אבן העזר צ״גEven HaEzer 93

Siman 93 of 178 in Even HaEzer — 32 se'ifim

Se’if 1א׳

הַכְּתֻבָּה הֲרֵי הִיא כְּחוֹב שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ זְמַן, וְאֵינָהּ נִגְבֵּית אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתַת הַבַּעַל, אוֹ אִם גֵּרְשָׁהּ. הַגָּה: וְהוּא הַדִּין מַה שֶּׁקִּבֵּל בַּנְּדוּנְיָא. וְעַיֵּן לְעֵיל סִימָן ס"ו סָעִיף י"א. כָּתַב לָהּ מַתָּנוֹת, הֵם נִגְבּוֹת מֵחַיִּים; מִיהוּ, אִם דֶּרֶךְ הַמָּקוֹם לִכְתֹּב כֵּן לְכָבוֹד בְּעָלְמָא וְשֶׁלֹּא לִגְבּוֹתָן מֵחַיִּים, הוֹלְכִין אַחַר הַמִּנְהָג (בְּמֵישָׁרִים בְּשֵׁם גָּאוֹן, וּדְלֹא כָּרַשְׁבָּ"א). וְלֹא יוּכַל הָאָב לְהַתְנוֹת עַל בִּתּוֹ בְּשׁוּם דָּבָר לְאַחַר שֶׁנִּשֵֹּׂאת, אֲבָל אִם הוּא מַשִּׂיאָהּ יָכוֹל לְהַתְנוֹת עַל מַתְּנוֹתֶיהָ לְשַׁנּוֹת מִן הַמִּנְהָג קֹדֶם שֶׁנִּשֵֹּׂאת, כְּפִי רְצוֹנוֹ. וְעַיֵּן בְּחשֶׁן הַמִּשְׁפָּט סִימָן צ"ז סָעִיף כ"ד:

The Ketuba is like a debt that is time bound, and it can only be collected after the death of the husband, or after divorce. Rem"a: The same is true about the dowry (Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 61:11) If he included gifts, they are collected while he is alive. Still, if the local practice is to inlcude gists as a honorific gesture, and to not collect them while he is alive, we follow the local practice (following the view of the Gaon, against the Rashb"a). The father cannot stipulate anything about his daughter after she is married, but if he is marrying her off he can put conditions on her gifts to change from the convention, if he so desires. See (Shulchan Arukh, Chosen Mishpat 97:24)

Se’if 2ב׳

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָיוּ לָה סְפֵק גֵּרוּשִׁין וּמֵת בַּעֲלָהּ, אֵינָהּ נִזּוֹנֵית מִנְּכָסָיו, שֶׁאֵין מוֹצִיאִין מִיַּד הַיּוֹרֵשׁ, מִסָפֵק. אֲבָל בְּחַיֵּי בַּעֲלָהּ יֵשׁ לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת עַד שֶׁתִּתְגָּרֵשׁ גֵּרוּשִׁין גְּמוּרִים:

A woman who had a divorce of a dubious nature, whose husband died, is not sustained from his property, as we do not extract from the inheritor out of uncertainty. But while her husband is living, she is provided with sustenance until he divorces her conclusively.

Se’if 3ג׳

אַלְמָנָה נִזּוֹנֵית מִנִּכְסֵי יוֹרְשִׁין כָּל זְמַן אַלְמְנוּתָהּ, אֲפִלּוּ אִם לֹא נִכְתַּב בִּכְתֻבָּהּ, וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם צִוָּה בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָה: אַל תִּזּוֹן אַלְמְנָתִי מִנְּכָסַי, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ. וְאֵין הַיּוֹרְשִׁים יְכוֹלִין לִפְרֹעַ לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּלְסַלְּקָהּ מֵהַמְּזוֹנוֹת, אֶלָּא הִיא נִזּוֹנֵית עַל כָּרְחָם כָּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְבַּע כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִתְנוּ כֵּן בְּפֵרוּשׁ שֶׁלֹּא תִּזּוֹן אַלְמְנָתוֹ מִנְּכָסָיו, אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מִנְהַג הַמָּקוֹם כֵּן. וִיכוֹלִין בֵּית דִּין לְתַקֵּן בִּמְקוֹמָן שֶׁהַיְתוֹמִים יְסַלְּקוּ אוֹתָהּ כְּשֶׁיִּרְצוּ (בֵּית יוֹסֵף וְרִיבָ"שׁ סִימָן ק"ז):

A widow is provided food from the property of the inheritors the entire time of her widowhood, even if it wasn't written in her marriage contract, and even if he commanded at the time of death, "Don't provide food from my property for my widow," we don't listen to him. And the inheritors are NOT able to pay off to her the marriage contract and remove her from the food, but she is provided food against their will as long as she doesn't claim her marriage contract, unless they explicitly stipulated that his widow will not be provided food from his property, or the custom in the place is such. Rama: And the [Jewish] Court is able to decree in their place that the orphans can remove her when they want (Beit Yosef and Riva"sh Siman 107).

Se’if 4ד׳

הַמַּנִּיחַ אַלְמָנָה וּבַת, מִמֶּנָּה אוֹ מֵאִשָּׁה אַחֶרֶת, וְאֵין בַּנְּכָסִים כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּזּוֹנוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן, הָאַלְמָנָה נִזּוֹנֵית וְהַבַּת תִּשְׁאַל עַל הַפְּתָחִים. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּבֵין שֶׁהַנְּכָסִים מְרֻבִּין בֵּין שֶׁהֵן מוּעָטִים, אִם יֵשׁ אַלְמָנָה וּבֵן אוֹ אַלְמָנָה וּבַת, תִּזּוֹן הִיא עִם הַבֵּן אוֹ עִם הַבַּת עַד שֶׁיֹּאכְלוּ הַנְּכָסִים; וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם תִּנָּשֵּׂא הַבַּת וּמַכְנֶסֶת הַנְּכָסִים לַבַּעַל, הִיא תִּזּוֹן מֵהֶם אֲפִלּוּ אַחַר מִיתַת הַבַּת. אֲבָל אִם יֵשׁ אַלְמָנָה וּבֵן וּבַת, וְהַנְּכָסִים מוּעָטִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּזּוֹנוּ הַבַּת וְהַבֵּן עַד שֶׁתִּבְגֹּר הַבַּת, אָז יִדָּחוּ הַבֵּן וְהַבַּת וְתִזּוֹן הָאַלְמָנָה לְבַדָּהּ עַד שֶׁתִּגְבֶּה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. הַגָּה: וּבְמָקוֹם שֶׁהָאַלְמָנָה דּוֹחָה הַבָּנוֹת, מוֹצִיאִין לָאַלְמָנָה מָזוֹן עַד זְמַן שֶׁאוֹמְדִין בֵּית דִּין שֶׁרְאוּיָה לִחְיוֹת, אִם זְקֵנָה וְאִם יַלְדָּה, וְנוֹתְנִין בְּיַד שָׁלִישׁ וְהוּא מְפַרְנְסָהּ אֶחָד לִשְׁלֹשִים יוֹם (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם הַמַּגִּיד מִשְׁנֶה שֶׁכֵּן כָּתַב בְּשֵׁם הָרַמְבַּ"ן והרשב"א):

When someone leave behinds a widow and a daughter, whether the daughter is hers or from a previous wife, and there isn't enough in the estate to provide for them both, the widow is supported and the daughter must beg. But some say that whether the estate is large or small, if there's a widow and a child, whether a son or a daughter, she is supported with the child, son or daughter, until the money runs out; and even if the daughter gets married and shares the estate with her husband, she [the widow] is still supported from them even after the death of the daughter. But if there is a widow and a son and a daughter, and the estate is small enough that they can't be supported until the daughter reaches majority age, then the son and daughter are sent away (?) and the widow alone is supported until she collects the worth of her Ketubah. Gloss: And in the case where the widow comes before the daughters, the widow is brought food until the point at ______

Se’if 5ה׳

אַלְמָנָה שֶׁתָּבְעָה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ בְּבֵית דִּין, אֵין לָהּ עוֹד מְזוֹנוֹת, וַאֲפִלּוּ לֹא פְּרָעוּהָ. אֲבָל תָּבְעָה שֶׁלֹּא בְּבֵית דִּין, לֹא הִפְסִידָה (טוּר). וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ תָּבְעָה בְּבֵית דִּין לֹא הִפְסִידָה, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן תָּבְעָה מֵעַצְמָהּ, אֲבָל אִם תָּבְעָה מִדֹּחַק, שֶׁלֹּא נָתְנוּ לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת, אוֹ שֶׁרִמּוּהָ וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ: פְּלוֹנִי חָפֵץ לִשָּׂא אוֹתָךְ, וּמֵחֲמַת זֶה תָּבְעָה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ אוֹ כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה, לֹא הִפְסִידָה מְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ. הַגָּה: הַנִּשְׁבַּעַת עַל כְּתֻבָּתָהּ לִפְנֵי בֵּית דִּין לֹא הִפְסִידָה מְזוֹנוֹת, דִּשְׁבוּעָתָהּ לָא הָוֵי כִּתְבִיעָה (הַגָּהוֹת אַלְפָסִי סוֹף פֶּרֶק נַעֲרָה):

A widow who sues [the estate] for her Ketubah is no longer entitled to support from the estate, even if she was not paid. However, if she merely demanded it outside of Bet Din she does not lose [her right to support.] (Tur) Others say that she does not lose it even if she sues in Bet Din unless she sued by choice, but if she sued under pressure because they [the heirs] were not supporting her or because they tricked her [by saying] so-and-so wants to marry you and therefore she sued for the Ketubah (so that she could support herself or have a dowry for her remarriage) or or for similar reasons, she does not lose her right to support. Rema: A woman who swears before the court as to her ketubah does not lose her right to support because swearing [as to the value] does not constitute a claim or suit.

…and 27 more se'ifim in this siman.

Become a premium member

Or start free — a free account opens your first 5 gematria searches in full. Create free account

The daily learning is free on your account, every day.

Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer — Torat Emet 357 edition, via Sefaria — public domain

English: Sefaria Community Translation — CC0

English rendered from the Hebrew for this app — The Gematria's own rendering program. A rendering of the words, not a ruling; practical halacha is learned with a rav