֹֽה:
from the dungeon: Heb. מִן-הַבּוֹר, lit., from the pit. From the prison, which was made like a sort of pit, and so every [instance of] בּוֹר in the Scriptures is an expression of“pit.” Even if there is no water in it, it is called בּוֹר, fosse in Old French, a pit.
מן הבור: מן בית הסוהר שהוא עשוי כמין גומא, וכן כל בור שבמקרא לשון גומא הוא, ואף אם אין בו מים קרוי בור פוש"א בלע"ז [חפירה]:
and he shaved: in honor of the throne. — [from Gen. Rabbah 89:9]
ויגלח: מפני כבוד המלכות:
Tehillim: Psalms Chapters 106 - 107
• Hebrew text
• English text
Chapter 106
The psalmist continues the theme of the previous psalm, praising God for performing other miracles not mentioned previously, for "who can recount the mighty acts of God?" Were we to try, we could not mention them all!
1. Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. Who can recount the mighty acts of the Lord, or proclaim all His praises?
3. Fortunate are those who preserve justice, who perform deeds of righteousness all the time.
4. Remember me, Lord, when You find favor with Your people; be mindful of me with Your deliverance;
5. to behold the prosperity of Your chosen, to rejoice in the joy of Your nation, to glory with Your inheritance.
6. We have sinned as did our fathers, we have acted perversely and wickedly.
7. Our fathers in Egypt did not contemplate Your wonders, they did not remember Your abundant kindnesses, and they rebelled by the sea, at the Sea of Reeds.
8. Yet He delivered them for the sake of His Name, to make His strength known.
9. He roared at the Sea of Reeds and it dried up; He led them through the depths, as through a desert.
10. He saved them from the hand of the enemy, and redeemed them from the hand of the foe.
11. The waters engulfed their adversaries; not one of them remained.
12. Then they believed in His words, they sang His praise.
13. They quickly forgot His deeds, they did not wait for His counsel;
14. and they lusted a craving in the desert, they tested God in the wilderness.
15. And He gave them their request, but sent emaciation into their souls.
16. They angered Moses in the camp, and Aaron, the Lord's holy one.
17. The earth opened and swallowed Dathan, and engulfed the company of Abiram;
18. and a fire burned in their assembly, a flame set the wicked ablaze.
19. They made a calf in Horeb, and bowed down to a molten image.
20. They exchanged their Glory for the likeness of a grass-eating ox.
21. They forgot God, their savior, Who had performed great deeds in Egypt,
22. wonders in the land of Ham, awesome things at the Sea of Reeds.
23. He said that He would destroy them-had not Moses His chosen one stood in the breach before Him, to turn away His wrath from destroying.
24. They despised the desirable land, they did not believe His word.
25. And they murmured in their tents, they did not heed the voice of the Lord.
26. So He raised His hand [in oath] against them, to cast them down in the wilderness,
27. to throw down their progeny among the nations, and to scatter them among the lands.
28. They joined themselves to [the idol] Baal Peor, and ate of the sacrifices to the dead;
29. they provoked Him with their doings, and a plague broke out in their midst.
30. Then Phineas arose and executed judgement, and the plague was stayed;
31. it was accounted for him as a righteous deed, through all generations, forever.
32. They angered Him at the waters of Merivah, and Moses suffered on their account;
33. for they defied His spirit, and He pronounced [an oath] with His lips.
34. They did not destroy the nations as the Lord had instructed them;
35. rather, they mingled with the nations and learned their deeds.
36. They worshipped their idols, and they became a snare for them.
37. They sacrificed their sons and daughters to demons.
38. They spilled innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; and the land became guilty with blood.
39. They were defiled by their deeds, and went astray by their actions.
40. And the Lord's wrath blazed against His people, and He abhorred His inheritance;
41. so He delivered them into the hands of nations, and their enemies ruled them.
42. Their enemies oppressed them, and they were subdued under their hand.
43. Many times did He save them, yet they were rebellious in their counsel and were impoverished by their sins.
44. But He saw their distress, when He heard their prayer;
45. and He remembered for them His covenant and He relented, in keeping with His abounding kindness,
46. and He caused them to be treated mercifully by all their captors.
47. Deliver us, Lord our God; gather us from among the nations, that we may give thanks to Your Holy Name and glory in Your praise.
48. Blessed is the Lord, the God of Israel, forever and ever. And let all the people say, "Amen! Praise the Lord!"
Chapter 107
This psalm speaks of those who are saved from four specific perilous situations(imprisonment, sickness, desert travel, and sea travel) and must thank God, for their sins caused their troubles, and only by the kindness of God were they saved. It is therefore appropriate that they praise God and tell of their salvation to all.
1. Give thanks to the Lord for He is good, for His kindness is everlasting.
2. So shall say those redeemed by the Lord, those whom He redeemed from the hand of the oppressor.
3. He gathered them from the lands-from east and from west, from north and from the sea.
4. They lost their way in the wilderness, in the wasteland; they found no inhabited city.
5. Both hungry and thirsty, their soul languished within them.
6. They cried out to the Lord in their distress; He delivered them from their afflictions.
7. He guided them in the right path to reach an inhabited city.
8. Let them give thanks to the Lord, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man,
9. for He has satiated a thirsting soul, and filled a hungry soul with goodness.
10. Those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death, bound in misery and chains of iron,
11. for they defied the words of God and spurned the counsel of the Most High-
12. He humbled their heart through suffering; they stumbled and there was none to help.
13. They cried out to the Lord in their distress; He saved them from their afflictions.
14. He brought them out of darkness and the shadow of death, and sundered their bonds.
15. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His kindness, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man,
16. for He broke the brass gates and smashed the iron bars.
17. Foolish sinners are afflicted because of their sinful ways and their wrongdoings.
18. Their soul loathes all food, and they reach the gates of death.
19. They cried out to the Lord in their distress; He saved them from their afflictions.
20. He sent forth His command and healed them; He delivered them from their graves.
21. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His kindness, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man.
22. Let them offer sacrifices of thanksgiving, and joyfully recount His deeds.
23. Those who go down to the sea in ships, who perform tasks in mighty waters;
24. they saw the works of the Lord and His wonders in the deep.
25. He spoke and caused the stormy wind to rise, and it lifted up the waves.
26. They rise to the sky, plunge to the depths; their soul melts in distress.
27. They reel and stagger like a drunkard, all their skill is to no avail.
28. They cried out to the Lord in their distress, and He brought them out from their calamity.
29. He transformed the storm into stillness, and the waves were quieted.
30. They rejoiced when they were silenced, and He led them to their destination.
31. Let them give thanks to the Lord for His kindness, and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man.
32. Let them exalt Him in the congregation of the people, and praise Him in the assembly of the elders.
33. He turns rivers into desert, springs of water into parched land,
34. a fruitful land into a salt-marsh, because of the wickedness of those who inhabit it.
35. He turns a desert into a lake, and parched land into springs of water.
36. He settles the hungry there, and they establish a city of habitation.
37. They sow fields and plant vineyards which yield fruit and wheat.
38. He blesses them and they multiply greatly, and He does not decrease their cattle.
39. [If they sin,] they are diminished and cast down through oppression, misery, and sorrow.
40. He pours contempt upon distinguished men, and causes them to stray in a pathless wilderness.
41. He raises the needy from distress, and makes their families [as numerous] as flocks.
42. The upright observe this and rejoice, and all the wicked close their mouth.
43. Let him who is wise bear these in mind, and then the benevolent acts of the Lord will be understood.
Tanya: Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 1
• English Text (Lessons in Tanya)
• Hebrew Text
• Audio Class: Listen | Download
• Video Class
Sunday, Kislev 22, 5778 · December 10, 2017
Today's Tanya Lesson
Likutei Amarim, beginning of Chapter 1
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Yehoshua B. Gordon Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Manis Freidman Listen • Download MP3
תניא בסוף פרק ג׳ דנדה: משביעים אותו
We have learned (Niddah, end of ch. 3):1 “An oath is administered to him:
Before a Jew is born an oath is administered to him in heaven, charging him:
תהי צדיק ואל תהי רשע, ואפילו כל העולם כולו אומרים לך צדיק אתה היה בעיניך כרשע
‘Be righteous and be not wicked; and even if the whole world judging you by your actions tells you that you are righteous, regard yourself as wicked.’”
The soul of a Jew descends into a body for a purpose — in order to fulfill a specific spiritual mission in this world. To enable him to fulfill it a heavenly oath is administered to him that he “be righteous and not wicked,” and concurrently, that he regard himself as wicked and not righteous. The root (שׁבע) of the verb משׁביעים (“an oath is administered”) is virtually identical with the root (שׂבע) of the verb משׂביעים (“one causes [him] to be sated”). Accordingly, the oath charging him to be righteous may also be understood to mean that the soul is thereby invested (“sated”) with the power that enables it to fulfill its destiny in life on earth.
וצריך להבין, דהא תנן אבות פרק ב׳ : ואל תהי רשע בפני עצמך
This requires to be understood, for we have learned in the Mishnah [Avot, ch. 2],2 “Be not wicked in your own estimation.”
How, then, can we say that an oath is administered to the soul that it regard itself as wicked, when this directly contradicts the Mishnaic injunction not to regard oneself as wicked?3
וגם אם יהיה בעיניו כרשע ירע לבבו ויהיה עצב
Furthermore, if a person considers himself wicked, he will be grieved at heart and depressed,
ולא יוכל לעבוד ה׳ בשמחה ובטוב לבב
and consequently will not be able to serve G‑d joyfully and with a contented heart;
Apart from the previously mentioned contradiction from the Mishnah, an additional question is now raised. A cardinal principle in the service of G‑d is that it be performed with joy — joy at the privilege of serving Him either through performing a positive command or by refraining from that which is prohibited. How then can one be required to take an oath to consider himself wicked, when this will cause him to be depressed, making it impossible for him to serve G‑d with joy?
Furthermore, just as the first part of the oath, “Be righteous and be not wicked,” is vital to his success in realizing his life’s mission, so too the fulfillment of the second part of the oath, that he consider himself wicked, is imperative. How can this possibly be so, when such an attitude hinders his joyful service of G‑d?
ואם לא ירע לבבו כלל מזה
while if his heart will not be at all grieved by this self-appraisal,
I.e., if we should propose that in order to fulfill the oath the person will indeed regard himself as wicked, but at the same time will resolve that his wickedness shall not perturb him, so as not to encumber his joyful service of G‑d,
יכול לבוא לידי קלות חס ושלום
he may be led to irreverence, G‑d forbid, by such an attitude, with sin perturbing him not at all.
For although his original resolve that being wicked will not perturb him stems only from his sincere desire to serve G‑d with joy, yet such a resolution may very well lead to a situation where wickedness will truly not disturb him.
אך הענין
However, the [above] matter will be more clearly understood after a preliminary discussion of the true meaning of “righteous” and “wicked”.
כי הנה מצינו בגמרא ה׳ חלוקות: צדיק וטוב לו, צדיק ורע לו
We find in the Gemara4 five distinct types: a righteous man who prospers, materially as well as spiritually — he knows only good; a righteous man who suffers, in both a material as well as spiritual sense: spiritually, he has not yet vanquished all his evil, and in the material sense too he is wanting;
רשע וטוב לו, רשע ורע לו, ובינוני
a wicked man in whom there is some good and who prospers; a wicked man who suffers spiritually and materially; and an intermediate man — the Beinoni.
ופירשו בגמרא: צדיק וטוב לו — צדיק גמור
The Gemara explains: “the righteous man who prospers” is the consummate lit., “complete”tzaddik;
Once he has achieved this level, physical suffering — to cleanse the soul from the impurities of sin — is unnecessary; he therefore prospers materially as well.
צדיק ורע לו — צדיק שאינו גמור
the “righteous man who suffers” is the imperfect lit., “incomplete” tzaddik.
He therefore experiences some measure of material suffering, thereby cleansing the soul while it is yet clothed in the body, so that he will not have to endure any spiritual suffering in the World to Come.
Accordingly, the Gemara is not referring to two tzaddikim on the same spiritual level, one of whom prospers while the other suffers; rather, it speaks of two distinct levels of tzaddikim. The Gemara thus cites only two characterizations regarding the tzaddik — “consummate” and “imperfect” (lit., “complete” and “incomplete”). The terms “who prospers” or “who suffers” do not indicate his spiritual level: they merely describe his resultant material status.
וברעיא מהימנא פרשת משפטים פירש: צדיק ורע לו — שהרע שבו כפוף לטוב
In Ra‘aya Mehemna (Parshat Mishpatim)5 it is explained that “the righteous man who suffers” is one whose evil nature is subservient to his good nature.6
He is a tzaddik who still retains some vestige of evil, albeit subservient to his good nature. Accordingly, a “righteous man who prospers” is a tzaddik in whom there is only good, since he has totally transformed his evil nature.
According to the Zohar (of which Ra‘aya Mehemna is a part), the terms “who prospers” and “who suffers” also indicate and describe the level of the tzaddik. The “tzaddik who prospers” is a tzaddik in whom there is only good — the evil within him having already been transformed to good; the “tzaddik who suffers” is a tzaddik of lower stature — one who still harbors some evil.
However, we must now understand why redundant titles are given to each level of tzaddik: “complete tzaddik” and “tzaddik who prospers”; “incomplete tzaddik” and “tzaddik who suffers.” If the “complete tzaddik”is the “tzaddik who prospers” (i.e., in whom there is only good) and the “incomplete tzaddik” is the “tzaddik who suffers” (i.e., retains a vestige of evil), why then is it necessary to give each tzaddik two appellations?
The explanation provided further (in ch. 10) is that each descriptive term denotes a specific aspect of the divine service of the tzaddik. The terms “complete tzaddik” and “incomplete tzaddik” denote the level of service of the tzaddik’s G‑dly soul, i.e., the tzaddik’s love of G‑d, for it is by virtue of this love that he is called “tzaddik.”The “complete tzaddik” is he who has attained perfection in his love of G‑d in a manner of ahavah betaanugim(“love of delights”) — the serene love of fulfillment. The tzaddik whose ahavah betaanugim is as yet imperfect is called the “incomplete (or unperfected) tzaddik.”
The terms “tzaddik who prospers” and “tzaddik who suffers” denote the tzaddik’s status vis-à-vis his efforts in transforming his animal soul to holiness. For the tzaddik, through his lofty service of ahavah betaanugim,transforms the evil within him into holiness and good. The designation “tzaddik who prospers” indicates that he has already totally transformed the evil within him and now good alone remains, while the “tzaddik who suffers” is one who has not yet managed to totally transform the evil within him to good; a vestige of it still remains.
The explanations that follow make it abundantly clear that the evil referred to here is no more than an amorphous evil still harbored in the heart of the “incomplete tzaddik.” For the tzaddik has no association with actual evil that manifests itself in thought or speech, and most certainly not with the evil that finds expression in actions.
ובגמרא סוף פרק ט׳ דברכות: צדיקים יצר טוב שופטן כו׳, רשעים יצר הרע שופטן
In the Gemara (end of ch. 9 of Berachot7) [it is stated] that the righteous are “judged” i.e., motivated and ruled by their good nature, their good nature having the final say; the wicked are judged i.e., motivated and ruled by their evil nature, their evil nature having the final say;
בינונים זה וזה שופטן וכו׳
intermediate men are “judged” by both the good and evil nature.8
אמר רבה: כגון אנא בינוני. אמר ליה אביי: לא שביק מר חיי לכל בריה וכו׳
Rabbah declared: “I, for example, am a ‘Beinoni’.” Said Abbaye to him, “Master, you make it impossible for any creature to live.”
Abbaye argued thus: “If you are a Beinoni, then all those on a lower level than you fall into the category of the wicked, concerning whom our Sages say:9 ‘The wicked, even while alive, are considered dead.’ By calling yourself a Beinoni you thus make it impossible for anyone to live.”
ולהבין כל זה באר היטב
To understand all the aforesaid clearly [an explanation is called for].
In addition to the question which will soon follow — that according to the common conception of a Beinonias a person having half mitzvot and half transgressions, how could a great sage like Rabbah mistake himself for a Beinoni — a further question is implied:
If a Beinoni is simply one having half mitzvot and half transgressions, then his status is readily identifiable, and there is no possible room for debate.
וגם להבין מה שאמר איוב בבא בתרא פרק א׳ : רבונו של עולם, בראת צדיקים בראת רשעים כו׳
And also to understand the statement of Job [Bava Batra ch. 1]10: “L‑rd of the Universe! You have created righteous men, You have created wicked men,....”
והא צדיק ורשע לא קאמר
for He does not decree [which persons are to be] righteous and wicked.
The Gemara11 relates that G‑d decrees that a child about to be born will be wise or foolish, strong or weak, and so on. However, whether the child will be righteous or wicked G‑d does not say: this is not predetermined; rather, it is left to the individual’s free choice.
How, then, are we to understand Job’s plaint, “You have created righteous men, You have created wicked men”?12
וגם להבין מהות מדריגת הבינוני
We must also understand the essential nature (mahut) of the rank of the Beinoni.
The mahut of a tzaddik is righteousness; the mahut of the wicked man is evil. What is the mahut — the essential nature — of the Beinoni?
שבודאי אינו מחצה זכיות ומחצה עוונות, שאם כן איך טעה רבה בעצמו לומר שהוא בינוני
He is certainly not one whose deeds are half virtuous and half sinful; for if this were so, how could Rabbah err in [classifying] himself as a Beinoni?
ונודע דלא פסיק פומיה מגירסא, עד שאפילו מלאך המות לא היה יכול לשלוט בו
— when it is known that his mouth never ceased studying [the Torah], so much so that even the Angel of Death had no dominion over him.13
Such was Rabbah’s diligence that he did not neglect his studies for even one moment. Qualitatively too, his learning was on so high a plane that the Angel of Death was unable to overpower him.
ואיך היה יכול לטעות במחצה עוונות, חס ושלום
How, then, could he err in considering that half his deeds were sinful, G‑d forbid?
ועוד, שהרי בשעה שעושה עונות נקרא רשע גמור
Furthermore, when can a person be considered a Beinoni? For at the time one sins until he repents he is deemed completely wicked,
ואם אחר כך עשה תשובה נקרא צדיק גמור
(and if he was sinful and then repented, thus ceasing to be wicked, he is deemed completely righteous14).
ואפילו העובר על איסור קל של דברי סופרים מקרי רשע, כדאיתא בפרק ב׳ דיבמות ובפרק קמא דנדה
Even he who violates a minor prohibition of the Rabbis is termed wicked, as is stated in Yevamot, ch. 2,15 and in Niddah, ch. 1.16
ואפילו מי שיש בידו למחות ולא מיחה נקרא רשע בפרק ו׳ דשבועות
Moreover, even he who himself does not sin, but has the opportunity to forewarn another against sinning and fails to do so is termed wicked [Shevuot, ch. 617].
וכל שכן וקל וחומר במבטל איזו מצות עשה שאפשר לו לקיימה
All the more so he who neglects any positive law which he is able to fulfill,
כמו כל שאפשר לו לעסוק בתורה ואינו עוסק
for instance, whoever is able to study Torah and does not do so,
שעליו דרשו רבותינו ז״ל: כי דבר ה׳ בזה וגו׳ הכרת תכרת וגו׳
to whom our Sages18 have applied the verse,19 “Because he has despised the word of the L‑rd (i.e., the Torah),.[that soul] shall be utterly cut off....”
ופשיטא דמקרי רשע טפי מעובר איסור דרבנן
It is thus plain that such a person is called wicked, more so than he who violates a prohibition of the Sages.
ואם כן על כרחך הבינוני אין בו אפילו עון ביטול תורה
This being so, we must conclude that the Beinoni is not guilty even of the sin of neglecting to study Torah;
a sin most difficult to avoid, and counted among those sins that people transgress daily.20
ומשום הכי טעה רבה בעצמו לומר שהוא בינוני
This is why Rabbah mistook himself for a Beinoni.
Since a Beinoni is innocent even of neglecting Torah study, Rabbah could [mistakenly] consider himself a Beinoni, even though he scrupulously observed even the most minor commandments and never ceased from his studies.
הגהה
ומה שכתוב בזהר חלק ג׳ דף רל״א: כל שממועטין עונותיו וכו׳ —
NOTE
As for what is written in the Zohar III, p. 231: “He whose sins are few [is classed as a ‘righteous man who suffers’],”
implying that even according to the Zohar the meaning of a “righteous man who suffers” is one who does have sins, albeit few; and if so, a Beinoni must be one who is in part virtuous and in part sinful,
היא שאלת רב המנונא לאליהו
this is the query of Rav Hamnuna to Elijah.
אבל לפי תשובת אליהו שם הפי' צדיק ורע לו הוא כמ"ש בר"מ פרשה משפטים דלעיל
But according to Elijah’s answer [ibid.], the meaning of a “righteous man who suffers” is as stated in Ra‘aya Mehemna on Parshat Mishpatim, quoted above,21 i.e., that the “righteous man who suffers” is one whose evil nature is subservient to his good nature.
ושבעים פנים לתורה
And the Torah has seventy facets (modes of interpretation).22
The Rebbe notes that the words, “And the Torah has seventy facets,” help us understand Rav Hamnuna’s query. It is difficult to understand how Rav Hamnuna would even entertain the notion that a “righteous man who suffers” is one who actually sins, inasmuch as all the abovementioned questions clearly lead us to assume the opposite. Rav Hamnuna’s query, however, was prompted only by the fact that “the Torah has seventy facets,” and he thought that this was possibly one of these facets.
END OF NOTE
| FOOTNOTES | |
| 1. | Niddah 30b. |
| 2. | Avot 2:13. |
| 3. | The apparent contradiction between the two statements is resolved in ch. 13. See also chs. 14, 29 and 34. |
| 4. | Berachot 7a. |
| 5. | Zohar II, 117b. |
| 6. | This is an alternative interpretation of the words ורע לו which may be rendered literally as “evil [belongs] to him”; i.e, he is master of the evil nature in him. |
| 7. | 61b. |
| 8. | See beginning of ch. 9, and ch. 13. |
| 9. | Berachot 18b. |
| 10. | Bava Batra 16a. |
| 11. | Niddah 16b. |
| 12. | The question is answered in ch. 14 and ch. 27. |
| 13. | See Bava Metzia 86a. |
| 14. | The Rebbe notes that although the Gemara in Kiddushin 49b indicates only that the penitent sinner is considered a tzaddik, it is explicitly stated in Or Zarua, sec. 112, that he is considered a tzaddik gamur. |
| 15. | 20a. |
| 16. | 12a. |
| 17. | 39b. |
| 18. | Sanhedrin 99a. |
| 19. | Bamidbar 15:31. |
| 20. | See below, end of ch. 25. |
| 21. | Zohar II, 117b. |
| 22. | Otiot deRabbi Akiva; comp. Bamidbar Rabbah 14:12. |
• Sefer Hamitzvot:
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassSunday, Kislev 22, 5778 · December 10, 2017
Today's Mitzvah
A daily digest of Maimonides’ classic work "Sefer Hamitzvot"
AUDIO & VIDEO CLASSES
• VIDEO CLASS: Rabbi Mendel Kaplan Watch • Listen
• AUDIO CLASS: Rabbi Berel Bell Listen • MP3 Download
Important Message Regarding This Lesson
The Daily Mitzvah schedule runs parallel to the daily study of 3 chapters of Maimonides' 14-volume code. There are instances when the Mitzvah is repeated a few days consecutively while the exploration of the same Mitzvah continues in the in-depth track.
Negative Commandment 262
A Husband's Obligations towards His Wife
"He shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or conjugal rights"—Exodus 21:10.
The Torah tells us that if a man marries a Jewish slave-girl, he may not torment her by denying her appropriate food, clothing, or conjugal rights. Rather, he must accord her the rights due to all "the daughters [of Israel]." Thus it is clear that this precept applies to all wives.
Full text of this Mitzvah »
A Husband's Obligations towards His Wife
Negative Commandment 262
Translated by Berel Bell
The 262nd prohibition is that one who purchases a Jewish maidservant and then marries her is forbidden from afflicting her. When I say "from afflicting her," I mean that he may not diminish her food, clothing, or conjugal rights (sh'eirah, k'susah, onasah) with the intention of afflicting her and causing her anguish.
The source of this commandment is G‑d's statement1 (exalted be He), "He may not diminish her food, clothing, or conjugal rights."
This same prohibition also applies to one who has married any Jewish woman; he also is prohibited from afflicting her in any of these three areas, with the intention of causing her anguish and distress.
The source for this is G‑d's statement2 (exalted be He) regarding the Jewish maidservant [whose master marries her and] whose food, clothing, and conjugal rights may not be withheld, "She must be treated exactly as other [married] women." From here we learn that the [proper] treatment of all married women is that one may not diminish their food, clothing, and conjugal rights.
Our Sages explained this in the Mechilta: "What does the verse, '[She must be treated] exactly as other [married] women' teach us [about the treatment of the maidservant]? It appears to come here to teach us something; but rather it ends up being taught about."3
There it is also explained that sh'eirah refers to food; k'susah is meant literally [i.e. clothing], and onasah refers to conjugal rights.
FOOTNOTES
1.Ex. 21:10.
2.Ex. 21:9.
3.By saying that a maidservant must be treated like a regular married woman, it would seem that we know something about the regular woman that we don't know about the maidservant. In reality, however, the opposite is true: we learn from verse 10 that a maidservant's food, clothing, and conjugal relations may not be diminished. By saying in verse 9 that the maidservant is treated like a regular woman, we learn that the same applies to a regular woman.
Rambam:
• 1 Chapter A Day: Tefilah and Birkat Kohanim Tefilah and Birkat Kohanim - Chapter Thirteen
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassTefilah and Birkat Kohanim - Chapter Thirteen
1
The common custom throughout all Israel is to complete the [reading of] the Torah in one year. [The cycle] is begun on the Sabbath after the Sukkot festival, reading the sidrah, Bereshit. On the following Sabbath, [the sidrah,] Eleh toldot [is read]; on the third, [the sidrah,] Vayomer Ado-nai el Avram. We continue reading according to this order until the Torah is completed, during the Sukkot festival.
There are those who finish the Torah reading in a three-year cycle. However, this is not a widely accepted custom.
א
המנהג הפשוט בכל ישראל שמשלימין את התורה בשנה אחת מתחילין בשבת שאחר חג הסוכות וקורין בסדר בראשית בשניה אלה תולדות בשלישית ויאמר יי' אל אברם וקוראין והולכין על הסדר הזה עד שגומרין את התורה בחג הסוכות ויש מי שמשלים את התורה בשלש שנים ואינו מנהג פשוט:
2
Ezra instituted the practice of having the Jews read the "curses" found in the Book of Leviticus before Shavuot, and those found in the Book of Deuteronomy before Rosh HaShanah.
It is common custom to read [the sidrah,] Bemidbar Sinai before Shavuot, [the sidrah,] Va'etchanan after Tish'ah B'Av, [the sidrah,] Attem nitzavim before Rosh HaShanah, and [the sidrah,] Tzav et Aharon before Pesach in an ordinary year.
Therefore, there are Sabbaths on which two sedarim are read: for example, [the sidrah,] Ishah ki tazria and [the sidrah,] Vezot tih'yeh torat hametzora [are often combined. Similarly, the sidrah,] Im bechukotai [is often combined] with [the sidrah,] Behar Sinai, so that [the reading of the Torah] will be completed in a year, and the sedarim will be read at the appropriate times.
ב
עזרא תיקן להם לישראל שיהו קורין קללות שבספר ויקרא קודם עצרת ושבמשנה תורה קודם ראש השנה והמנהג הפשוט שיהו קוראין במדבר סיני קודם עצרת ואתחנן אחר תשעה באב אתם נצבים קודם ראש השנה צו את אהרן קודם הפסח בשנה פשוטה לפיכך יש שבתות שקורין שחרית שני סדרין כגון אשה כי תזריע וזאת תהיה תורת המצורע אם בחקותי עם בהר סיני וכיוצא בהן כדי שישלימו בשנה ויקראו אותן הסדרים בעונתן:
3
At the point [in the Torah] where the Sabbath morning [reading] was completed, the reading [is begun] on the Sabbath afternoon, on Monday, on Thursday, and on the following Sabbath.
What is implied? On the first Sabbath, we read [the sidrah,] Bereshit in the morning. In the afternoon, ten or more verses from [the sidrah,] Eleh toldot Noach are read. The same practice [is followed] on Monday and Thursday. On the coming Sabbath, we begin from Eleh toldot Noach, and read until the conclusion of the sidrah. This pattern is followed throughout the year.
On each Sabbath, a haftarah is recited that reflects the Torah reading.
ג
מקום שמפסיקין בשבת בשחרית שם קוראין במנחה ובשני ובחמישי ולשבת הבאה כיצד שבת ראשונה קורין בשחרית בסדר בראשית במנחה קורין אלה תולדות נח עשרה פסוקים או יותר וכן בשני ובחמישי וכן לשבת הבאה בשחרית מתחילין מאלה תולדות נח וקורא עד סוף הסדר ועל דרך זו קורין כל השנה ומפטירין בכל שבת ושבת בנביא מעין שקרא בתורה:
4
On Rosh Chodesh, the first reader reads three verses from the passage (Numbers 28:1-15) Tzav. The second reader reads the third verse which was read by the first reader, and the following two verses, so that three verses will remain in the passage. The third reader reads the three verses that were left [unread] by the second reader, and the passage "And on the Sabbath day...." The fourth reader reads [the passage] "And on your new months...."
If Rosh Chodesh falls on the Sabbath, two Torah scrolls are taken out in the morning. The sidrah of that particular Sabbath is read from one, and the person who concludes the reading reads [the passage] "And on your new months...."
The person who reads the haftarah reads the passage concerning Rosh Chodesh, and then reads [the passage (Isaiah 66:1-24) that concludes:] "And it will be from month to month..." as the haftarah.
If Rosh Chodesh Av falls on the Sabbath [the passage, Isaiah 1:14-31, beginning:] "My soul hates your new moons and your festivals" is read as the haftarah.
If Rosh Chodesh falls on Sunday, on the preceding Sabbath [the passage (I Samuel 20:18-42), beginning:] "And Jonathan told him: 'Tomorrow is the new month...'” is read as the haftarah.
ד
ובראשי חדשים הראשון קורא שלשה פסוקים מפרשת צו והשני חוזר וקורא פסוק ג' שקרא הראשון ושני פסוקים שאחריו כדי שישייר בפרשה שלשה פסוקים והשלישי קורא שלשה פסוקים ששייר השני עם וביום השבת והרביעי קורא ובראשי חדשיכם ואם חל ראש חדש להיות בשבת מוציאין שני ספרים בשחרית באחד קורין בו סדר אותה שבת ובשני קורא בו המשלים ובראשי חדשיכם והמפטיר קורא ענין ראש חדש ומפטירין והיה מדי חדש בחדשו וראש חדש אב שחל להיות בשבת מפטירין חדשיכם ומועדיכם שנאה נפשי ור"ח שחל להיות באחד בשבת מפטירין בשבת שלפניו ויאמר לו יהונתן מחר חדש:
5
Whoever is called to read from the Torah should begin [his reading] with a positive matter and conclude with a positive matter.
However, in Parashat Ha'azinu, the first [person called to the Torah] reads until Z'chor y'mot olam (Deuteronomy 32:7). The second begins from Z'chor y'mot olam [and continues] until Yarkivehu (ibid.:13). The third [reads] from Yarkivehu until Vayar Ado-nai vayin'atz (ibid.:19). The fourth [reads] from Vayar Ado-nai vayin'atz until Lu chachmu (ibid.:29). The fifth [reads] from Lu chachmu until Ki essa el shamayim yadi (ibid.:40). The sixth [reads] from Ki essa el shamayim yadi until the conclusion of the song (ibid.:43).
Why is the Torah reading ceased at these points? Because these are [verses of] rebuke, [and the intent is that] that they motivate the people to repent.
ה
כל העולה לקרות בתורה פותח בדבר טוב ומסיים בדבר טוב אבל פרשת האזינו קורא הראשון עד זכור ימות עולם והשני מתחיל מזכור ימות עולם עד ירכיבהו והשלישי מירכיבהו עד וירא ה' וינאץ והרביעי מן וירא ה' וינאץ עד לו חכמו והחמישי מן לו חכמו עד כי אשא אל שמים ידי והששי מכי אשא אל שמים ידי עד סוף השירה ולמה פוסקין בה בענינות אלו מפני שהן תוכחה כדי שיחזרו העם בתשובה:
6
The eight verses at the conclusion of the Torah may be read in a synagogue when fewer than ten people are present. They are indeed all Torah and were related by Moses from the Almighty. However, since, on the surface, they appear to have been recited after Moses' death, the [rules governing them] are different. Therefore, it is permissible for an individual to read them.
ו
שמונה פסוקים שבסוף התורה מותר לקרות אותם בבית הכנסת בפחות מעשרה אף על פי שהכל תורה היא ומשה מפי הגבורה אמרם הואיל ומשמען שהם אחר מיתת משה הרי נשתנו ולפיכך מותר ליחיד לקרות אותן:
7
The "curses" in Leviticus should not be interrupted. Rather, a single person should read them [in their entirety]. He should begin with the verse preceding them and conclude with the verse following them.
The "curses" in Deuteronomy may be interrupted if one desires. However, the people have already adopted the custom of not interrupting [this reading]. Rather, a single person reads them [in their entirety].
ז
קללות שבתורת כהנים אין מפסיקין בהן אלא אחד קורא אותן מתחיל בפסוק שלפניהם ומסיים בפסוק של אחריהם וקללות שבמשנה תורה אם רצה לפסוק בהן פוסק וכבר נהגו העם שלא לפסוק בהן אלא אחד קורא אותן:
8
[The cycle of Torah readings] is interrupted for the festivals and Yom Kippur. [On these occasions,] we read [a passage that] concerns the festival and not the sidrah of [that] Sabbath.
Moses instituted [the practice that], on each festival, the Jews should read [a passage] appropriate to it. Also, it [is proper] on each festival to ask about and explain the subjects [pertinent] to that festival.
Which [passages] are read? On Pesach, [we read] the passage concerning the festivals in Leviticus (23:4-44). [However,] the people have already adopted the custom of reading Mishchu uk'chu lachem (Exodus 12:21-51) on the first day. The haftarah is [the description] of the Pesach celebrated in Gilgal (Joshua 5:2-15).
On the second day, we read Shor o kesev (Leviticus 22:26-23:44). The haftarah is [the description] of the Pesach celebrated by Josaiah (II Kings 1-9, 21-25). On the third day, we read Kadesh li kol b'chor (Exodus 13:1-16); on the fourth day, Im kessef talveh (Exodus 22:24-23:19); on the fifth day, P'sol lecha (Exodus 34:1-26); on the sixth day, Vaya'asu Bnei Yisrael et hapesach b'mo'ado (Numbers 9:1-14).
On the final festival, [we read] from Vay'hi beshalach until the conclusion of the song [sung at Red Sea] until [the verse,] Ani Ado-nai rof'echa (Exodus 13:17-15:26). The haftarah is Vayedaber David (II Samuel 22:1-51).
On the eighth day, [we read], Kol hab'chor (Deuteronomy 15:19-16:17). The haftarah is Od hayom (Isaiah 10:32-4, 11:1-16, 12:1-6).
ח
מפסיקין למועדות וליוה"כ וקוראין בענין המועד לא בסדר שבת ומשה תיקן להם לישראל שיהו קוראין בכל מועד ענינו ושואלין ודורשין בענינו של יום בכל מועד ומועד ומה הן קורין בפסח בפרשת מועדות שבתורת כהנים וכבר נהגו העם לקרות ביום ראשון משכו וקחו לכם ומפטירין בפסח גלגל וביום טוב שני שור או כשב ומפטירין בפסח יאשיהו בשלישי קדש לי כל בכור ברביעי אם כסף תלוה בחמישי פסל לך בששי ויעשו בני ישראל את הפסח במועדו ביום טוב אחרון ויהי בשלח עד סוף השירה עד כי אני ה' רופאך ומפטירין וידבר דוד ובשמיני כל הבכור ומפטירין עוד היום:
9
On Shavuot, we read [the passage, containing the reading] Shiv'ah shavuot (Deuteronomy 16:9). However, it is common custom to read [the passage,] Bachodesh hash'lishi (Exodus 19:1-20:23) on the first day of the festival. [The vision of God's] chariot (Ezekiel 1:1-28) is read as the haftarah.
On the second day, the passage describing the festivals, Kol hab'chor (Deuteronomy 15:19-16:17) is read, and [a passage from] Chabbakuk (3:1-19) is read as the haftarah.
ט
בעצרת קורין בשבעה שבועות ומנהג פשוט שקורים ביום טוב הראשון בחדש השלישי ומפטירין במרכבה ובשני קורין בפרשת מועדות כל הבכור ומפטירין בחבקוק:
10
On Rosh HaShanah, we read [the passage including the verse]: Uvachodesh hash'vi'i b'echad lachodesh (Numbers 29:1). However, it is common custom to read [the passage,] VAdo-nai pakad et Sarah (Genesis 21:1-33). [The passage,] Vay'hi ish echad min haramatayim (I Samuel 1:1-2:10) is read as the haftarah.
On the second day, [the passage,] V'HaElo-him nisah et Avraham (Genesis 22:1-24) is read, and [the passage including the verse] Haven yakir li Efrayim (Jeremiah 31:1-19) is read as the haftarah.
י
בראש השנה קורין בחדש השביעי באחד לחדש ומנהג פשוט שקורין ביום ראשון ויי' פקד את שרה ומפטירין ויהי איש אחד מן הרמתים ובשני קורין והאלהים נסה את אברהם ומפטירין הבן יקיר לי אפרים:
11
On Yom Kippur, in the morning, we read [the passage,] Acharei mot (Leviticus 16:1-34) and read [the passage,] Ki koh amar ram v'nisa (Isaiah 57:14-58:14) as the haftarah.
In the afternoon, [we read the passage] in Acharei mot that is concerned with forbidden sexual relations, in order that anyone who has violated one of these sins will remember, become embarrassed, and repent. The third person [who] reads from the Torah recites [the Book of] Yonah as the haftarah.
יא
ביום הכפורים בשחרית קורין אחרי מות ומפטירין כה אמר רם ונשא במנחה קורין בעריות שבאחרי מות כדי שיזכור ויכלם כל מי שנכשל באחת מהן ויחזור בתשובה והשלישי קורא בתורה ומפטיר ביונה:
12
On Sukkot, on the first two days, we read the passage that concerns the festivals: Shor o kesev o eyz (Leviticus 22:26-23:44). The haftarah read on the first day is [the passage,] Hiney yom ba l'Ado-nai (Zechariah 14). On the second day, [the haftarah is the passage,] Vayikahalu el hamelech Shlomo (I Kings 8:2-21).
On the final day of the festival, we read [the passage,] Kol hab'chor (Deuteronomy 15:19-16:17). For the haftarah, we read [the passage,] Vay'hi k'chalot Shlomo (I Kings 8:54-66).
On the following day, we read [the sidrah,] Vezot haberachah (Deuteronomy 33-34). For the haftarah, we read [the passage,] Vaya'amod Shlomo (I Kings 8:22-53). There are those who read [the passage,] Vay'hi acharei mot Moshe (Joshua 1) as the haftarah.
On the other days of Sukkot, we read [the passages that describe] the sacrifices [offered] on the festival.
יב
בסוכות בשני ימים טובים הראשונים קורין בפרשת המועדות שהיא שור או כשב או עז וגו' ומפטירין ביום ראשון הנה יום בא ליי' וביום שני ויקהלו אל המלך שלמה וביום טוב אחרון קורין כל הבכור ומפטירין ויהי ככלות שלמה ולמחר קורין וזאת הברכה ומפטירין ויעמוד שלמה ויש מי שמפטירין ויהי אחרי מות משה ובשאר ימות החג קורין בקרבנות החג:
13
What is implied? On each of the days of Chol Hamo'ed, we read two passages. [For example,] on the third day [of the festival], which is [the first day of] Chol Hamo'ed, the priest reads [the passage,] Uvayom hasheni. The Levite reads [the passage,] Uvayom hash'lishi. The Israelite repeats [the passage,] Uvayom hash'lishi, and the person called for the fourthaliyah repeats [both passages:] Uvayom hasheni and Uvayom hash'lishi.
Similarly, on the fourth day [of the festival], which is the second day of Chol Hamo'ed, we read the passages Uvayom hash'lishi and Uvayom harevi'i. The same pattern is followed on all the [other] days.
יג
כיצד בכל יום ויום מחולו של מועד קורא שתי פרשיות ביום השלישי שהוא חולו של מועד קורא הכהן וביום השני ולוי קורא וביום השלישי וישראל קורא ביום השלישי והרביעי חוזר וקורא ביום השני וביום השלישי וכן ביום הרביעי שהוא שני של חולו של מועד קורין וביום השלישי וביום הרביעי ועל דרך זו בכל יום ויום:
14
In the morning [service] on each and every one of the festivals, on Yom Kippur, and during the seven days of Pesach, two [Torah] scrolls are taken out. We read the passages mentioned above from the first scroll, and from the second scroll we read the description of the sacrifices [offered on] that day, in the Book of Numbers. The person who reads the description of the sacrifices recites the haftarah from the prophets.
יד
בכל יום ויום מימים טובים וכן ביוה"כ ובשבעת ימי הפסח מוציאין שני ספרים בשחרית הראשון קורא בו אלו הענינות שאמרנו והשני קורא בו קרבן אותו היום האמור בחומש הפקודים בתורה והקורא ענין הקרבן הוא מפטיר בנביא:
15
On any day when two or three [Torah] scrolls are taken out: if they are taken out one after the other, when the first scroll is returned, Kaddish is recited and the second scroll is taken out. When the second scroll is returned, Kaddish is also recited.
We have mentioned above that the common custom is to recite Kaddish after the reader concludes the reading at all times, and then to recite the haftarah from the prophets.
טו
ובכל יום שמוציאין שני ספרים או שלשה אם הוציאו זה אחר זה כשמחזיר את הראשון אומר קדיש ומוציא השני וכשמחזיר את האחרון אומר קדיש וכבר אמרנו שהמנהג הפשוט לומר קדיש אחר שקורא המשלים לעולם ואחר כך מפטירין בנביא:
16
When the Sabbath falls during Chol Hamo'ed - whether during Pesach or during Sukkot - [the passage,] R'ey Attah omer elai (Exodus 33:12-34:26) is read on that Sabbath. On Pesach, [the passage describing Ezekiel's vision of] the dry bones (Chapter 37) is read as the haftarah. When [the Sabbath] falls in the midst of Sukkot, [the passage,] B'yom bo Gog (Ezekiel 38:18-39:16) is read as the haftarah.
טז
שבת שחלה להיות בחולו של מועד בין בפסח בין בסוכות קורין באותה שבת ראה אתה אומר אלי ומפטירין בפסח העצמות היבשות ואם חלה בתוך החג ביום בא גוג:
17
On Chanukah, [the following passages are read:] On the first day, we read from the Priestly Blessing (Numbers 6:38-42) until the conclusion of the sacrifice offered on the first day (Numbers 7:17). On the second day, we read [the passage describing] the sacrifices of the Nasi who brought the offering on the second day. This practice is continued until the eighth day. On the eighth day, we read [the descriptions of] all the [remaining] sacrifices until the end of the portion.
On the Sabbath of Chanukah, the haftarah is Zechariah's [vision of the Menorah (2:14-4:7)]. If two Sabbaths are celebrated during Chanukah, on the first Sabbath, Zechariah's [vision of the Menorah] is read as the haftarah; on the second, [the description of] Solomon's [Menorah is read as the haftarah (I Kings 7:40-50)]. The one who reads the [passage designated for] Chanukah is the one who recites the haftarah from the prophets.
On Purim, [the passage,] Vayavo Amalek (Exodus 17:8-16) [is read].
יז
בחנוכה ביום ראשון קורין מברכת כהנים עד סוף קרבן המקריב ביום הראשון וביום שני קורין קרבן נשיא שהקריב בשני וכן עד יום השמיני ביום שמיני קורין עד סוף הקרבנות עד סוף הסדר ומפטירין בשבת של חנוכה בנרות זכריה ואם היו שתי שבתות בחנוכה מפטירין בשבת ראשונה בנרות זכריה ובשנייה בנרות שלמה והקורא בענין חנוכה הוא שמפטיר בנביא בפורים קורין בשחרית ויבא עמלק:
18
On Tish'ah B'Av, in the morning, [the passage,] Ki tolid banim (Deuteronomy 4:25-40) is read, and [the passage,] Asof asifem, n'um Ado-nai (Jeremiah 8:13-9:23) is read as the haftarah. During the Minchah service, we read [the passage,] Vay'chal Moshe (Exodus 32:11-14, 34:1-10), as on other fast days.
On the other days when we fast [to commemorate the bitter events] that occurred to our ancestors, we read the [above-mentioned passage,] in the morning and Minchah services [in the following manner]: The first person called to the Torah reads four verses, [beginning] Vay'chal Moshe. The second and the third read from P'sol lecha until asher ani oseh imach.
On the fasts that are declared by the community because of difficulties like famine or plague, we read blessings and curses, so that the people will repent and humble their hearts when they hear them.
יח
בתשעה באב קורין בשחרית כי תוליד בנים ומפטירין אסף אסיפם נאם יי' ובמנחה קורין ויחל משה כשאר ימי התעניות ובשאר התעניות שאנו מתענין על מה שאירע לאבותינו קורין בשחרית ומנחה הראשון קורא ויחל משה ארבע פסוקים וקורא השני והשלישי מפסל לך עד אשר אני עושה עמך ובתעניות שגוזרין אותן הצבור מפני הצרות כגון בצורת ודבר וכיוצא בהן קורין ברכות וקללות כדי שישובו העם ויכנע לבבם כשישמעו אותם:
19
It is customary on the three Sabbaths before Tish'ah B'Av to read haftarot of rebuke. On the first Sabbath, we read [the passage,] Divrei Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah 1:1-2:3) as the haftarah. On the second [Sabbath], we read [the passage,] Chazon Yishayahu (Isaiah 1:1-27). On the third [Sabbath], we read [the passage,] Eichah hay'ta l'zonah (Isaiah 1:21).
Similarly, on the Sabbath after Tish'ah B'Av we read [the passage Nachamu, nachamu, ami (Isaiah 40:1-26) as the haftarah. It is the common custom in our cities to read the comforting prophecies of Isaiah as the haftarot from Tish'ah B'Av until Rosh HaShanah.
On the Sabbath between Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur, we read [the passage,] Shuvah Yisrael as the haftarah.
יט
נהגו העם להיות מפטירין קודם תשעה באב בשלש שבתות בדברי תוכחות שבת ראשונה מפטירין בדברי ירמיהו שנייה חזון ישעיהו שלישית איכה היתה לזונה וכן שבת שאחר תשעה באב מפטירין נחמו נחמו עמי ומנהג פשוט בעירנו להיות מפטירין בנחמות ישעיהו מאחר תשעה באב עד ראש השנה ושבת שבין ראש השנה ויום הכפורים מפטירין שובה ישראל:
20
When Rosh Chodesh Adar falls on the Sabbath, we read Parashat Shekalim (Exodus 30:11-16), and read as the haftarah [the passage concerning] Yehoyada, the priest (II Kings 11:17-20, 12:1-17). If Rosh Chodesh Adar falls in the middle of the week - even if it falls on Friday - Parashat Shekalim is read on the previous Sabbath.
On the "second Sabbath," we read Parashat Zachor (Deuteronomy 25:17-19), and read as the haftarah, [the passage,] Pakad'ti et asher asah Amalek (I Samuel 15:1-34). What is meant by the "second Sabbath"? The Sabbath before the week in which Purim falls - even if Purim falls on Friday.
On the "third Sabbath," we read [the passage describing] "the red heifer" (Numbers 19:1-22), and read as the haftarah [the passage,] V'zarakti aleichem (Ezekiel 36:16-38). Which is the "third Sabbath"? The one preceding the fourth.
On the fourth Sabbath, we read [the passage,] Hachodesh hazeh lachem (Exodus 12:1-20), and read as the haftarah [the passage,] Barishon b'echad lachodesh (Ezekiel 45:16-25, 46:1-18). Which is the "fourth Sabbath"? The Sabbath of the week when Rosh Chodesh Nisan falls - even if it falls on Friday.
כ
ראש חדש אדר שחל להיות בשבת קורין בפרשת שקלים ומפטירין ביהוידע הכהן וכן אם חל ראש חדש אדר להיות בתוך השבת ואפילו בערב שבת מקדימין וקורין בשבת שלפניו בפרשת שקלים בשנייה קורין זכור ומפטירין פקדתי את אשר עשה עמלק אי זו היא שבת שנייה כל שחל פורים להיות בתוכה ואפי' בערב שבת בשלישית קורין פרה אדומה ומפטירין וזרקתי עליכם ואי זו היא שבת שלישית הסמוכה לרביעית ברביעית קורין החדש הזה ומפטירין בראשון באחד לחדש ואי זו היא רביעית כל שחל ראש חדש ניסן להיות בתוכה ואפילו בערב שבת:
21
Thus, there will be times when there is an interruption between the first [of these] Sabbaths and the second, or between the second and the third. At times, there will be two interruptions - between the first and the second and between the second and third. However, an interruption is never made between the third and fourth [Sabbaths].
כא
נמצאת אומר שפעמים תהיה הפסקה בין שבת ראשונה ושנייה או בין שנייה ושלישית ופעמים יהיו שתי הפסקות בין ראשונה לשנייה ובין שנייה ושלישית אבל בין שלישית לרביעית אין מפסיקין:
22
Each one of these four passages should be read from another Torah scroll, after reading the sidrah of that Sabbath from the scroll that was taken out first.
If Rosh Chodesh Adar fell on the Sabbath and the sidrah to be read that week was V'attah tetzaveh, six people read from V'attah tetzaveh until V'asita kiyor nechoshet.The seventh person reads from the second scroll and repeats the reading of Ki tissa until V'asita kiyor nechoshet.
If the sidrah to be read that week was Ki tissa itself, six people read from Ki tissa until Vayakhel. The seventh person reads from the second scroll and repeats the reading of Ki tissa until V'asita kiyor nechoshet.
כב
כל פרשה מארבע פרשיות האלו אחד קורא אותה בספר שני אחר שקורין סדר אותה שבת בספר שהוציאו ראשון חל ראש חדש אדר להיות בשבת והיה סדר אותה שבת בואתה תצוה קורין ששה מואתה תצוה עד ועשית כיור נחשת והשביעי חוזר וקורא מכי תשא עד ועשית כיור ואם היה סדר אותה שבת כי תשא עצמו קורין ששה מכי תשא עד ויקהל והשביעי חוזר וקורא בספר שני מכי תשא עד ועשית כיור נחשת:
23
[When] Rosh Chodesh Adar falls on the Sabbath, three Torah scrolls are taken out. The sidrah of the day is read from the first scroll. The passage concerning Rosh Chodesh is read from the second scroll, and Ki tissa is read from the third scroll. Similarly, [when] Rosh Chodesh Nisan falls on the Sabbath, three Torah scrolls are taken out. The sidrah of the day is read from the first scroll, the passage concerning Rosh Chodesh is read from the second scroll, and Hachodesh hazeh is read from the third scroll.
כג
ראש חדש אדר שחל להיות בשבת מוציאין שלשה ספרים הראשון קורא בו סדר היום והשני קורא בו ענין ראש חדש והשלישי קורין בו כי תשא וכן ראש חדש ניסן שחל להיות בשבת מוציאין שלשה ספרים קורין סדר היום בראשון וענין ראש חדש בשני והחדש הזה בשלישי:
24
[Similarly, when] Rosh Chodesh Tevet falls on the Sabbath, three Torah scrolls are taken out. The sidrah of the day is read from the first scroll. The passage concerning Rosh Chodesh is read from the second scroll, and the passage for Chanukah is read from the third scroll.
[When Rosh Chodesh Tevet] falls during the middle of the week, three people read from the passage concerning Rosh Chodesh, and the fourth person reads the passage for Chanukah.
כד
ראש חדש טבת שחל להיות בשבת מוציאין שלשה ספרים הראשון קורא בו סדר היום והשני קורא בו ענין ראש חדש והשלישי קורא בו ענין חנוכה חל להיות באמצע השבת שלשה קורין בענין ראש חדש והרביעי קורא בענין חנוכה:
25
Although a person hears the entire Torah [portion] each Sabbath [when it is read] communally, he is obligated to study on his own each week the sidrah of that week, reading it twice in the original and once in the Aramaic translation. [When] there is no Aramaic translation for a verse, one should read the verse three times in the original, so that one completes [the study of] one's [Torah] portions with the community.
כה
אע"פ שאדם שומע כל התורה כולה בכל שבת בצבור חייב לקרות לעצמו בכל שבוע ושבוע סדר של אותה שבת שנים מקרא ואחד תרגום ופסוק שאין בו תרגום קוראהו שלש פעמים עד שישלים פרשיותיו עם הצבור:
Rambam:
• 3 Chapters A Day: Ishut Ishut - Chapter Seventeen, Ishut Ishut - Chapter Eighteen, Ishut Ishut - Chapter Nineteen
English Text | Hebrew Text
Audio: Listen | Download | Video ClassIshut - Chapter Seventeen
1
[The following laws apply when] a person dies after having been married to several wives. Whichever of his wives was married first has the right to collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah [before the others]. None may collect [her due] without taking an oath.1
The [wives who married] last are entitled to [collect their due] only from what remains after [those who married previously collect theirs].2 Even the last wife [to collect] must take an oath [before] she collects what remains.3
Similarly, when there is [also] a promissory note [owed by the husband's estate], if the promissory note was dated before [the ketubot], the promissory note should be collected first. If the ketubot were each dated before [the promissory note], the woman should collect [her due] first, and the person owed the promissory note [should collect from] the remainder.
א
מי שהיה נשוי נשים רבות ומת. כל שנשאת בתחלה קודמת ליטול כתובתה. ואין אחת מהן נוטלת אלא בשבועה. ואין לאחרונה אלא מה ששיירה שלפניה וגם היא נשבעת ונוטלת השאר. וכן אם היה עליו שטר חוב. אם היה החוב קודם גובה בעל חוב תחילה. ואם הכתובה קדמה גובה האשה בתחלה והנשאר לבעל חוב:
2
When does the above apply? When the land from which [the wives and the creditor] desire to collect was owned by [the deceased] at the time he married the women and took the loan. For [in such a situation], the law is that whoever's document is dated first takes precedence.
If, however, a man married several women in succession, and borrowed money - whether before marrying the women or afterwards - and [then - i.e.,] after marrying and borrowing he purchased land - it should be divided among all of them equally, for all their liens took effect at the same time. At the time he purchased the land, each one established a lien on it. None has precedence over the others.4
ב
בד"א כשהיתה הקרקע שבאו לגבות ממנה קנויה לו בשעת נשואים ובשעה שלוה הוא שהדין נותן שכל הקודם בשטר תחלה זכה תחלה. אבל אם נשא נשים זו אחר זו ולוה בין קודם נישואין בין אחר נישואין ואחר שנשא ולוה קנה קרקע כולן חולקין כאחד ששיעבוד כולן כאחד בא. שבשעה שקנה היה משועבד לכל ואין כאן דין קדימה:
3
Similarly, if all the ketubot and promissory notes were dated on one day - or at a specific time, in a place where it is customary to [include] the time [of a legal document] - it should be divided among all of them equally; none has precedence over the others.
Under all circumstances, [if one of the creditors or one of the wives] took possession of movable property [belonging to the estate as payment for] the loan or ketubah, the property that they took should not be expropriated from him or her. For no creditor has precedence over another with regard to movable property.5
ג
וכן אם היה זמן הכתובות והשטרות כולן יום אחד או שעה אחת במקום שכותבים שעות חולקין כאחד שאין שם קודם. ולעולם כל שקדם וזכה במטלטלין כדי חובו או כדי כתובתה אין מוציאין מידו שאין דין קדימה במטלטלין:
4
[The following rules apply when] a person divorces his wife at the time he has an outstanding promissory note, and his creditor and his divorcee come to collect [their due]. If the husband owns [enough] money and land to settle the debt and the obligations stemming from the ketubah, the creditor should be awarded the money,6 and his divorcee should collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah from the landed property.7
If all [the husband] possesses is land that is not of sufficient value to settle both debts, and neither [his divorcee nor his creditor] has a prior claim to this land, it should be given [toward the payment of the debt owed to] the creditor. If any [land] remains [after the settlement of the debt], it should be given to the divorcee. If nothing remains, the divorcee must yield to the creditor. [The rationale is that] the creditor suffered a loss; he [lent] money [to the husband]. The woman, by contrast,did not lose anything. For more than a man desires to marry, a woman desires to be married.
ד
מי שגירש את אשתו ועליו שטר חוב ובא בעל חוב והאשה לגבות והיו לו מעות וקרקע כדי החוב והכתובה. בעל חוב נוטל מעות והאשה נוטלת כתובתה מן הקרקע. ואם אין לו אלא קרקע שאין בה כדי לגבות שניהם ולא היה בה דין קדימה נותנין אותו לבעל חוב. ואם נשאר לאשה כלום תטול ואם לאו תדחה מפני בעל חוב. שהרי בעל חוב הפסיד והוציא מעותיו והאשה לא חסרה דבר שיותר משהאיש רוצה לישא אשה רוצה להנשא:
5
Similarly, if a man dies leaving a widow and a creditor, and land to which neither of them has a prior claim, the widow must yield to the creditor, and he collects the debt owed him first.
ה
וכן מי שמת והניח אשה ובעל חוב וקרקע שאין בה דין קדימה האשה נדחית מפני בעל חוב והוא גובה חובו תחלה:
6
Since the geonim ordained8 that a woman and a creditor may collect their due from movable property, and as is well known, no creditors are given precedence with regard to movable property9 [the following rules apply]. If the husband did not leave enough movable property to settle both accounts, the creditor is allowed to collect the entire debt [owed him] first. If anything remains [after the settlement of the debt] for the wife to receive [by virtue of] her ketubah, it should be given to her. If nothing remains, the wife must yield.
ו
וכיון שתקנו הגאונים שתגבה האשה ובעל חוב מן המטלטלין והדבר ידוע שאין דין קדימה במטלטלין אם לא הניח מטלטלין כדי ליתן לשניהם נותנין לבעל חוב כל חובו תחלה. ואם נשאר לאשה מה שתטול בכתובתה תטול ואם לאו תדחה:
7
[The following rule applies when] nichsei tzon barzel were recorded in a woman's ketubah and she claims that they were lost or taken by her husband. With regard to nichsei tzon barzel, a woman is regarded like any other creditor.10
Therefore, she is required to take an oath that she did not take possession of them, give them away or forego the obligation [to her husband]. Afterwards, she receives a share in the estate together with the other creditors.
ז
היו כתובין בכתובתה נכסי צאן ברזל וטענה שאבדו או שלקחם הבעל הרי היא בנכסי צאן ברזל שלה כשאר בעלי חובות ונשבעת שלא לקחה אותן ולא נתנה ולא מחלה וחולקת עם בעלי חובות:
8
When a person who has many wives and who dies or divorces them when none of them has a claim of higher priority to his property than the others, and his holdings are not of sufficient value to pay them each the money due them by virtue of their ketubot, how are his holdings divided? If his holdings are sufficiently valuable to provide only the wife with the ketubah of the least value, or if they are less valuable than that, all of his wives divide [his holdings] equally.
If his holdings are more valuable than that, they should be divided equally to provide the wife with [the money due her by virtue of] the ketubah of the least value. Afterwards, the remainder is divided among the remaining wives according to the same pattern.
What is implied? [To explain by example:] A man was married to four wives. The ketubah of the first was for 400 [zuz], that of the second for 300, that of the third for 200, and that of the first for 100. The total sum is thus 1000 [zuz]. [The following rules apply] if he divorces all of them or dies. If his holdings are worth 400 [zuz] or less, they divide his holdings equally, and each receives 100 or less. If his holdings are worth 800 [it would be improper to divide them equally]. For if they were divided equally, the fourth wife would receive 200 [zuz], and [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah is only 100.
What is done instead? 400 [zuz] are set aside and divided equally, each receiving 100. Thus, the fourth wife has received [the full amount due her by virtue of] her ketubah and she withdraws [from the suit]. Thus, 400 [zuz] are left for three wives, each of whom has already received 100 zuz]. If the 400 were divided equally among the three of them [it would be unfair]. For the third wife would receive 233 and [the amount due her by virtue of] her ketubah was only 200. Therefore, 300 [zuz] are separated from the 400, and these are divided equally among the three. Thus, the third wife receives her 200 and withdraws [from the suit]. There remain two wives and 100 [zuz]. This sum is divided equally between the first and second wife. Thus, the first and second wife each received 250 zuz; the third wife received 200; and the fourth wife, 100. This pattern of allocation is followed even when there are 100 [wives].11
ח
מי שמת או גירש ויש לו נשים רבות ואין שם דין קדימה ואין לו כדי כל הכתובות כיצד הן חולקות. רואים אם כשיחלק הממון על מנין הנשים יגיע לפחותה שבהן כדי כתובתה או פחות חולקות בשוה. ואם היה הממון יותר על זה חולקים ממנו כדי שיגיע לפחותה שבהן כשיעור כתובתה. וחוזרות וחולקות את המותר בין הנותרות על דרך הראשון. כיצד מי שהיה נשוי ארבע נשים כתובתה של ראשונה ארבע מאות ושל שנייה שלש מאות ושל שלישית מאתים ושל רביעית מאה נמצא הכל אלף וגירש כולן או מת. אם הניח ארבע מאות או פחות חולקות בשוה וכל אחת נוטלת מאה או פחות. הניח שמונה מאות אם תחלק בין כולן בשוה נמצאת הרביעית נוטלת מאתים והרי אין בכתובתה אלא מאה אלא כיצד עושין לוקחין ארבע מאות זוז וחולקין אותן ביניהן בשוה מאה מאה נמצאת הרביעית נטלה כדי כתובתה והלכה לה נשאר כאן ארבע מאות זוז ושלש נשים שביד כל אחת משלשתן מאה זוז אם תחלוק הארבע מאות בין שלשתן בשוה נמצא השלישית נוטלת מאתים ושלשים ושלש ושליש והרי אין בכתובתה אלא מאתים. לפיכך לוקחין מארבע המאות שלש מאות וחולקין בין שלשתן בשוה שנמצאת השלישית שנטלה מאתים שלה והלכה לה נשאר כאן מאה ושתי נשים חולקין את המאה בשוה בין ראשונה ושנייה. נמצא ביד הראשונה מאתים וחמשים וכן ביד השנייה. ונמצא ביד השלישית מאתים וביד הרביעית מאה ועל דרך זו חולקות לעולם אפי' הן מאה:
9
A person who guarantees the value of a woman's ketubah is not obligated to pay [her the money due her in the event that her husband's holdings are not sufficient if he dies or divorces her]. [This applies] even when he affirmed his commitment with a contractual act.12 [The rationale is that] his [intent is to] perform a mitzvah,13 and he did not cause the woman to lose anything.14
If, however, a person guarantees the ketubah of his son and affirms his commitment with a contractual act,15 he is obligated to pay. For a father will make a binding commitment on behalf of his son and decide to obligate himself.
A person who underwrites a ketubah, by contrast, is obligated to pay, even though he did not affirm his commitment with a contractual act. What is meant by a person who underwrites a ketubah? One who tells a woman: "Marry this man. I will give [the money for] this ketubah." If, however, he says: "I will guarantee this ketubah," "I will pay this ketubah," "I am obligated for it" or the like, he is not liable unless he is the father [of the groom].
When a person divorces a wife [whose ketubah has been underwritten in the above fashion], he must first take a vow16 that she is forbidden to derive benefit from him. Only then may she collect her ketubah from the underwriter or the [husband's] father, if he guaranteed it. [This precaution was instituted,] lest the husband remarry her,17 and thus the two will [have acquired] the property of [the underwriter] through subterfuge.
ט
הערב לאשה בכתובתה אע"פ שקנו מידו אינו חייב לשלם שמצוה עשה והרי לא חסרה כלום. ואם ערב של כתובת בנו הוא וקנו מידו חייב לשלם שהאב בגלל בנו משעבד עצמו וגומר ומקנה. וקבלן של כתובה חייב לשלם אע"פ שלא קנו מידו. ואי זה הוא קבלן זה שאמר לאשה הנשאי לזה ואני נותן כתובה זו. אבל אם אמר לה הריני ערב כתובה זו. אני פורע כתובה זו. אני חייב בה. וכיוצא בזה פטור אלא א"כ היה אביו. המגרש את אשתו ידירנה הנאה ואחר כך תפרע כתובתה מן הקבלן או מאביו אם היה ערב. שמא יחזירנה ונמצאו עושין קנוניא על נכסיו של זה:
10
Similarly, a person who consecrates his property and then divorces his wife must take a vow that she is forbidden to derive benefit from him. Only then may she collect [the money due her by virtue of her ketubah] from the person who redeems the property from the Temple treasury.18 [This precaution was instituted,] lest the two attempt to deceive the Temple treasury.19
When, however, a person divorces his wife, and she comes to collect [the money due her by virtue of her ketubah] from the [property that was sold to] purchasers, he is not required to take a vow that she is forbidden to derive benefit from him. Instead, she must take the oath required of her, and then she [is entitled to] collect [her due]. If afterwards she desires, she may return to her husband. For the purchasers know that the property was under lien to the ketubah of a woman, and they caused themselves the loss by taking property that was under such a lien.
י
וכן המקדיש נכסיו וגירש את אשתו ידירנה הנאה ואח"כ תפרע מן הפודה מיד ההקדש שמא יעשו קנוניא על ההקדש. אבל המגרש את אשתו ובאה לטרוף מן הלקוחות אין מחייבין אותו להדירה אלא נשבעת וטורפת. ואם רצתה תחזור לבעלה שכבר ידעו הלקוחות שיש עליו כתובת אשה והם הפסידו על עצמם שלקחו נכסים שתחת שיעבודה:
11
When a husband sold his property, and afterwards the woman agreed to [her husband's] act and wrote the purchaser: "I have no claim against you," she may, nevertheless, collect [the money due her by virtue of her ketubah by expropriating this property].20 [This applies] even when she affirmed [her commitment] with a contractual act.21 [The rationale is] that she wrote this [statement to the purchaser] only so that there will not be strife between her and her husband. She can [therefore excuse herself,] saying: "I was [merely intending] to please my husband."22
[A different rule applies, however, when the purchaser] enters into an agreement with the woman that she foregoes her lien on this property [before purchasing it from her husband]. If this agreement is affirmed with a contractual act, and afterwards the husband sells the property [to him], [the woman is not entitled to] expropriate this property.23
Similarly, [a woman is not entitled to expropriate property sold by her husband in the following circumstance]. Her husband sold a property [on a previous occasion, and at that time] asked his wife to write the purchaser, "I have no claim to this property," and the woman refused, causing the sale to be nullified.24 [If,] afterwards, the husband sells [property] - whether the same field he had sold previously or another field - to another person, and after the husband's sale the woman agreed, [made a commitment] that she has no claim to this field and affirmed it with a contractual act, she may not expropriate it. For she cannot say, "I did this [merely] to please my husband," since on the previous occasion, when she did not want [to waive her rights], she did not follow her husband's desires.
יא
הבעל שמכר נכסיו ואח"כ כתבה אשתו ללוקח דין ודברים אין לי עמך והסכימה למעשיו אע"פ שקנו ממנה הרי זו טורפת. שלא כתבה לו אלא שלא תהיה בינה לבין בעלה קטטה ויש לה לומר נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי. אבל אם קנו מיד האשה תחלה שאין לה שיעבוד על מקום זה ואחר כך מכר אותו הבעל אינה טורפת אותו. וכן אם מכר הבעל ואמר לאשתו לכתוב ללוקח דין ודברים אין לי עמך ולא כתבה ולא הסכימה למעשיו ונפסד המכר וחזר הבעל ומכר לאיש אחר בין אותה שדה בין שדה אחרת ואחר שמכר הבעל הסכימה למעשיו וקנו מידה שאין לה שיעבוד על שדה זו אינה יכולה לטרוף שאינה יכולה לומר נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי שהרי בראשונה כשלא רצתה לא הלכה ברצון בעלה:
12
[The above ruling is also relevant in the following situation.] A man had two wives. He sold a field, and the purchaser had entered into a contractual act with one of [the husband's] wives, waiving her lien to this field in a manner in which the agreement was effective and the woman no longer had the privilege of claiming, "I did this [merely] to please my husband." Afterwards, the husband died or divorced both his wives.
The second wife may expropriate the property from the purchaser, for she did not enter into any agreement with him. The first wife may then expropriate [the property] from the second wife, for she had a prior claim to it, and she waived her lien only with regard to the purchaser [and not with regard to anyone else]. When the property comes into the possession of the first [wife], the purchaser may expropriate it from her, since she made an agreement with him. [The second wife can then expropriate it from the purchaser,] and the cycle continues until they reach a compromise among themselves.25
יב
מי שהיו לו שתי נשים ומכר את שדהו וקנו מיד הראשונה שאין לה שיעבוד על שדה זו ואינה טורפת אותו מן הלוקח והיה הקנין מועיל שאינה יכולה לטעון בו נחת רוח עשיתי לבעלי ואחר כך מת הבעל או גירש שתיהן השנייה מוציאה מיד הלוקח שהרי לא קנו מידה ללוקח. והראשונה מוציאה מיד השנייה מפני שהיא קדמה ולא הסירה שיעבודה אלא מעל הלוקח. וכשתחזור השדה לראשונה חוזר הלוקח ומוציאה מידה שהרי קנו לו וחוזרות חלילה עד שיעשו פשרה ביניהן:
13
[In the event of her husband's death,] a widow - regardless of whether she was widowed from erusin or nisu'in - may take the oath [required of her], sell land belonging to her husband and collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. [The sale may be carried out] in a court of expert judges, or in a court whose judges are not expert,26 provided it consists of three trustworthy men who are knowledgeable with regard to the evaluation of land. The responsibility for the sale falls on the estate belonging to the heirs.27 A divorcee, by contrast, may sell [her ex-husband's property] only in a court of expert judges.28
Whenever a woman has property sold in court, she must have it sold after a public announcement has been made. In the laws of loans,29 the guidelines for the sale [of property] will be explained. When, by contrast, a woman sells property without the participation of the court,30 a public announcement [of the sale] need not be made. It is, nevertheless, necessary [to consult] with three trustworthy men who are knowledgeable with regard to the evaluation [of property].
יג
אלמנה בין מן הנישואין בין מן האירוסין נשבעת ומוכרת מקרקע בעלה ונפרעת כתובתה בין בבית דין מומחין בין בבית דין שאינן מומחין. והוא שיהיו השלשה האנשים נאמנין ויודעין בשומת הקרקע. ואחריות המכר על נכסי יתומים. אבל הגרושה לא תמכור אלא בבית דין מומחין. וכל המוכרת בבית דין לא תמכור אלא בהכרזה. ובהלכות הלואה יתבאר משפט מכירת בית דין היאך היא. אבל המוכרת שלא בבית דין אינה צריכה הכרזה ואע"פ כן צריך שלשה שהם נאמנים ויודעים בשומא:
14
[The following rules apply when] a widow sells [her husband's] landed property privately in order to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah:31 If she sold the property at its proper value, the sale is binding.32 [All that is necessary is for] her to take the oath required of widows after the sale.33
The above applies when she sells the property to another individual. If she takes it as her own after evaluating it, her act is of no significance.34 [This applies even when] she had announced the sale of the property [and received no better offer].
יד
אלמנה שמכרה קרקע בכתובתה בינה לבין עצמה אם מכרה שוה בשוה מכרה קיים ונשבעת שבועת אלמנה אחר שמכרה. והוא שמכרה לאחר אבל אם שמה לעצמה לא עשתה כלום ואפילו הכריזה:
15
[In the above situation,] if the woman's ketubah was for 200 [zuz], and she sold [property] that was worth 100 [zuz] for 200,35 or property that was worth 200 for 100,36 she has received the value of her ketubah and is no longer owed anything. She must, however, take the oath required of a widow.
If her ketubah was for 100 [zuz] and she sold [property] worth 101 [zuz] for 100, the sale is nullified.37 [This applies] even if she says, "I will [accept the loss and] return the [outstanding] dinar to the heirs."
טו
היתה כתובתה מאתים ומכרה שוה מאה במאתים או שוה מאתים במאה נתקבלה כתובתה ואין לה כלום ובלבד שתשבע שבועת אלמנה. היתה כתובתה מאה ומכרה שוה מאה ודינר במאה מכרה בטל ואפילו אמרה אני אחזיר את הדינר ליורשים:
16
If her ketubah was for 400 zuz and she sold [four pieces of property], three that were each worth 100 [zuz] for 100 [zuz] each, and one that was worth 101 zuz for 100 [zuz - the final sale is nullified, but the [first three] are all binding.
טז
היתה כתובתה ארבע מאות זוז ומכרה לזה במנה ולזה במנה שוה בשוה ולאחרון שוה מאה ודינר במאה של אחרון בטל ושל כולם קיים:
17
A woman has the privilege of selling [the rights to] her ketubah or giving [them] as a present.38 If her husband dies or divorces her, [the purchaser or the recipient] is entitled to come and collect [the money due her by virtue of her ketubah].39 If she dies in the lifetime of her husband or [after his death, but] before she takes the oath [required of widows], he is not entitled to anything.
יז
יש לאשה למכור כתובתה או ליתנה במתנה אם מת הבעל או גירשה יבא הלה ויטול ואם מתה היא בחיי בעלה או קודם שנשבעה אין לו כלום:
18
Although a woman sold [the rights to] a portion of her ketubah, used them as security [for a loan] or gave them as a present, she may sell landed property belonging to her husband and collect the remainder of [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. [This sale may be carried out] in a court of three expert judges or through three trustworthy men.
[A woman] may sell [portions of her husband's property] many times. [These sales may be carried out] in a court of three expert judges or through three trustworthy men who are knowledgeable with regard to the evaluation of property.
יח
הרי שמכרה מקצת כתובתה או משכנה מקצת כתובתה או נתנה לאחר מקצת כתובתה מוכרת מקרקע בעלה ותגבה השאר בין בבית דין מומחין בין בשלשה נאמנים. ומוכרת לכתובתה אפילו פעמים רבות בין בבית דין בין בשלשה נאמנים ויודעים שומת הקרקע:
19
When a woman sells [the rights to] her ketubah - whether to another person or to her husband - she does not forfeit the other privileges of her ketubah.40 [As such,] if she has a son, [and she dies before her husband does,] he inherits the worth of her ketubah - [although it] was sold from his father's estate - in addition to his share [in the estate, as will be explained].41
If, by contrast, a woman waives her ketubah in favor of her husband, she forfeits all the privileges associated with her ketubah. [Her husband] is not required to provide her even with her subsistence.42
The waiver of a ketubah [in favor of the woman's husband] need not [be affirmed by] a contractual act nor [be observed by] witnesses,43 just as the forfeiture [of any obligations] does not require affirmation by] a contractual act nor [the observation of] witnesses. Through one's words alone [the forfeiture is binding], provided the statement is made seriously, [in a manner that] can be relied upon, rather than facetiously, as a joke, or rhetorically.44
יט
המוכרת כתובתה בין לאחרים בין לבעלה לא אבדה שאר תנאי כתובה. ואם היה לה בן זכר יורש כנגד הכתובה הזאת שנמכרה מנכסי אביו יותר על חלקו כדין תנאי זה. אבל המוחלת כתובתה לבעלה איבדה כל תנאי כתובתה ואפילו מזונות אין לה עליו. ומוחלת כתובתה אינה צריכה קנין ולא עדים כשאר כל המוחלים שאינן צריכין לא עדים ולא קנין אלא בדברים בלבד. והוא שיהיו דברים שהדעת סומכת עליהן ולא יהיו דברי שחוק והתול או דברי תימה אלא בדעת נכונה:
FOOTNOTES
1.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 10:4), the Rambam explains that this oath differs from the oath that all widows take before collecting from an estate, as mentioned in Chapter 16, Halachah 4, and must be taken even when the wives are not obligated to take that oath. The woman must take this oath for the other widows, stating that she did not collect any money from their husband's estate previously. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 96:16), however, states that the first widow takes an oath to the second, the second to the third, the third to the fourth, and the fourth to the heirs.
2.
This procedure is followed even if doing so prevents one of the wives from collecting all that is due her. Indeed, even if there is nothing left for her at all, this order should be followed.
3.
This ruling follows the opinion of ben Nanas in the above-mentioned mishnah. It involves a reversal of opinion for the Rambam, who, in his Commentary on the Mishnah favored the view of the other Sages.
4.
This refers to a situation where the property owned by the estate is sufficient to cover all the obligations. Otherwise, the creditor takes precedence over the widows, as explained in Halachot 4-5 (Maggid Mishneh).
5.
If one of the wives or creditors did not wait for the formal deposition of the estate's property, but took possession of some of the movable property on his or her own initiative, they are allowed to retain possession. For in contrast to landed property, the ownership of movable property is not a matter of public knowledge. Hence a creditor does not know whether another creditor preceded him, and therefore no creditor is given the right to collect his due from such property.
As reflected in the rulings of the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 102:2), this ruling applies only when the movable property was not acquired together with and via the acquisition of landed property (kinyan agav). In the latter situation, the ownership of the movable property also becomes public knowledge, and therefore the order in which the liens were established is significant.
The Ramah quotes the opinion of the Mordechai, who states that, in the latter instance, if one of the widows seizes possession of the property, it should be expropriated from her.
6.
For it was money that he gave him.
7.
For a woman relies on the fact that she will ultimately be able to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from the landed property in her husband's estate (Ketubot 86a).
8.
See Chapter 16, Halachah 7.
9.
See the notes on Halachah 3 with regard to a kinyan agav.
10.
The term nichsei tzon barzel refers to property that the woman brought to the household, for which the husband obligated himself to pay a fixed value. In this instance, since the woman, like a creditor, gave up something of value, she is considered on a higher level of precedence than usual.
11.
This pattern is also followed in the allocation of a person's holdings when they are not sufficient to pay the debts he owes, as explained in Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh, Chapter 20. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam's approach and follows the minority view that the Rambam cites in that source, which maintains that the money should be divided proportionately. The Rambam's view is followed by most other Rishonim (Rashi, Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi, the Rashba and Rabbenu Asher) and is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 96:18).
12.
Bava Batra 174b explains that the guarantor is not serious about his commitment. He feels that the couple needs only a small push to get married, and that is his intent, rather than making a serious financial commitment. Even a contractual act, which in other contexts serves as an indication of seriousness of purpose, is not sufficient in this instance.
The Ra'avad and the Tur (Even HaEzer 102) differ, and maintain that if a guarantor affirms his commitment with a contractual act, he is liable. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 102:6) quotes the Rambam's view, while the Ramah cites that of the Ra'avad.
13.
I.e., he brought about the marriage between the couple.
14.
As can be deduced from the Rambam's wording, the Maggid Mishneh states that if a person guarantees a woman's nedunyah (the goods she brought to the household), his commitment is binding. For in this instance, the woman did give up something of value.
15.
In this instance as well, the Ra'avad and the Tur differ and hold the father liable, even when he did not affirm his commitment with a contractual act. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 102:6) follows the Rambam's view, while the Ramah cites that of the Ra'avad.
16.
Moreover, this vow must be taken al da'at rabbim, based on the judgement of the public, and it thus cannot be nullified (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 102:7).
17.
I.e., after the woman collected the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from him.
18.
The woman may not collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from the property while it is the possession of the Temple treasury. After it is redeemed, however, she may collect her due from the property. The person who redeems the property must, however, be advised that the property is on lien to a woman's ketubah. (See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 18:7; Hilchot Arachin VaCharamin 7:14-15.)
19.
I.e., the woman will collect her husband's property because it is on lien on her ketubah. Afterwards, she will remarry her husband, and he will be able to use his property, because of his rights as the woman's husband.
20.
The sale is valid, however, until the woman seeks to claim the property. If, by contrast, the husband sells property that belonged to the woman, or property from which she was designated to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, the sale is nullified immediately (Maggid Mishneh). (See Hilchot Mechirah 30:3.)
21.
Note the Ramah (Even HaEzer 90:17), who states that if the woman received money from the purchaser, her commitment is binding.
22.
I.e., the woman is saying that her commitment was not sincere and was made only to satisfy her husband.
23.
Since she entered into the agreement with the purchaser before her husband made the sale, she cannot excuse herself by saying that she made her statements only to please her husband.
24.
The Maggid Mishneh questions the reason for this phrase. When this law is cited in the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 90:17), this phrase is omitted. Nevertheless, based on the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 10:5), the Ma'aseh Rokeach maintains that, according to the Rambam, a sale must have been nullified in order for the woman's commitment to be binding later on.
25.
A three-way compromise would obviously be most desirable. Nevertheless, any compromise between two of the three parties that causes one to renounce his right to expropriate the property is sufficient to stop the cycle (Chelkat Mechokek 100:26).
26.
Our Sages understood that the necessity to pursue judicial proceedings is a cause of hardship and embarrassment for women. They felt that rather than subject his wife to such distress, any husband would willingly grant her the right to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah by selling his property without appearing in court (Ketubot 97b).
Therefore, rather than require her to take the matter to a formal court, they enabled her to resolve the issue by having the property evaluated by three acquaintances who possess the qualities mentioned above. Although these men would not be considered capable of participating in an ordinary court, an exception was made in this case. If, however, the widow has already remarried, she is required to undergo the ordinary judicial procedure.
27.
I.e., should the property be expropriated by a creditor of the deceased, his heirs must reimburse the purchaser.
28.
With regard to a divorcee, by contrast, our Sages (op. cit.) felt that her ex-husband would not be disturbed by her being subjected to hardship when this is necessary to protect his own interests.
Although there are Rishonim who maintain that the provision made for a widow also applies to a divorcee, the Rambam's ruling is accepted by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 103:3).
29.
See Hilchot Malveh V'Loveh 12:8,10, which explains that public announcements that a property will be sold are made daily for thirty days (or on Mondays and Thursdays, for a period of sixty days).
30.
I.e., without the participation of a formal court.
31.
I.e., without even the participation of the three acquaintances mentioned in the previous halachah.
32.
Although the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 103:1) appears to favor the Rambam's view, it does mention other opinions that differ.
33.
It would appear that the Rambam requires her merely to take the oath required of all widows before collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. In this instance, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 103:4) requires the woman to take an additional oath, stating that she did not sell the property for less than its worth.
34.
The Maggid Mishneh and Chelkat Mechokek 103:11 state that, according to the Rambam, if the woman has the property evaluated by three trustworthy men who are knowledgeable with regard to the value of property, she is allowed to take the property as her own. Other opinions differ and maintain that this is possible only when the property is evaluated by a proper Rabbinical court.
35.
When selling the property, the woman is considered to be the agent of the heirs, and the profit belongs to them and not to her (Ketubot 98b).
36.
In this instance, the woman must accept the loss herself, because she took property that was worth the full value of her ketubah.
37.
For she has no right to sell any property that is worth more than her ketubah.
38.
The requirement of a ketubah was instituted so that the husband will not consider divorce a light matter, because of the severity of the financial obligation that will result. This remains true even if the woman does not receive the money herself.
39.
As reflected in the continuation of the Rambam's words, the woman must first take the oaths required of her as if she herself were to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
40.
I.e., her rights to support, medical attention and the like.
41.
Chapter 19, Halachah 2.
42.
From the Rambam's wording, it appears that the woman is not entitled to her subsistence even during her husband's lifetime, while they remain married. (Note Chapter 10, Halachah 10, which states that if a woman waives her ketubah in favor of her husband, he must write her a new ketubah.) The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 93:9) quotes the opinion that even during the husband's lifetime, he is not required to support his wife, but appears to favor the view of other Rishonim (Rashi, the Ramban and the Rashba), who grant a woman the right to support during her husband's lifetime in such a situation.
See also Chapter 19, Halachah 12, which discusses another consequence of a woman's waiver of her ketubah in favor of her husband.
43.
In contrast to their role with regard to marriage and divorce, in financial matters witnesses are necessary only to confirm what happened. Their presence does not make a transaction or a commitment binding, nor hinder it from becoming so. (See Hilchot Mechirah 5:9.)
44.
See Hilchot Mechirah 5:11-13.
Ishut - Chapter Eighteen
1
A widow is entitled to receive support from the estate [inherited by her husband's] heirs as long as she remains a widow, unless she collects [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.1 From the time she demands payment for her ketubah in court, however, she is no longer entitled to receive her subsistence.2
Similarly, if she sold [the rights to] her entire ketubah, gave them as security [for a loan] or made her ketubah an ipotiki for another person - i.e., she told him "Collect your debt from here" - she is not entitled to receive her subsistence from the heirs.3 [The above applies] whether these exchanges were made in a court of expert judges or outside a court, or whether they were made in her husband's lifetime or after his death.
If, however, she sold [the rights to] only a portion of her ketubah, she is entitled to receive her subsistence.4 When a widow becomes consecrated5 [to a new husband], she forfeits [her rights to receive] subsistence [from her deceased husband's estate].6
א
אלמנה ניזונת מנכסי יורשין כל זמן אלמנותה עד שתטול כתובתה. ומשתתבע כתובתה בב"ד אין לה מזונות וכן אם מכרה כתובתה כולה או משכנה כתובתה או עשתה כתובתה אפותיקי לאחר והוא שתאמר לו פה תגבה חובך. בין שעשתה דברים אלו בב"ד מומחין בין שלא בב"ד בין שעשתה בחיי בעלה בין שעשתה לאחר מיתת בעלה אין לה מזונות מן היורשים. אבל אם מכרה מקצתה יש לה מזונות. ומשתתארס האלמנה אבדה מזונותיה:
2
Just as the woman receives her subsistence from her husband's estate after his death, so, too, is she granted a wardrobe, household utensils and [the right to continue] living in the dwelling she lived in during her husband's lifetime.7 She may continue to make use of the pillows, spreads, servants and maidservants that she made use of during her husband's lifetime.
If the dwelling falls, the heirs are not required to rebuild it.8 [Even] if the widow asked, "Allow me to rebuild it at my own expense," she is not granted this option. Similarly, she may not repair it, nor have the walls sealed [and painted].
She must [continue to] dwell in it in the condition it [was in her husband's passing], or she must leave [and find other accommodations]. Should the heirs sell the dwelling in which a widow is living, their deed is of no consequence.
ב
כשם שניזונת אחר מותו מנכסיו כך נותנין לה כסות וכלי תשמיש ומדור (או יושבת במדור) שהיתה בו בחיי בעלה ומשתמשת בכרים וכסתות בעבדים ובשפחות שנשתמשה בהן בחיי בעלה. נפל המדור אין היורשין חייבין לבנותה. ואם אמרה הניחו לי ואני אבננו משלי אין שומעין לה. וכן לא תחזק בדקו ולא תטחה אותו אלא תשב בו כמה שהוא או תצא. ויורשין שמכרו מדור אלמנה לא עשו ולא כלום:
3
If the dwelling [in which she was living fell] or her husband had been renting a dwelling, [the estate must] provide her with a dwelling appropriate to her social standing. Similarly, her subsistence and the wardrobe given her are granted according to her social standing.
If her husband's social standing exceeded her own, she is granted the above according to his social standing. For a woman's [social standing] ascends according to [her husband's] social standing, but does not descend [according to his]. [This applies] even after his death.
ג
נפל הבית או שלא היה לבעלה בית אלא בשכר נותנין לה מדור לפי כבודה. וכן מזונותיה וכסותה לפי כבודה. ואם היה כבוד הבעל גדול מכבודה נותנין לה לפי כבודו מפני שעולה עמו ואינה יורדת אפילו לאחר מיתה:
4
[The widow is given her subsistence as a member of] the household at large. What is the intent of [the latter term]? When five people who would each require a kav of food when they eat alone [live] in the same house and eat together [their needs are reduced]. Four kabbim will be sufficient for them. The same applies with regard to other necessary household [supplies].
Therefore, if a widow says: "I will not leave my father's house. Ascertain the amount of support I deserve for my subsistence and give it to me there," the heirs have the right to tell her: "If you desire to dwell with us, you will receive [a full measure of] support. If not, we will give you only your share as a member of the household at large."
If she explains [that she desires not to live with them] because she is young, and they are young [and the situation would be immodest, her claim is accepted]. [The heirs are required] to provide her with support sufficient for her as she lives alone, while she lives in her father's home.
[Any money] remaining from [the funds granted for] the support of a widow or from her wardrobe belongs to the heirs.9
ד
ברכת הבית מרובה כיצד. חמשה שהיה מזונות כל אחד מהן קב בשיאכל לבדו אם היו חמשתן בבית אחד ואוכלין בעירוב מספיק להן ארבע קבין והוא הדין לשאר צרכי הבית. לפיכך אלמנה שאמרה אינני זזה מבית אבי פסקו לי מזונות ותנו לי שם. יכולין היורשין לומר לה אם את אצלנו יש לך מזונות ואם לאו אין אנו נותנים לך אלא כפי ברכת הבית. ואם היתה טוענת מפני שהיא ילדה והם ילדים נותנין לה מזונות המספיקין לה לבדה והיא בבית אביה. ומותר מזונות האלמנה ומותר הכסות ליורשין:
5
[The following laws apply when] a widow becomes sick. If she requires medical treatment that is of an undefined nature, it is considered as support for her subsistence, and the heirs must provide her with it.10 If, however, she requires medical treatment of a limited nature, the treatment [should be paid for by deducting it] from [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.
If she is taken captive, the heirs are not required to redeem her. [This applies] even if she is a yevamah [and it is a mitzvah for her late husband's brother to marry her]. [Indeed,] even when she was taken captive during her husband's lifetime [and he was thus obligated to redeem her], if he dies while she is in captivity, there is no obligation to redeem her from his estate. Instead, she must be redeemed from her private funds, or she must collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah and redeem herself.
ה
אלמנה שחלתה אם צריכה לרפואה שאין לה קצבה הרי זו כמזונות ויורשין חייבין בה. ואם היא צריכה רפואה שיש לה קצבה הרי זו מתרפאה מכתובתה. נשבית אין היורשין חייבין לפדותה אפילו היתה יבמה ואפילו נשבית בחיי בעלה ומת והיא בשביה אין חייבין לפדותה מנכסיו אלא נפדית משל עצמה או תטול כתובתה ותפדה עצמה:
6
When a widow dies, her late husband's heirs are responsible for her burial. If, however, she had already taken the oath required of a widow [before collecting the money due her by virtue of her ketubah], her heirs inherit her ketubah, and they are required to bury her, and not her late husband's heirs.11
[Her late husband's] heirs are entitled to the income [from the work] of the widow. If the heirs tell the widow, "Take the income you generate in exchange for [receiving] your subsistence," their words are of no substance. If, however, she desires such an arrangement, she is given this prerogative.12
ו
מתה האלמנה יורשי הבעל חייבין בקבורתה. ואם נשבעה שבועת אלמנה ואח"כ מתה יורשיה יורשין כתובתה והן חייבין בקבורתה אבל לא יורשי הבעל. מעשה ידי האלמנה ליורשין. ויורש שאמר לאלמנה טלי מעשה ידיך במזונותיך אין שומעין לו אבל היא שרצתה בזה שומעין לה:
7
All the household tasks that a wife performs on behalf of her husband, a widow must perform on behalf of his heirs, with the exception of pouring them drinks, making their beds and washing their face, hands and feet.13
ז
וכל מלאכות שהאשה עושה לבעלה אלמנה עושה ליתומים חוץ ממזיגת הכוס והצעת המטה והרחצת פניו ידיו ורגליו:
8
An ownerless article discovered by a widow and the benefit that accrues from the property that the woman brought to her husband's household belong to the woman herself; the heirs [to her husband's estate] have no right to them at all.14
ח
מציאת האלמנה ופירות נכסים שהכניסה לבעל לעצמה ואין ליורש בהם כלום:
9
The property that [a woman brought to the household as] her nedunyah may be taken by the woman without her having to take an oath.15 The heirs to her husband's estate have no claim with regard to it, except if the nichsei tzon barzel have increased in value during her husband's lifetime. [In this instance,] the increase belongs to the husband16 [and is given to his heirs].
[Even] if a widow dies without taking the oath [required of her], her heirs inherit her nedunyah, even if it is nichsei tzon barzel. If, however, it has increased in value, the increase must go to her husband's heirs.
ט
והנכסים עצמם שהם נדונייתה נוטלת אותן בלא שבועה ואין ליורשים בהם דין לעולם אלא אם כן הותירו בחיי הבעל והיו נכסי צאן ברזל שהמותר לבעל. ואם מתה האלמנה בלא שבועה יורשיה יורשים נדוניתה אע"פ שהוא נכסי צאן ברזל ואם היה בהן מותר המותר ליורשי הבעל:
10
When a woman seizes movable property [belonging to her husband's estate, so that she can sell it and use the money] for her subsistence, the property should not be removed from her possession.17 [This applies regardless of] whether she took possession of the movable property during her husband's lifetime or afterwards. Even if she takes possession of a talent of gold18 [it is not removed from her possession].
Instead, the court documents what she has taken into her possession and defines the amount she should be given for her subsistence. Calculations are made, and she is allowed to derive her subsistence from [the property] in her possession until she dies or until she is no longer entitled to support for her subsistence. [At that time,] the heirs are granted the remainder.
י
אלמנה שתפסה מטלטלין כדי שתזון מהן בין שתפסה מחיים בין שתפסה אחר מותו אפילו תפסה ככר זהב אין מוציאין מידה אלא כותבין עליה בית דין מה שתפסה ופוסקין לה מזונות ומחשבין עמה והיא ניזונית ממה שבידה עד שתמות או עד שלא יהיו לה מזונות. ויקחו היורשין את השאר:
11
Similarly, if she took possession of movable property during her husband's lifetime [to provide] for [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, she may collect [the money due her] from this [property after he dies]. If, however, she took possession of it after her husband's death [to provide] for [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, she may not collect [her due] from it.19
יא
וכן אם תפסה מטלטלין בכתובתה בחיי בעלה ומת גובה מהן. אבל אם תפסה אחר מותו לכתובתה אינה גובה מהן אע"ג שתקנו הגאונים שתגבה הכתובה ותנאי הכתובה מן המטלטלין. לפיכך תזון האלמנה מן המטלטלין אע"פ שלא תפסה:
12
20The geonim ordained that a woman may collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah and every obligation due her as a stipulation of her ketubah from the movable property [in her husband's estate]. Based on this [provision], a woman may receive her subsistence from [the sale of] movable property [from her husband's estate].
Nevertheless, if her husband left movable property and she did not take possession of it, the heirs take possession of it, and they must provide her with her subsistence. She has no right to prevent them from taking possession, by saying: "Have the movable property held in the court [so that] I can derive my subsistence from it, lest it become depleted,21 and I will have no means of support." Even if an explicit stipulation was made [by her husband at the time her ketubah was composed] that she could derive her subsistence from this movable property, she cannot prevent [the heirs] from taking possession of it.22 This is the ruling that is universally followed in all courts.
יב
ואם הניח בעלה מטלטלין ולא תפסה אותן היורשים נוטלין אותן והן מעלין לה מזונות ואינה יכולה לעכב עליהן ולומר יהיו המטלטלין מונחין בבית דין עד שאיזון מהן שמא יאבדו ולא יהיו לי מזונות. ואפילו התנתה עליו בפירוש שתזון מן המטלטלין אינה מעכבת וכזה דנין תמיד בכל בתי דינין:
13
If, however, her husband left landed property, she has the right to prevent the heirs from selling it. If they do sell it, however, she does not have the right to expropriate [the property] from the purchasers. A widow and a man's daughters may derive their subsistence only from the property that remains in his estate. [In this regard, they have no claim to property that was sold.]23
יג
אבל אם הניח קרקע יכולה היא לעכב עליהן שלא ימכרו ואם מכרו אינה מוציאה מיד הלקוחות שאין האשה והבנות ניזונות אלא מנכסים בני חורין:
14
If the deceased left many wives, they all have equal rights to receive their subsistence. [This applies] even when he married them one after the other. For the concept of a prior claim does not exist with regard to a claim for support.24
יד
הניח נשים רבות אע"פ שנשאן זו אחר זו ניזונות בשוה (כמו) שאין דין קדימה במטלטלין:
15
[The following rules apply with regard to] a widow who has an obligation to marry a yavam.25 During the first three months,26 she derives her subsistence from her deceased husband's estate.27 If it can be determined that she is pregnant, or if it was known that she was pregnant when her husband died, she continues to derive her support [from his estate] until she gives birth. If she bears a viable child, she may continue to derive her subsistence throughout her widowhood as other women do.
If after three months have passed, it is [either] not evident that she is pregnant or she miscarries, she is not entitled to support from either her husband's estate or from her yavam. Instead, she must file a suit against her yavam either to marry her or [to free her of her obligation through] chalitzah.
טו
אלמנה שנפלה לפני יבם בשלשה חדשים הראשונים ניזונת משל בעל. ואם הוכר העובר וכן אם הניחה מעוברת ניזונת והולכת עד שתלד. ילדה בן של קיימא ניזונת והולכת כל ימי אלמנותה כשאר כל הנשים. לא נמצאת מעוברת אחר שלשה חדשים או שהפילה אינה ניזונת לא משל בעל ולא משל יבם אלא תובעת יבמה לכנוס או לחלוץ:
16
If she filed a suit against her yavam either to marry her or [to free her of her obligation through] chalitzah, he appeared in court and then fled or became ill, or if the yavam lives overseas,28 the woman is entitled to derive her support from the property of the yavam without taking any oath at all.29
טז
תבעה יבמה לכנוס או לחלוץ ועמד בבית דין וברח או שחלה או שהיה היבם במדינת הים הרי זו ניזונת משל יבם בלא שבועה כלל:
17
If the yavam she was obligated to marry is a minor,30 she is not entitled to receive her support from him until he comes of age and resembles other yevamim.31
יז
נפלה לפני יבם קטן אין לה מזונות עד שיגדל ויהיה כשאר היבמין:
18
Should a person designate a portion of land to be used for support of his wife after his death, by saying: "This particular place will be for [my wife's] support,"32 he has granted her additional rights with regard to her support.
If the income [from this land] is less than the support due her, she is entitled [to collect] the remainder from the other portions of his estate. If the income [from those portions of land] is less than the support due her, she is entitled to the entire amount.
If, however, he told her, "Your support will come from this particular place," and she remained silent,33 her sole source of support is the income from that particular place. [Her husband] has specificied [the source for] her support.
יח
מי שייחד קרקע לאשתו במזונותיה בשעת מיתה ואמר יהיה מקום פלוני למזונות הרי ריבה לה מזונות. ואם היה שכרו פחות ממזונות הראויות לה נוטלת השאר משאר נכסים. ואם היה שכרו יותר מן הראוי לה נוטלת הכל. אבל אם אמר לה יהיה במקום פלוני במזונותיה ושתקה אין לה אלא פירות אותו מקום בלבד שהרי קצץ לה מזונות:
19
There are those who have ruled that when a widow comes to the court to ask for support she should be allotted support without requiring her to take an oath.34 This ruling should not be followed; they have misunderstood [the situation, erroneously associating it with that of] a woman whose husband left on an overseas journey.35
My teachers36 ruled that she should not be allotted support until she takes an oath in court.37 For she is coming to collect from property in the possession of heirs, and anyone who collects property in the possession of heirs may do so only after an oath has been taken. My own conception [also] follows [this approach], and it is proper to rule accordingly.
יט
אלמנה שבאה לבית דין לתבוע מזונות יש מי שהורה שפוסקין לה מזונות ואין משביעים אותה. ואין ראוי לסמוך על הוראה זו מפני שנתחלף לו הדבר באשה שהלך בעלה למדינת הים. ורבותי הורו שאין לה מזונות מב"ד עד שתשבע שהרי זו באה להפרע מנכסי יתומים וכל הנפרע מנכסי יתומים לא תפרע אלא בשבועה. ולזה דעתי נוטה וכן ראוי לדון:
20
When a woman comes to the court to collect support for her subsistence, an oath is administered to her at the outset. The property is then sold without being publicized, and an allotment is made for her subsistence.38
Similarly, she is entitled to sell property for her subsistence without involving a court of expert judges; three trustworthy individuals are sufficient, and the sale need not be publicized. Similarly, if she sells property by herself for its appropriate value to provide for her subsistence, the sale is binding.39 When the heirs come and require her to take an oath, she must take the oath.
כ
אלמנה שבאה לבית דין לתבוע מזונות משביעין אותה בתחלה ומוכרין בלא הכרזה ונותנין לה מזונות. וכן יש לה למכור למזונות שלא בב"ד מומחין אלא בשלשה אנשים נאמנים בלא הכרזה. וכן אם מכרה למזונות בינה לבין עצמה שוה בשוה מכרה קיים וכשיבאו היורשין להשביע אותה נשבעת:
21
How much property is sold to provide for her subsistence? Enough to provide for her support for six months,40 but not for longer than that. The sale is made on the condition that the purchaser give the widow an allotment for food every thirty days.41 Afterwards, another parcel of property is sold for another six months.
The property should continue to be sold in this manner until all that remains from the estate is [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. She should collect this sum and complete her dealings with the court.42
כא
וכמה מוכרין למזונות כדי לזון מהם ששה חדשים לא יותר על זה. ומוכין ע"מ שיהיה הלוקח נותן לה מזון שלשים יום וחוזרת ומוכרת פעם שניה לששה חדשים. וכן מוכרת והולכת לעולם עד שישאר מן הנכסים כדי כתובתה גובה כתובתה מן השאר והולכת לה:
22
When the court allots a widow support for her subsistence, they do not reckon the money she earns until the heirs come and demand it. [If such a demand is made,] and the woman has earned money, they are entitled to it. If not, they have no further claim against her.
I maintain [however] that if the heirs are below majority, the court should make a reckoning with the widow with regard to [her income].43 Just as she is allotted a subsistence, the court declares that her income [should be given to the orphans].
כב
אלמנה שפסקו לה ב"ד מזונות אין מחשבין עמה על מעשה ידיה עד שיבאו היורשים ויתבעוה. אם מצאו לה מעשה ידיה נוטלין אותו ואם לאו הולכין לדרכם. ואני אומר שאם היו היורשים קטנים ב"ד מחשבין עמה ופוסקין מעשה ידיה כדרך שפוסקין לה מזונות:
23
When a widow does not manifest possession of her ketubah, she is not granted money for her subsistence. [The rationale is that] perhaps she waived her ketubah [in favor of her husband] or sold it or gave it as security [for a loan].44
Even when the heir[s] do not issue such a claim against her, the court makes this claim on their behalf and tells her: "Bring your ketubah, take the required oath and collect [the money for] your subsistence." [This law applies] unless it is not customary [in a particular locale] to compose a document recording the ketubah.45
כג
אלמנה שאין שטר כתובה יוצא מתחת ידה אין לה מזונות שמא מחלה כתובתה או מכרה או משכנה אותה. אע"פ שלא טען יורש טוענין אנו לו ואומרים לה הביאי כתובתיך והשבעי וטלי מזונותיך. אלא אם אין דרכם לכתוב כתובה:
24
[The following laws apply when] a woman and her husband traveled overseas, and she returned, claiming [her husband] died. If she desires, she is entitled to receive her subsistence from her husband's estate, as are other widows. If she desires, she may collect [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah.46
If she claims, "My husband divorced me," her word is not accepted.47 She is, however, entitled to derive her subsistence from his estate until she receives a sum equal to [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. [The rationale is] that if she is still his wife, she is entitled to receive her subsistence [from his holdings]. If he divorced her, she is entitled to receive [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah, [provided] she manifests possession of her ketubah. Therefore, she may collect the support for her subsistence until she receives [the money due her by virtue of] her ketubah. [From this point on,] she has completed her dealings with the court.
כד
האשה שהלכה היא ובעלה למדינת הים ובאה ואמרה מת בעלי רצתה ניזונת כדין כל האלמנות רצתה נוטלת כתובה. אמרה גרשני בעלי אינה נאמנת וניזונת מנכסיו עד כדי כתובתה מכל פנים. שאם עדיין היא אשתו יש לה מזונות. ואם גרשה כמו שאמרה יש לה כתובה שהרי כתובתה בידה לפיכך נוטלת מזונות עד כדי כתובתה והולכת לה:
25
[The following laws apply when] there is doubt whether a woman was divorced, and her husband died [afterwards]. She is not entitled to receive her subsistence from his estate, for property cannot be expropriated from an heir on the basis of a doubtful claim.48 During her husband's lifetime, by contrast, she is entitled to her subsistence until she is divorced in a complete and binding manner.49
כה
האשה שהיה לה ספק גירושין ומת בעלה אינה ניזונת מנכסיו שאין מוציאין מיד היורש מספק. אבל בחיי בעלה יש לה מזונות עד שתתגרש גירושין גמורין:
26
If a poor50 widow waits two years before she sues for support - or if a rich widow waits three years - it can be assumed that she has waived her claim to support for the previous years.51Therefore, she is not granted support for that period. From the time she issues a claim onward, however, she is entitled to support.
If, however, she waited even one day less [before presenting her claim], she is not considered to have waived her claim, and she may collect her support for the previous years.
כו
אלמנה עניה ששהתה שתי שנים ולא תבעה מזונות או עשירה ששהתה שלש שנים ולא תבעה ויתרה ואין לה מזונות בשנים שעברו אלא משעה שתבעה. ואם שהתה פחות מזה אפילו ביום אחד לא ויתרה אלא תובעת ונוטלת מזון השנים שעברו:
27
[The following rules apply when] a widow demands support for her subsistence from the heirs, and they claim to have paid her, while she claims that she did not receive payment. Until she remarries, the burden of proof is on the orphans. [If they do not support their claim], the widow is entitled to take a rabbinical oath and collect the money due her.52 If she has already remarried, the burden of proof is upon her. [If she does not support her claim,] the heirs are entitled to take a rabbinic oath that they paid her [and are freed of obligation].53
כז
אלמנה שתבעה מזונות מן היורשים הם אומרים נתננו והיא אומרת לא נטלתי כל זמן שלא נשאת על היתומים להביא ראיה או תשבע שבועת היסת ותטול. משנשאת עליה להביא ראיה או ישבעו היורשים שבועת היסת שנתנו לה:
28
The laws governing the extra sum added by the husband to the ketubah are the same as those governing the fundamental requirement of the ketubah. Therefore, if a widow demands payment of this additional amount - or sells it, waives payment of it [in favor of her husband] or gives it as security - together with the fundamental requirement of the ketubah, she is not entitled to support for her subsistence.
If she demanded payment for a portion and left a portion uncollected,54 it is as if she demanded payment for a portion of the fundamental requirement of the ketubah and left a portion uncollected.55
Whenever a woman sells or waives payment of her ketubah without making any further specification, she is considered to have sold or waived this additional amount together with the fundamental requirement of the ketubah. For the term ketubah is universally used to refer to both these items.
כח
דין תוספת כתובה כדין העיקר. לפיכך אלמנה שתבעה או מכרה או מחלה או משכנה תוספת כתובתה עם העיקר אין לה מזונות. ואם תבעה מקצת והניחה מקצת הרי זו כמי שתבעה מקצת העיקר והניחה מקצתו. וכל המוכרת או המוחלת סתם מכרה ומחלה התוספת עם העיקר ששניהם כתובה שמם בכל מקום:
FOOTNOTES
1.
Rashi (Gittin 35a) states that as long as the widow does not contemplate remarriage, she is showing honor to her deceased husband, and therefore our Sages ordained that she should receive her subsistence from his estate. However, by demanding payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, she indicates that she is seeking to remarry. From that time onward, her deceased husband's estate is no longer obligated to support her.
The option whether to continue receiving her subsistence or to demand payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah is hers. The heirs cannot compel her to receive the money due her by virtue of her ketubah and cease giving her support (Ketubot 95b; Maggid Mishneh).
2.
The Beit Shmuel 93:13 explains that if the woman asks for payment of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, and the heirs refuse to pay her or are unable to do so, she is still entitled to support.
3.
In all these instances, it is considered as if she has already collected the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
4.
In this instance, however, the heirs have the right to pay her the remainder of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, and thus prevent her from continuing to collect her subsistence from the estate. If this provision were not granted, every widow would collect all the money due her by virtue of her ketubah except for the final p'rutah, and continue to receive support (Rabbenu Asher, quoted by the Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 93:10.).
5.
In the present age, this law applies even when the woman has merely become engaged to a new husband (Beit Yosef, Even HaEzer 93, as quoted by the Ramah, Even HaEzer 93:7).
6.
Even if she has not collected the money due her by virtue of her ketubah.
7.
Nevertheless, the dwelling becomes the property of the heirs, and they are also entitled to live there. The widow is, however, granted a place of dignity in the household (Maggid Mishneh; Ramah, Even HaEzer 94:1).
8.
Nor are they required to give her a room in it if they rebuild it themselves. Instead, they may rent her a different dwelling, as stated in the following halachah.
9.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that these funds are granted to the widow, but the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 95:5) follows the Rambam's ruling.
10.
The heirs may, however, fix a price with the physician for the widow's treatment, and then she becomes responsible for the financial burden (Ketubot 52b; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 79:2).
11.
The rationale is, as stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 4, that the burial of the woman was granted her in return for the husband's right to inherit her ketubah. If her heirs can collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, they are required to bury her. If not, since the money for her ketubah remains within the husband's estate, his heirs are responsible for her burial.
Although this is the Rambam's view, the Ra'avad and Rabbenu Nissim do not accept it. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 89:4) mentions the Rambam's view and states that it was not accepted by the other authorities.
12.
The same laws apply with regard to her husband during his lifetime, as stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 4.
13.
These tasks are acts of endearment, appropriate only for a wife to her husband.
14.
Although a husband is granted these rights (Chapter 12, Halachah 3), his heirs are not. The husband is granted the rights to the objects his wife finds so that strife will not arise between them. That rationale is not considered with regard to his heirs (Ketubot 96a).
With regard to the rights to her property: as mentioned in Chapter 12, Halachah 4, our Sages associated the rights to a woman's property with her redemption from captivity. Since the heirs are not obligated to redeem her, they are not entitled to this privilege.
15.
The property that a woman brings to her household belongs to her. Her husband has merely the right to derive benefit from it; he is not the owner. With regard to this property, she is treated like any of the other creditors of the estate, and no oath is required of her.
16.
Nichsei tzon barzel is property that the husband has had evaluated, and it is the value of the article for which he obligates himself or his estate. Nevertheless, if the property itself exists, it is given to the woman. If the property has increased in value, however, the husband - and therefore his heirs - are entitled to the increase.
The Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 96:1) state that this law refers only in an instance where the property that the woman brought to the household - or an article exchanged for it - is still intact. Otherwise, she is required to take an oath before collecting the money paid in lieu of the property.
17.
Although the movable property in her husband's estate is not under lien for her subsistence, it is not taken away from her if she takes possession of it. As the Kessef Mishneh emphasizes, the above applies with regard to the Talmudic era. As stated in the following halachah, it is customary at present to consider movable property as under lien to all a husband's obligations.
There are some Rishonim who differ with the Rambam and equate the provisions for the widow's subsistence with the collection of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. (See the following halachah.) The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 93:20) follows the Rambam's view.
18.
I.e., a sum that will last far longer than thirty days - the length of time for which the court sells property to provide her with her subsistence - or perhaps more than the worth of the woman's entire ketubah.
19.
Instead, it must be returned to the heirs.
Tosafot (Ketubot 96a) explains the distinction between a woman's taking possession of movable property to collect for her subsistence and the collection of the money due her by virtue of her ketubah as follows. Our Sages ordained that a woman may collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah from property that had belonged to her husband and was sold. Therefore, it is likely that the woman will ultimately receive her due. As such, she is required to return the movable property. With regard to her subsistence, however, no such provision was made. Hence, she is given an alternative, to take possession of movable property.
As explained in the following note, according to the Kessef Mishneh and others this law describes the practices of the Talmudic age and not those of the present era.
20.
K'nesset HaGedolah explains that, contrary to the standard published texts of the Mishneh Torah, Halachah 12 begins here. This is not a continuation of the previous halachah, because there is a difference with regard to the laws governing movable property between the practices of the Talmudic age and those of the present era.
21.
For if the heirs sell it, the woman has no claim to the proceeds of the sale, nor may she expropriate the property from the purchasers. Similarly, if the heirs destroy the movable property, she has no claim against them. From an ethical perspective, however, the heirs are enjoined not to sell this movable property.
22.
The Chelkat Mechokek 93:36 states that if a specific clause was included in the ketubah regarding this matter, although the widow cannot nullify the sale she has a right to receive her subsistence from its proceeds.
23.
The Rashba states that if a clause was added to the ketubah specifically stating that the woman has the right to collect her subsistence from movable property after her husband's death, then she is allowed to expropriate the landed property from the purchasers (Maggid Mishneh; Ramah, Even HaEzer 93:21).
24.
Our translation is based on manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah. The standard printed texts substitute "movable property" for "claim for support." Apparently, this version reached the Ra'avad who objects, and states - as is the halachah - that the principle applies with regard to landed property as well.
25.
I.e., her husband died childless, and he had a brother who is commanded to marry his widow.
26.
This time period is granted in order to determine whether the woman was made pregnant by her husband before he died. If three months pass without pregnancy becoming noticeable, we can assume that a child was not conceived.
27.
Until she gives birth or miscarries, she is not entitled to remarry, lest she become bound by the obligation of yibbum. Since it is because of her husband that she may not remarry, his estate is required to provide for her (Rashi, Yevamot 41b).
28.
The Maggid Mishneh states that the latter two clauses - that the yavam became sick or that he lived overseas - apply also only if the yavam had previously appeared in court. If, however, he has never appeared in court, he is not under any obligation.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 160:1) follows the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who states that the yavam is obligated to support her in the latter instances only when he consented to marry her. If he desired to perform chalitzah, he is under no obligation to her.
29.
There is no need for her to take an oath that the yavam had not given her property. For since they have not established a relationship, such suspicions are unfounded (Ketubot 107b).
30.
Who should not perform the mitzvah of yibbum until he attains majority.
31.
Since he is forbidden to marry her, he is not required to support her. Nor is she entitled to support from her husband's estate. Yevamot 41b says that it is as if she is penalized from heaven.
32.
The Rambam is referring to statements made by a dying man with regard to the allocation of his property. If these statements are observed by witnesses, they are binding. This practice, referred to as a matnat sh'chiv me'ra (the oral will of a dying man) is described in Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 8:2).
33.
I.e., since it is possible that the woman will suffer a loss, she has the right to protest. If, however, she remained silent, we assume that she accepted her husband's decision.
34.
The reference is to Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi, who ruled this way in a responsum. His opinion is favored also by the Ra'avad, the Ramban, the Rashba and Rabbenu Asher. Ketubot 105a states that the woman should take an oath "at the end and not at the beginning." They explain that this refers to a woman whose husband has died. The woman should take the oath when she comes to collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, and not when she comes asking for support. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 93:19) appears to favor this view, and the Ramah states that it should be followed.
35.
See Chapter 12, Halachah 16.
36.
Rav Yosef Migash.
37.
They interpret Ketubot (loc. cit.) to be referring to a woman whose husband traveled overseas. She should not take an oath at the outset - i.e., when she comes to collect her subsistence - but rather at the end, if her husband comes and requires this of her. See Chapter 12, Halachah 21.
The dissenting authorities refute this interpretation, explaining that it is far more reasonable to require an oath of a woman when her husband is alive than after his death, for after his death it is very likely that the woman will soon take an oath to collect her ketubah.
38.
In contrast to the sale of property so that the woman can collect the money due her by virtue of her ketubah (Chapter 17, Halachah 13), in this instance the sale need not be publicized. The rationale is that the woman needs the money for her subsistence immediately and should not be required to wait.
39.
Rabbenu Chanan'el and the Ramban differ with the Rambam on this point. Although their opinion is also mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 93:25), it appears that the Rambam's opinion is favored.
40.
In this manner, a large amount of property is sold. If a smaller amount were sold, the parcel of land would be too small to fetch a proper price.
41.
I.e., the purchaser gives the widow only enough money to support herself for thirty days at a time. The rationale is that if she remarries or seeks to collect her ketubah, she is no longer entitled to receive support for her subsistence. Since there is the possibility that this will happen at any given time, she is given support for only a limited period of time. In the event that she remarries, the remainder of the money left from the sale is given to the heirs (Rashi, Ketubot 97a).
42.
The Maggid Mishneh explains that this is simply proper advice for the woman. For she can sell all the land necessary to provide her with the money due her by virtue of her ketubah at one time, while to collect her subsistence she must sell the land in small parcels. If she chooses, however, she may take the latter alternative.
43.
Since the heirs are orphans, the court is obligated to look after their interests. Therefore, it is obligated to ensure that the woman's earnings are given to them.
44.
In all these cases, the widow is no longer entitled to receive support from her deceased's husband's estate, as stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 18.
45.
In this instance, since the probability is that the woman would not have been given a document recording her ketubah, the fact that she does not have such a document in her possession is not considered detrimental to her position.
46.
See Chapter 16, Halachah 31.
47.
See Hilchot Gerushin 12:1.
48.
Since her status is questionable, she is not entitled to support. For this is granted only to a man's wife and not to his divorcee.
49.
Since divorce is dependent on the husband's initiative, as long as a woman's status is in question - and for that reason she may not marry another person - he is required to continue to support her (Rashi, Ketubot 97b).
50.
Ketubot 96a mentions two years and three years, stating that the difference is between a rich widow (who can afford to wait) and a poor one; alternatively, between a brash widow (who is not embarrassed to appear in court) and a modest one (who will hesitate before coming). The Rambam does not mention the second opinion at all (although generally, when the Talmud mentions two opinions, he rules according to the second opinion), nor does the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 93:14). Rabbenu Asher and the Chelkat Mechokek 93:26, however, do mention the latter opinion.
51.
The Rashba maintains that if, however, the woman took property as security, or if she borrowed money to be repaid with the money she will receive for her support, she is still entitled to receive the money retroactively. This opinion is cited by the Maggid Mishneh and the Shulchan Aruch (op. cit.).
52.
As long as she has not remarried, the property of her husband's estate is considered under lien to her and in her possession. Hence, she is given this privilege.
53.
For once she remarries, the property is considered to be in the possession of the heirs. Hence, they are given this privilege.
54.
The same law applies if the widow demanded payment of the fundamental requirement of the ketubah, but did not demand payment for the additional amount.
55.
See Halachah 1.
Ishut - Chapter Nineteen
1
One of the provisions of [a woman's] ketubah is that her male offspring will inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah and the nedunyah she brought to the household as nichsei tzon barzel.1 Afterwards, these children divide the remainder of the estate with their brothers equally.2
א
מתנאי הכתובה שיהיו בנים הזכרים יורשים כתובת אמן ונדונייתה שהכניסה בתורת נכסי צאן ברזל ואח"כ חולקין שאר הירושה עם אחיהם בשוה:
2
What is implied? A man married a woman whose ketubah and nedunyah were together valued at 1000 [zuz]. She bore a son, and then she died within [her husband's] lifetime. Afterwards, the man married another woman whose ketubah and nedunyah were together valued at 200 [zuz]. She bore a son, and then she died within [her husband's] lifetime. Afterwards, the man died, leaving an estate worth 2000 [zuz].
His first wife's son should inherit 1000 [zuz] by virtue of his mother's ketubah, and his second wife's son should inherit 200 [zuz] by virtue of his mother's ketubah, and the remainder they should [both] inherit and [divide] equally. Thus, the first wife's son will receive 1400 [zuz], and the second wife's son will receive 600 [zuz].
ב
כיצד נשא אשה כתובתה ונדונייתה אלף וילדה בן ומתה בחייו. ואחר כך נשא אשה אחרת כתובתה ונדונייתה מאתים וילדה בן ומתה בחייו. ואחר כך מת הוא והניח אלפים. בנו מן הראשונה יורש אלף שבכתובת אמו. ובנו מן השנייה יורש מאתים שבכתובת אמו והשאר יורשים אותו בשוה. נמצא ביד בן הראשונה אלף וארבע מאות. וביד בן השנייה שש מאות:
3
When does the above apply? When [the estate] is worth at least one dinar more than the amount [due the children by virtue of their mothers'] ketubot. If, however, there is not a dinar or more remaining [in the estate],3 the entire estate should be divided equally [without applying the provision mentioned above].
[The rationale is that] if [the children of one of the mothers] will inherit [what is due them by virtue of] their mother's ketubah, [the other mother's children] will inherit [what is due them by virtue of] their mother's ketubah, and at least one dinar will not remain to be divided among the heirs, then this provision [which is of Rabbinic origin] will supersede [entirely] the equal division of the estate among the children that is required by Scriptural law.
ג
בד"א בשהניח יותר על כדי שתי כתובות דינר אחד או יותר כדי שיחלקו השאר בשוה. אבל אם לא הניח יותר דינר חולקים הכל בשוה שאם יירשו אלו כתובת אמן ואלו כתובת אמן ולא ישאר דינר אחד לחלוק אותו בין היורשים נמצא תנאי זה מבטל חלוק ירושה בין הבנים בשוה שהוא מן התורה:
4
The same law applies to a man who married many wives, whether one after the other or several at one time. If they have all died in his lifetime, and they have all borne male children from this man, if his estate contains at least a dinar more than the ketubot of all his wives, each of the [sets of] sons inherits the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah. The remainder [of the estate] is divided equally.
ד
והוא הדין למי שנשא נשים רבות בין בזו אחר זו בין בבת אחת ומתו כולן בחייו ולו מהן בנים זכרים אם היה שם יותר על כדי כל הכתובות דינר כל אחד ואחד יורש כתובת אמו והשאר חולקין בשוה:
5
[Should the estate not be large enough to satisfy the obligations of both ketubot and the additional dinar,] and the heirs say: "We will increase the value of our father's estate so that there will be more than a dinar [in addition to the value of the ketubot]," so that they can collect [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah, their request is not accepted. Instead, the estate should be evaluated in court according to its value at the time of their father's death [and the decision rendered on the basis of this figure].
Even if the value of the estate increases or decreases [in the time between] the death of their father and the actual division of the property, [the decision whether to grant the heirs their mothers' ketubot] depends only on the value of the estate at the time of their father's death.
ה
אמרו היתומים הרי אנו מעלין על נכסי אבינו יותר דינר כדי שיטלו כתובת אמן אין שומעין להם. אלא שמין את הנכסים בב"ד כמה שהיו שוין בשעת מיתת אביהן ואע"פ שנתרבו או נתמעטו אחרי מיתת אביהן קודם שיבואו לחלוק אין שמין אותן אלא כשעת מיתת אביהן:
6
If the value of the estate was a dinar or more than the sum of the two ketubot, each of the sons inherits the money due his mother by virtue of her ketubah. Even if there is a promissory note due against the estate for the amount that exceeds the value of the ketubot, it is not considered to have reduced [the value of the estate].
ו
היה שם יותר על כדי כל הכתובות דינר או יותר אע"פ שיש עליו שטר חוב כנגד היותר אינו ממעט אלא כל אחד מהן יורש כתובת אמו:
7
[The following rules apply when a man] was married to two wives. One died within his lifetime and one died afterwards, and he has sons from both wives. Although the value of the estate he left does not exceed the value of the two ketubot, the sons of the [wife who died after her husband's death] have the right to inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah first, [provided] she took the oath required of a widow before she died.
[The rationale is] that they do not inherit their mother's ketubah by virtue of this provision, but rather through the Torah's laws of inheritance.4 Afterwards, the sons of the wife [who died during her husband's lifetime] inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of her] ketubah on the basis of this provision. If anything remains in the estate afterwards, it should be divided equally.5
If [the woman who died after her husband] died before she was able to take the oath [required of her], only the sons of [the woman who died in her husband's lifetime] are entitled to inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah.6 The remainder is divided equally.
ז
מי שהיה נשוי שתי נשים ומתה אחת מהן בחייו ואחת אחר מותו ולו בנים משתיהן אע"פ שלא הניח יתר על שתי הכתובות אם נשבעה השניה שבועת אלמנה קודם שתמות בניה קודמים לירושת כתובתה. מפני שאינן יורשין כתובת אמן בתנאי זה אלא ירושה של תורה ואחר כך יורשין בני הראשונה כתובת אמן בתנאי זה. ואם נשאר שם כלום חולקין אותו בשוה. ואם מתה קודם שתשבע בני הראשונה יורשים כתובת אמן בלבד והשאר חולקין בשוה:
8
[The following rules apply when a man] was married to two wives, fathered sons with both of them and then died. If the wives died after the father did, but after taking the oath [required of widows], each of their sons is entitled to inherit [the money due his mother by virtue of] her ketubah according to the Torah's laws of inheritance, and not by virtue of this provision. Therefore, in this instance it is not significant whether the estate is more valuable than the sum of the two ketubot or not. [The claim of] the heirs of the wife married first takes precedence over the claim of the wife married afterwards.
If neither of the wives took [the required] oath, the sons [of both women] divide the entire estate equally. Neither has the right to inherit [his mother's] ketubah, for a widow is not entitled to her ketubah until she takes the [required] oath.7
ח
היה נשוי שתי נשים והיו לו בנים מהן ומת ואח"כ מתו הנשים אם נשבעו ואח"כ מתו כל אחד ואחד יורש כתובת אמו בירושה של תורה ולא בתנאי זה. לפיכך אין משגיחין אם יש שם מותר או אין שם. ויורשי הראשונה קודמין ליורשי השנייה. ואם לא נשבעו חולקין הבנים הכל בשוה ואין שם ירושת כתובה לפי שאין לאלמנה כתובה עד שתשבע:
9
[In the above instance,] if one of the widows took the [required] oath and one did not, the sons of the one who took the oath inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah first, and then the remainder of the estate is divided equally [among all the heirs].8
Whenever [a son] inherits [the money due his mother by virtue of] her ketubah after she died in his father's lifetime, he does not have the right to expropriate property that was sold to others; [he inherits] only property in the possession of the estate.
ט
אחת נשבעה ואחת לא נשבעה זו שנשבעה בניה יורשין כתובתה תחלה והשאר חולקין אותו בשוה. וכל היורש כתובת אמו שמתה בחיי אביו אינו טורף מנכסים משועבדים אלא מבני חורין ככל היורשין:
10
Among the provisions of the ketubah is that after the death of their father, [his wife's] daughters have the right to receive support for their sustenance from their father's estate9 until they become consecrated10 or until they reach the age of bagrut.11
If a daughter reaches the age of bagrut but has not been consecrated, or if she is consecrated before she reaches the age of bagrut,12 she is not entitled to receive her sustenance.
When a daughter receives her sustenance from her father's estate after his death, her earnings and the ownerless objects she discovers belong to her, not to her brothers.13
י
ומתנאי כתובה שתהיינה הבנות ניזונות מנכסי אביהן אחר מותו עד שיתארסו או עד שיבגרו. בגרה הבת אע"פ שלא נתארסה או נתארסה אע"פ שלא בגרה אין לה מזונות. ובת הניזונת מנכסי אביה לאחר מותו מעשה ידיה ומציאתה לעצמה לא לאחים:
11
An allotment of support, garments and living quarters should be made for a man's daughters from his estate, just as it is made for his widow. His [landed property] may be sold to provide his daughters with their sustenance and garments without a public announcement, just as it is sold to provide for his widow's sustenance and garments.
[There is, however, one difference between the two.] The allotment to the widow is made according to her social standing and that of her husband, while his daughters are given only their necessities. The daughters are not, however, required to take an oath.14
יא
פוסקין לבת מזונות וכסות ומדור מנכסי אביה כדרך שפוסקין לאלמנה. ומוכרין למזון הבנות וכסותן בלא הכרזה כדרך שמוכרין למזון האלמנה וכסותה. אלא שהאשה פוסקין לה לפי כבודה וכבוד הבעל ולבנות פוסקין להן דבר המספיק להן בלבד. ואין הבנות נשבעות:
12
A man's sons are not entitled to inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah, nor are his daughters entitled to receive their sustenance according to the provisions mentioned above unless they manifest possession of the document [recording their mother's] ketubah.15 If, however, they do not manifest possession of the document, they are not entitled to anything, for it is possible that their mother waived her ketubah [in favor of her husband]. In a locale where it is not customary to record the ketubah in a document, however, the children are entitled to [the benefits stemming from] these provisions.
יב
אין הבנים יורשין כתובת אמן. ולא הבנות ניזונות בתנאים אלו עד שיהיה שטר כתובה יוצא מתחת ידם. אבל אם אין שם שטר כתובה אין לה כלום. שמא מחלה אמן כתובתה. ואם אין דרכם לכתוב כתובה יש להן כפי התנאים:
13
When, shortly before his passing, a man orders that one of the provisions of [his wife's] ketubah be ignored - e.g., he said: "My daughters should not derive their sustenance from my estate," "My widow should not derive her sustenance from my estate," or "My sons should not inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah" - his words are of no consequence.16
[Although] person gives his entire estate to others through an oral will17 [all the provisions of his wife's ketubah must be met]. [The rationale is] that the transfer of property through an oral will does not take effect until after death, as will be explained.18Thus, the mandate of the will and the obligations of the estate due to the provisions [of the ketubah] take effect simultaneously. Therefore, the widow and [the deceased's] daughters receive support for their sustenance from the estate, and [the deceased's] sons inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah if she dies during her husband's lifetime.19
יג
מי שצוה בשעת מיתתו לעקור אחד מתנאי כתובה. כגון שאמר אל יזונו בנותיו מנכסיו. או אל תזון אלמנתו מנכסיו או אל יירשו בניו כתובת אמן אין שומעין לו. נתן כל נכסיו במתנה לאחרים הואיל ומתנת שכיב מרע אינה קונה אלא לאחר מיתה כמו שיתבאר הרי המתנה וחיוב הנכסים בתנאין אלו באין כאחד ולפיכך אלמנתו ובנותיו ניזונות מנכסיו ובניו יורשים כתובת אמן שמתה בחיי בעלה:
14
A daughter of a girl who nullifies her marriage through mi'un is considered like any other daughter, and she is entitled to support for her sustenance [after her father's death].20 Nevertheless, the daughter of a yevamah,21 the daughter of a sh'niyah,22 the daughter of one's arusah,23 and the daughter of a woman who has been raped24 are not entitled to support for their sustenance after their father's death by virtue of this provision. During their father's lifetime, however, he is obligated to support them like any of his other sons and daughters.
יד
בת הממאנת הרי היא כשאר הבנות ויש לה מזונות. אבל בת היבמה ובת השנייה ובת הארוסה ובת האנוסה אין להן מזונות אחר מיתת אביהן בתנאי זה. אבל בחיי אביהן הוא חייב במזונותן כדין שאר הבנים והבנות בחיי אביהן:
15
A man who consecrates a girl who is receiving her sustenance from her brothers is obligated to provide her with support from the time of consecration onward. [Although a husband is ordinarily required to support his wife only after nisu'in, an exception is made in this instance, because] the girl is not entitled to support from her brothers after she becomes consecrated. Nor is she past the age of majority, when she is capable of providing for her own sustenance, but rather she is a minor, or a na'arah.25 [Hence, her husband is obligated to support her, because] a manwould not desire that the woman he consecrated be put to shame [by having to] wander and beg [for her support].26
טו
המארס בת הניזונת מן האחין חייב במזונותיה משעת האירוסין שהרי אין לה מזונות מאחיה (אלא עד שתתארס או עד שתבגר וזו) אינה בוגרת כדי שתזון עצמה אלא קטנה או נערה ואין אדם רוצה שתתבזה ארוסתו ותלך ותשאל על הפתחים:
16
Should a daughter marry and then leave her husband through the rite of mi'un, or be divorced, or be widowed - even if she is obligated to marry a yavam - since she returns to her father's home and has not reached the age of bagrut, she is entitled to support from her father's estate until she reaches the age of bagrut or until she becomes consecrated.27
טז
נשאת הבת ומיאנה או נתגרשה או נתאלמנה אפילו היא שומרת יבם הואיל וחזרה לבית אביה ועדיין לא בגרה הרי זו ניזונת מנכסי אביה עד שתבגר או עד שתתארס:
17
When a mandies leaving both sons and daughters, the sons inherit his estate,28 and it is their responsibility to provide their sisters with support until they reach the age of bagrut, or until they become consecrated.
When does this apply? When the estate is large enough to provide both the sons and the daughters with their sustenance until the daughters reach the age of bagrut. This is called an ample estate.
If, however, the estate contains only a lesser amount, the funds necessary to support the daughters until they reach the age of bagrut are set aside,29 and the remainder is given to the sons. If the estate contains only enough to provide for the support of the daughters, the daughters are entitled to their sustenance until they reach bagrut or until they become consecrated, and the sons should beg for their support.30
יז
מי שמת והניח בנים ובנות יירשו הבנים כל הנכסים והם זנין את אחיותיהם עד שיבגרו או עד שיתארסו. בד"א בשהניח נכסים שאפשר שיזונו מהם הבנים והבנות כאחת עד שיבגרו הבנות ואלו הן הנקראין נכסים מרובין. אבל אם אין בנכסים שהניח אלא פחות מזה מוציאין מהם מזונות לבנות עד שיבגרו ונותנין השאר לבנים. ואם אין שם אלא כדי מזון הבנות בלבד הבנות ניזונות מהן עד שיבגרו או עד שיתארסו והבנים ישאלו על הפתחים:
18
When does the above apply? When the estate contains landed property. If, however, the estate contains movable property, since it is only by virtue of the ordinance of the geonim that the daughters are entitled to derive their support from the movable property, the sons and the daughters should receive their support equally from this meager estate. For with regard to movable property, [the daughters] were given the right to be considered like the sons, but not superior to them. The geonim have ruled in this manner.31
יח
בד"א בשהניח קרקע אבל אם לא הניח אלא מטלטלין הואיל ובתקנת הגאונים הוא שיזונו הבנות מן המטלטלין הרי הבנים והבנות ניזונות כאחד מן הנכסים האלו המועטין. שלא תקנו להם במטלטלין אלא שיהיו כבנים וכזה הורו הגאונים:
19
If [a man] left an ample estate of landed property, and afterwards [the value of the estate decreased until] it became meager, the heirs have already acquired [the property].32
If [the estate was deemed] meager [in value] at the time of the man's death, and [the value increased afterwards]33 to the point that it is considered ample, the heirs are given the right to inherit it. Even if the value did not increase, if the sons sold an estate that was considered meager, the sale is binding.34
יט
הניח קרקע והיו הנכסים מרובין ונתמעטו אחר כן כבר זכו בהן יורשים. היו מועטין בשעת מיתה ונתרבו אח"כ הבנים יורשין אותן. ואפילו לא נתרבו אם קדמו הבנים ומכרו נכסים מועטין מכרן קיים:
20
If the estate was ample but a debt was owed, or [the man] had made a provision with his wife, [promising] to support her daughter [from a previous marriage], the debt or [the obligation to] support the widow's daughter35 does not prevent the estate from being considered ample.36 Instead, the sons inherit the entire estate. [It is their responsibility] to pay the creditor his debt, to support the widow's daughter for the time stipulated and to support their sisters until they reach majority, or until they become consecrated and leave their domain.37
כ
היו הנכסים מרובין ויש עליו חוב או שהתנה עם אשתו שיזון את בתה אין החוב ולא מזונות בת אשתו ממעטין בנכסים אלא יירשו הבנים הכל ויתנו לב"ח חובו ויזונו בת אשת אביהן עד זמן שפסק ויזונו אחיותיהן עד שיבגרו או עד שיתארסו ויצאו מתחת ידיהם:
21
[The following rules apply when a man] left a widow and a daughter, either from her or from another wife, and his estate is not large enough to provide support for both of them. The widow should derive her support from the estate, and the daughter should beg [for alms].38
Similarly, I maintain that support for [a man's] daughter takes precedence over [his] sons' inheritance of their mother's ketubah if she died in her husband's lifetime, although both [rights] are provisions of the ketubah. [This can be derived by making] an inference from a more serious responsibility to a less serious one: If the inheritance [of a man's estate to which the sons are entitled] by virtue of Scriptural law is superseded by [the obligation to provide] the daughter with her support, how much more so should [the sons'] inheritance of [their mother's] ketubah, which is only a Rabbinic ordinance, be superseded by [the obligation to provide] the daughter with her support.
כא
הניח אלמנה ובת ממנה או מאשה אחרת ואין בנכסים כדי שיזונו שתיהן האלמנה ניזונת והבת תשאל על הפתחים. וכן אני אומר שמזונות הבת קודמין לירושת הבן את כתובת אמו שמתה בחיי אביו ואע"פ ששניהם מתנאי הכתובה. וקל וחומר הדברים אם נדחת ירושה של תורה מפני מזונות הבת לא תדחה ירושת הכתובה שהיא תנאי ב"ד מפני מזונות הבת:
22
When a man dies and leaves older daughters and younger daughters, without leaving a son, we do not say that the younger daughters should be granted their sustenance until they reach the age of bagrut, and then the entire estate should be divided equally. Instead, the entire estate should be divided equally [immediately].
כב
מי שמת והניח בנות גדולות וקטנות ולא הניח בן אין אומרים יזונו הקטנות עד שיבגרו ויחלקו שאר הנכסים בשוה אלא כולן חולקות בשוה:
FOOTNOTES
1.
This and the laws that follow are relevant only in situations where a man has children from two different wives and he did not divorce the wives before their death. When a man's wives die before he does, he inherits their nedunyah and is not required to pay them the money due them by virtue of their ketubot. Nevertheless, our Sages ordained that a woman's children should benefit from her investment in the household and the commitment made to her. Hence, before the father's estate is divided among all the heirs, the children of each of his wives are entitled to receive the monies mentioned above.
2.
Note the statements of the Ramah (Even HaEzer 111:16), who states that this practice is not followed in the present age. The rationale is that the practice was instituted in the Talmudic era to encourage a father to give his daughter a generous nedunyah. (For because of this practice, he can be assured that the money he gives will remain within his family.) In the present age, however, this encouragement is not necessary, for it has become customary for parents to endow their daughters generously before marriage.
3.
As the Rambam stated in Chapter 16, Halachah 7, the children's inheritance of the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah applies only when there is enough landed property remaining in the estate to pay for both ketubot.
From the wording of the Rambam, it would, nevertheless, appear that it is sufficient that the additional dinar be movable property; it need not be landed property. This indeed is the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 111:14). If this is the intent, it would reflect a change in the Rambam's decision from his ruling in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ketubot 10:3).
4.
I.e., once the woman took the oath required of her, the money due her by virtue of her ketubah is considered to be justly hers. Her children then inherit her property.
5.
In this instance, they are entitled to inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah even if the estate is not large enough to allow for the division of the inheritance according to Scriptural law afterwards (Ketubot 91a; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 111:8).
6.
Since the woman did not take the oath required of a widow, there is room to suspect that her husband already gave her the money due her by virtue of her ketubah, or that she took possession of it herself. Therefore, her sons are not entitled to collect her ketubah.
7.
Nor are the sons entitled to inherit the money due their mothers by virtue of their ketubot based on the provision mentioned above, because this is applicable only when the woman dies in her husband's lifetime.
8.
The sons of the widow who did not take the oath are not entitled to inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah.
9.
See Chapter 21, Halachah 18, which states that the daughters are granted this right even when their father divorced their mother before his death, and they took up residence with their mother.
10.
Once the daughter is consecrated by a husband, her support is no longer the responsibility of her father's estate. (See also Halachah 15.)
11.
During a man's lifetime, he is required only to provide his daughters with their sustenance until the age of six (Chapter 12, Halachah 14). After his death, however, they are entitled to support until the age of twelve and a half.
12.
From the Rambam's wording, it would appear that he maintains that a girl forfeits her right to support if she becomes consecrated while she is a minor. This ruling is not universally accepted by the Rishonim. The Maggid Mishneh quotes Rabbenu Chananel and the Rashba as saying that she does not forfeit this right in such an instance. The Tur (Even HaEzer 112) mentions a third view: that if she consecrates herself, she forfeits her support, but if her brothers are involved in her consecration, she is still entitled to support. The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 112:3) quotes the Rambam's view, while the Ramah mentions the other opinions.
13.
Although during his lifetime, her father is entitled to her earnings and the objects she discovers, this right is not given to his sons. The rationale is that the father would prefer for his daughter to receive her own earnings than to have them given to his sons.
14.
Although a widow is not required to take an oath when collecting her support, this is because she is required to take an oath when she collects the money due her by virtue of her ketubah. Therefore, one might think that a daughter would be required to take such an oath. Indeed, the Beit Shmuel 112:15, based on the statements of Tosafot, requires that such an oath be taken.
15.
The Ra'avad and the Maggid Mishneh question the Rambam's ruling with regard to the support the man's daughters receive for their sustenance. They maintain that this support is not dependent on whether the mother receives the money due her by virtue of her ketubah (and therefore, the waiver of that payment has no effect). The Rambam's opinion appears to be based on his statements in Chapter 17, Halachah 19, in which he states that a woman who waives payment of her ketubah forgoes all the provisions of her ketubah. The Shulchan Aruch does not mention this issue, and the Ramah (Even HaEzer 112:1) cites the opinion of the Ra'avad.
16.
The rationale is that the obligation took effect at the time of his marriage, and he is incapable of negating it at a later time.
17.
An oral will refers to a person's disposition of his property verbally before his death. As explained in Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah, Chapter 8, our Sages ordain that such a disposition of property is acceptable.
18.
Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 8:8. (See also Hilchot Nachalot 8:9.)
19.
The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam with regard to the rights of a person's sons and daughters. Nevertheless, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 111:17) follows the Rambam's view.
20.
This ruling has been contested by other authorities on several grounds. First, the Ra'avad challenges the Rambam, asking: how is it possible for a girl who nullifies her marriage through mi'un to have a child? By definition, mi'un is possible when a girl is a k'tanah, a minor (see Chapter 4, Halachah 7), and while she is a minor it is impossible for her to conceive a child. He explains that Ketubot 53b is speaking about a girl who leaves her husband through mi'un - she is entitled to return to her deceased father's home and receive support for her sustenance.
Second, the Maggid Mishneh accepts the fact that a girl can conceive a child while a minor, but asks: Since the mother nullifies the marriage through mi'un, it is as if her husband had never had any obligations to her at all. Her ketubah and all of its provisions are nullified entirely. Why then is his estate liable for the support of his daughter after his death? See the Beit Shmuel 112:11 for a possible explanation.
21.
When a man dies childless, his brother (the yavam) inherits his entire estate, and that estate is responsible for the ketubah of the yevamah (the widow who is married by the yavam). If a yevamah bears a girl, the deceased brother's estate is not liable for the girl's support after her father's (the yavam's) death, for she is not the daughter of the deceased brother. Nor is the yavam's estate responsible for her support, for he never gave a ketubah to the yevamah.
Note, however, the Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 112:5), which states that if the deceased brother did not leave an estate, the yavam must give the yevamah a ketubah from his own property. Hence, in this instance, his estate becomes liable for the support of his daughters.
22.
Since the mother's marriage is forbidden, our Sages did not grant her a ketubah. Ketubot 54a questions whether they also did not grant her the rights stemming from the ketubah's provisions, including her daughter's right to support in this instance. Since the question is left unresolved, her daughter is not granted this privilege.
23.
Who was born before the couple entered the phase of nisu'in (Shulchan Aruch, loc. cit.). Since the ketubah takes effect only after nisu'in, this daughter is not entitled to support.
24.
The term anusah refers to a virgin who was raped. The rapist is required to marry her and is forbidden to divorce her (Deuteronomy 22:28). Since he is forbidden to divorce her, she is not granted a ketubah. Our Sages (ibid.) question whether or not she was not granted the provisions of a ketubah. This question is also left unresolved, and her daughter is not granted the privilege of deriving her livelihood from her father's estate. Similarly, the daughter of a woman who was raped and never married by the rapist is not entitled to support from her father's estate.
25.
The Beit Shmuel 112:6 interprets the Rambam's wording as implying that after the girl reaches the age of bagrut, she is required to support herself.
The Beit Shmuel also mentions that other Rishonim interpret Ketubot 53b, the source for this halachah, differently. According to their interpretation, the husband is not liable for the girl's support. If the husband desires, continues the Beit Shmuel, he may rely on this opinion.
26.
It is as if he had made a commitment to support her when he consecrated her.
27.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 112:4) cites the Rambam's view. The Ramah differs, however, citing the opinion of Rabbenu Asher, who maintains that from the time a girl becomes consecrated after her father's death, and onward, she is not entitled to support from his estate.
28.
The estate is given to them, and they may use it as they see fit. They are, however, forbidden to sell the property except in an extreme situation - e.g., to use the proceeds to redeem captives (Ramah, Even HaEzer 112:11). Moreover, if the court sees that the sons are spending lavishly and abusing the resources of the estate, they should set aside the daughters' portion.
29.
They are entrusted to a guardian appointed by the court.
30.
For it is more common for males to beg for alms than for females to do so (Ketubot 67a). This principle is also followed with regard to the distribution of charity. If there is a needy male and a needy female, and the communal fund cannot provide both of them with their needs, the female is given priority (Hilchot Matnot Aniyim 8:15).
31.
The Ramah (Even HaEzer 112:12) states that according to the custom to include within the ketubah a clause stating that the obligations of the estate are binding on movable property as well, the estate is considered to be meager and the support for the daughters is set aside.
32.
I.e., the property should remain in the possession of the sons, and they must continue to provide for their sisters' sustenance. It is not expropriated from the sons and given to a guardian.
33.
The Maggid Mishneh mentions a difference of opinion with regard to the interpretation of the word "afterwards." Rashi (Ketubot 91a) maintains that this means "after the man's death, but before the matter is brought to the court and a guardian appointed." Others (Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi and the Rashba) maintain that even after a guardian is appointed, the property can be given to the heirs if its value increases.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 112:14) quotes the Rambam's wording without relating to this issue. The Ramah mentions the latter view.
34.
The opinion of Tosafot, et al. is that even if the property has been entrusted to a guardian, if it is sold by the heirs the sale is binding. The Ramah (loc. cit.), however, appears to follow the view that the sale is binding only before the property has been entrusted to a guardian.
According to Rabbenu Asher, the daughters have no lien on the money received from the sale. Although Rav Hai Gaon differs, it appears that Rabbenu Asher's view is favored (Chelkat Mechokek 112:30).
35.
See Chapter 23, Halachah 17.
36.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 112:15) states that the payment of the money due the widow by virtue of her ketubah is, however, considered in determining whether the estate is ample or not.
37.
This ruling entitles the sons to derive their sustenance from the estate together with the daughters until the funds are depleted.
38.
According to the Rambam, the property set aside for the widow's support should be given to a third party, and he should follow the guidelines set in Chapter 18, Halachah 21 (Maggid Mishneh).
There are opinions that maintain that property is set aside for the widow's support only when there is a son and a daughter, and the estate is too meager to support both of them. In that instance, since property is being set aside for the daughters' support, and the widow takes precedence over the daughters, property is also set aside for her. When property is not required to be set aside for the daughters, it is not set aside for the widow's support either. Instead, she, the daughters and the sons, all derive their sustenance from the estate together.
The Shulchan Aruch (Even HaEzer 93:4) mentions both opinions, and the Beit Shmuel 93:9 states that the latter view is favored by most authorities. This difference of opinion also leads to another (Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 112:15): Does the obligation to support the widow cause the estate to be considered meager or not? According to the Rambam it does, but according to the other authorities it does not.
Hayom Yom:• English Text | Video Class
Sunday, Kislev 22, 5778 · 10 December 2017
"Today's Day"
Tuesday, Kislev 22, 5703
Torah lessons: Chumash: Vayeishev, Shlishi with Rashi.
Tehillim: 106-107.
Tanya: I speak however (p.xiv)...May this be His will.
A practice instituted by the Rebbe: Every morning after davening - including Shabbat, festivals, Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur - say a portion of Tehillim1 as the book was apportioned for the days of the month. When Tehillim is completed with a minyan - Mourner's Kaddish is said. In a month of 29 days, say the last two portions on the 29th.
FOOTNOTES
1.See "Saying Tehillim," Kehot 1975.
Daily Thought:
Real Idols
Abraham worshipped idols as did his father, Terach. Abraham was an intelligent man, as was Terach. But Abraham came to recognize the falseness of the idols, while Terach stayed behind.
Because Terach never truly believed in the idols and never truly worshipped them. But when Abraham worshipped idols, it was with all his heart, mind and soul, every hour of the day and night. It had to be real.
Everything Abraham did had to be real. And therefore, he found truth. (Siddur Im Dach, Lulav.)
-------
No comments:
Post a Comment