כתובות ט׳Ketubot 9

Mishnah

משנה: הַכּוֹתֵב לְאִשְׁתּוֹ דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת וְאִם מֵתָה יוֹרְשָׁהּ. אִם כֵּן לָמָּה כָתַב לָהּ דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ שֶׁאִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה קַיָים. כָּתַב לָהּ דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עָלַיִיךְ וּבְפֵירוֹתֵיהֶן הֲרֵי זֶה אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת בְּחַיֶּיהָ וְאִם מֵתָה יוֹרְשָׁהּ. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר לְעוֹלָם הוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּירֵי פֵירוֹת עַד שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב לָהּ דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבְפֵירוֹתֵיהֶן וּבְפֵירֵי פֵירוֹתֵיהֶן עַד עוֹלָם. כָּתַב לָהּ דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבְפֵירוֹתֵיהֶן וּבְפֵירֵי פֵירוֹתֵיהֶן בְּחַיַּיִךְ וּבְמוֹתֵךְ אֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת בְּחַיֶּיהָ וְאִם מֵתָה אֵינוֹ יוֹרְשָׁהּ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר מֵתָה יוֹרְשָׁהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִתְנָה עַל מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה וְכָל הַמַּתְנֶה עַל מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל.

MISHNAH: If somebody writes to his wife: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties,” he receives their revenues and if she should die, he inherits from her. In this case, why did he write “I shall have nothing to do with your properties”? If she sold or gave away, it is valid. If he wrote to her: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties, nor with their revenues,” he does not receive their revenues during her lifetime but if she should die, he inherits from her. Rebbi Jehudah says, he continues to receive the investment results of her revenues unless he writes: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties, nor with their revenues, nor with revenues derived from revenues, without limits.” If he wrote “I shall have nothing to do with your properties, nor with their revenues, nor with revenues derived from revenues during your lifetime and after your death,” he does not receive the revenues during her lifetime and does not inherit from her after her death. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, if she dies, he should inherit from her since he made a condition contradicting what is written in the Torah, and anybody’s condition contradicting what is written in the Torah is invalid.

Halakhah

הלכה: הַכּוֹתֵב לְאִשְׁתּוֹ דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵם רִבִּי יַנַּיי. בְּשֶׁלֹּא כָנַס. אֲבָל אִם כָּנַס אֵין אָדָם מְאַבֵּד אֶת זְכוּתוֹ בְלָשׁוֹן הַזֶּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. מִילְתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חִיָיה. הָאוֹמֵר. יָדַיי מְסוּלָּקוֹת מִן הַשָּׂדֶה הַזּוֹ וְרַגְלַיי מְסוּלָּקוֹת מִן הַשָּׂדֶה הַזּוֹ. לֹא אָמַר וְלֹא כְלוּם. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּן בַּר חִיָיה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְאַבֵּד אֶת זְכוּתוֹ בְלָשׁוֹן הַזֶּה. דְּתַנִינָן תַּמָּן. מִי שֶׁהָיָה נָשׂוּי שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים וּמָכַר אֶת שָׂדֶהוּ וְכָתְבָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לַלּוֹקֵחַ. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עִמָּךְ. הַשְּׁנִיָיה מוֹצִיאָה מִיַּד הַלּוֹקֵחַ. הָא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה לֹא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כָּל גַּרְמָהּ אָמְרָה שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְאַבֵּד אֶת זְכוּתוֹ בְלָשׁוֹן הַזֶּה. אָלָּא כָאן אֲפִילוּ הַשְּׁנִיָיה לֹא תוֹצִיא מִיַּד הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. וְלָמָּה אֵין הָרִאשׁוֹנָה מוֹצִיאָה מִיַּד הַלּוֹקֵחַ. שֶׁכֵּן הִיא כוֹתֶבֶת לוֹ. כָּל עֶרֶר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בַשָּׂדֶה זוֹ אַל יְהִי לִי עִמָּךְ כְּלוּם.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody writes to his wife: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: If he did not take her in. But if he took her in, nobody can lose his rights by these expressions. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, this is the word of Rebbi Ḥiyya: He who says that “my hands are removed from this field, my feet are removed from this field,” did not say anything. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: Does a Mishnah imply that nobody can lose his rights by these expressions? Did we not state there: “If somebody was married to two wives when he sold a field and the first one wrote for the buyer: I have no claims on you, the second one can take it away from the buyer’s hands,” this implies, not the first one. He said to him, that text itself implies that nobody can lose his rights by these expressions, but here the second wife cannot take anything away from the first, and why can the first one not take it away from the buyer’s hands? For she writes to him: For any complaint I shall have regarding this field, I shall have nothing against you.

כָּתַב לָהּ וְכָתַבְתָּהּ לוֹ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְאַבֵּד זְכוּתוֹ כָּךְ אִשָּׁה אֵינָהּ מְאַבֶּדֶת זְכוּתָהּ. כָּתַב לָהּ מִן הָאֵירוּסִין וּמִן הַנִּישּׂוּאִין. פְּלוּגְתָא דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי וּבֵית הִלֵּל. עַל דַּעְתּוֹן דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי תִּמְכּוֹר. עַל דַּעְתּוֹן דְּבֵית הִלֵּל לֹא תִמְכּוֹר.

If he wrote for her and she wrote for him. Just as he did not lose his rights so she did not lose her rights. If he wrote to her “from preliminary and definitive marriage”, that is the disagreement between the Houses of Shammai and Hillel. In the opinion of the House of Shammai she shall sell; in the opinion of the House of Hillel she should not sell.

רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. כָּתַב לָהּ. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ. וְנָפְלוּ לָהּ לְאַחַר מִיכֵּן. מָהוּ. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם מַתְנֶה עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי בּוּן בַּר חִיָיה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. מִזְּכוּתוֹ אַתְּ לָמֵד חִייוּבוֹ. אֶלָּא לֹא כָתַב לָהּ שַׁנְיָיה [הִיא] אֵין לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. הֲוֵי מִזְּכוּתוֹ אַתְּ לָמֵד חִיּוּבוֹ. רִבִּי לֵוִי בַּר חַיְיתָא בְעָא. כָּתַב לָו. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִנְכָסַיִיךְ הָעֲתִידִין לִיפּוֹל לִיךְ. מָה הֵן. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם מַתְנֶה עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָעוֹלָם.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: If he wrote to her: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties,” and she inherited properties afterwards, what is the rule? Can a person put a condition on something not in existence? Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said before Rebbi Ze‘ira: From his rights you can infer his obligations. If he had not written to her, would it make any difference, would he not receive its yield? That means, from his rights you can infer his obligations. Rebbi Levi bar Ḥaita asked: If he wrote to her: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties which you shall inherit in the future,” what is the rule? Can a person put a condition on something not in existence?

מָכְרָה פֵירוֹת מְחוּבָּרִין לְקַרְקַע. רִבִּי אָחָא אָמַר. כְּמוֹכֶרֶת פֵּירוֹת תְּלוּשִׁין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. בְּמוֹכֶרֶת אֶחָד מֵעֲשָׂרָה בַקַּרְקַע. רִבִּי זְעוּרָא רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם רַב. הַכּוֹתֵב שָׂדֶה מַתָּנָה לְאִשְׁתּוֹ אֵינָהּ מוֹכֶרֶת פֵּירוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן. אֵילּוּ הֵן פֵּירֵי פֵירוֹת. מוֹכֵר פֵּירוֹת וְלוֹקֵחָ קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת. רִבִּי אִמִּי בְעָא. אִילּוּ אַחֵר כּוֹתֵב לָהּ יֵשׁ לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. הוּא שֶׁכָּתַב לָהּ לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן. לֹא אָמַר אֶלָּא כוֹתֵב. אֲבָל מוֹכֵר לֹא. מַה בֵין כּוֹתֵב מַה בֵין מוֹכֵר. עִולָּה הָיָה רוֹצֶה לְהַבְרִיחַ מְזוֹנוֹת מִן הָאִשָּׁה.

If she sold produce connected to the ground: Rav Aḥa said, as if she sold harvested [produce]; Rebbi Yose said, as if she sold a tenth of the ground. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: If somebody writes a field over to his wife, she cannot sell the produce. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, a baraita says so “What are revenues derived from revenues? He sells the produce, buys real estate, and eats its revenue.” Rebbi Immi asked: If another person had written [real estate] over to her, would he not receive the revenue? If he himself wrote, not so much more! He said only “wrote over”, but not “sold”. What is the difference between one who writes and one who sells? He tried to find a reason to hide food from the wife.

נִיחָא עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה בְּשֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִּנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבַפֵּירוֹת. אֵין לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. אֲפִילוּ כָתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בְשָׂדֶה זוֹ וּבְפֵירוֹתֶיהָ. אֵין לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. נִיחָא עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרַבָּנִין בְּשֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בְשָׂדֶה זוֹ וּבְפֵירוֹתֶיהָ. יֵשׁ לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. אֲפִילוּ כָתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִּנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבַפֵּירוֹתֵיהֶן. יֵשׁ לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. דָּמַר רַב זְעִירָא רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם רַב. הַכּוֹתֵב שָׂדֶה מַתָּנָה לְאִשְׁתּוֹ אֵין לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָא. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן פֵּירֵי פֵירוֹת. מוֹכֵר פֵּירוֹת וְלוֹקֵחַ קַרְקַע וְאוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִּנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבַפֵּירוֹתֵיהֶן. לֹא כְּכוֹתֵב שָׂדֶה מַתָּנָה לְאִשְׁתּוֹ הוּא. אַתְּ אָמַר. לֹא פֵירוֹת וְלֹא פֵירֵי פֵירוֹת. הֲוֵי לֹא שַׁנְיָיא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה בְּשֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עַל שָׂדֶה זוֹ וּבְפֵירוֹתֵיהֶן. בְּשֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִּנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבַפֵּירוֹתֵיהֶן. אֵין לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת. וְדִכְוָותֵיהּ לְרַבָּנִן לֹא שַׁנְיָיא. בֵּין שֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בִּנְכָסַיִיךְ וּבַפֵּירוֹתֵיהֶן. בֵּין שֶׁכָּתַב. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בַשָּׂדֶה זוֹ וּבְפֵירוֹתֵיהֶן. יֵשׁ לוֹ אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת.

It is reasonable according to Rebbi Jehudah, if he wrote: “I shall have nothing to do with your properties and the revenues,” that he cannot take the revenues. Even if he wrote: “I shall have nothing to do with this field and its yield,” he cannot eat its yield. It is reasonable according to the rabbis; if he wrote: “I shall have nothing to do with this field and its yield,” can he eat its yield? Even if he wrote, “I shall have nothing to do with your properties and its yields,” can he eat its yield? Let us hear from the following, as Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rav Jehudah said in the name of Rav: If somebody writes a field over to his wife, he has no right to its yield. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, a baraita says so “What are revenues derived from revenues? He sells the produce, buys real estate, and eats its revenue.” Since he wrote, “I shall have nothing to do with your properties and their yields,” is that not as if he wrote a field over to his wife, and you say, he has neither revenue nor revenue from revenue! That means, there is no difference in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah whether he wrote “I shall have nothing to do with this field and its yield,” or he wrote “I shall have nothing to do with your properties and their revenues,” he cannot take any revenue. Similarly, for the rabbis it makes no difference whether he wrote “I shall have nothing to do with your properties and their revenues,” or he wrote “I shall have nothing to do with this field and its yield,” he can take its yield.

רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רַב. הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. אֲבָל לֹא לְעִנְיָין דְּבָרִים. הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל דְּאָמַר. אִם מֵתָה יְרוֹשְׁתָהּ. אֲבָל דְּבָרִים שֶׁהִתְנָה עַל מַה שֶׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה. וְכָל הַמַּתְנֶה עַל הַכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל. בִּתְנָאֵי גּוּף. אֲבָל בִּתְנָאֵי מָמוֹן תְּנָאוֹ קַיָים. וְזֶה תְנַאי מָמוֹן הוּא. וְלָמָּה אָמְרוּ. תְּנָאוֹ בָטֵל. שֶׁבְּסוֹף הוּא זָכָה בָהֶן. רִבִּי אִימִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בְּדִין הָיָה שֶׁאִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה שֶׁיְּהֵא מִכְרָהּ קַיָים. שֶׁבְּסוֹף הוּא זוֹכֶה בָהֶן. וְלָמָּה אָמְרוּ בָטֵל. שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא אִשָּׁה מוֹכֶרֶת נְכָסִים מִשֶּׁלְּבַעֲלָהּ וְאוֹמֶרֶת. שֶׁלִּי הֵן.

Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, but not in the matter of words. Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel for he said, if she dies he inherits from her, but in matters of words, “since he made a condition contradicting what is written in the Torah, and anybody’s condition contradicting what is written in the Torah is invalid,” in personal matters. But in money matters, one’s stipulations are valid and that is a money matter! Why did we say that the condition is invalid? Because in the end he acquired it. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The law should have been that if she sold or gave it away it should be valid, for [the buyer] acquired it. Why did they say it is invalid? That a wife should not sell her husband’s property and say, it is mine.

רִבִּי [יוֹסְטִינֵי] הֲוָה לֵיהּ עוֹבְדָא וּשְׁאִיל לְרַבָּנִין. אָמְרִין לֵיהּ. פּוּק מִנְּכָסֵיךְ. שְׁאַל לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶן לָקִישׁ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. עוּל בִּנְכָסֵיךְ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. הֵיי לוֹן רַבָּנִין. הָא רַב הָא רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן הָא רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. רַבָּנִין דְּרִבִּי יוֹסְטִינֵה.

Rebbi Justinus had a case and he asked the rabbis who told him, leave you properties. He asked Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, who told him, enter your properties. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: Who are those rabbis? What about Rav, Rebbi Joḥanan, and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? He said to him, Rebbi Justinus’s rabbis.

בְּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. מֵתָה מִי יוֹרְשָׁהּ. אִלֵּין. אֲחֶיהָ יוֹרְשִׁין אוֹתָהּ.

They asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: Following the Sages, if she died who inherits from her? Those, her brothers, inherit from her.

רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעוּרָא. הָאַחִין שֶׁחָלְקוּ אַלְמָנָה נִיזּוֹנֶת מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן. שֶׁלֹּא תֹאמַר. יֵעָשׂוּ כְּמוֹ שֶׁמָּכְרוּ וְלֹא תְהֵא נִיזּוֹנֶת מִשֶּׁלָּהֶן. פְּשִׁיטָא. מָכְרוּ שֶׁלָּהֶן מָכְרוּ.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: If the brothers divided [the inheritance], the widow is supported by them. For you should not say, they should be considered as if they had sold the properties and the widow would not be supported by these, since it is obvious that if they sold, they sold their own property.

רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. כְּתִיב אִם יִהְיֶה הַיּוֹבֵל לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהַיּוֹבֵל נוֹהֵג הַנְחָלוֹת חוֹזְרוֹת וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁאֵין הַיּוֹבֵל נוֹהֵג אֵין הַנְחָלוֹת חוֹזְרוֹת. אַדְּרַבָּה. אָתָא מֵימַר לָךְ. אֲפִילוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהַיּוֹבֵל נוֹהֵג וְהַנְחָלוֹת חוֹזְרוֹת יְרוּשַׁת תּוֹרָה אֵינָהּ חוֹזֶרֶת.

Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Abbahu: It is written: “If the Jubilee will happen for the Children of Israel.” If the institution of the Jubilee exists, inheritances return; if the institution of the Jubilee does not exist, inheritances do not return. It is the opposite way, it comes to tell you that even if the institution of the Jubilee exists and inheritances return, inheritance by biblical law does not return!

רִבִּי הִלֵּל בַּר פָּזִי בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מָכַר הוּא וּמֵתָה הִיא. אָמַר לוֹ. מִכְרֹה בָטֵל. לְבֵן שֶׁמָּכַר בְּחַיֵּי אָבִיו וּמֵת אָבִיו. מָכְרָה הִיא וּמֵת הוּא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִכְרָהּ קַיָים. לְאָב שֶׁמָּכַר בְּחַיֵּי בְנוֹ וּמֵת בְּנוֹ. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר מַרְיָיא בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹנָה. מָכְרָה לְבַעֲלָהּ מָהוּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מִדְּאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי (יוּדָה). הָדָא אָמְרָה מִכְרָהּ מֶכֶר. תַּנֵּי. הָאוֹמֵר. יִינָתְנוּ נְכָסַיי לִפְלוֹנִי. מֵת פְּלוֹנִי לִפְלוֹנִי. [מֵת פְּלוֹנִי לִפְלוֹנִי.]. מֵת הָרִאשׁוֹן יִינָתְנוּ לַשֵּׁינִי. מֵת הַשֵּׁינִי יִינָתְנוּ לַשְּׁלִישִׁי. מֵת הַשֵּׁינִי בְחַיֵי הָרִאשׁוֹן. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁלֹּא זָכָה בָהֶן הַשֵּׁינִי לֹא זָכָה בָהֶן הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. אָמַר לֵיהּ. כָּךְ פִּירֵשׁ רִבִי הוֹשַׁעְיָה אֲבִי הַמִּשְׁנָה. אַחֲרָיו לִפְלוֹנִי וְאַחֲרָיו לִפְלוֹנִי. אִילּוּ אָמַר. מֵת הַשְּׁלִישִׁי בְחַיֵי שֵׁינִי. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁלֹּא זָכָה בָהֶן הַשֵּׁינִי לֹא זָכוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין יְאוּת אַשְׁכָּחַת אֲמַר. אַחֲרָיו לִפְלוֹנִי אַחֲרָיו לִפְלוֹנִי. תַּנֵּי. הָרִאשׁוֹן מוֹכֵר קַרְקַע וְלוֹקֵחַ פֵּירוֹת דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי. רַבָּן שִמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר. אֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא אֲכִילַת פֵּירוֹת בִּלְבַד. חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. מִן מַה דְּאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה. הֲלָכָה כְרִבִּי. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁאֵין נוֹתְנִין לֹו כְמַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מְרַע. הָכָא אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְהָדָא אִשָּׁה מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁמְּזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ עַל בַּעֲלָהּ לֹא כְמַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מְרַע הִיא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ עַל בַּעֲלָהּ בְּרָאוּי לָהּ. מַאֲכָל מְשַׁח וּמֶלַח. וְהִיא בָעְיָיא מְזַבְּנָה וּמֵיכַל תַּרְנוגֹלִין. הָדָא אָמְרָה שֶׁאִם בִּיקֵּשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן מְזַבְּנָה וּמֵיכַל תַּרְנוגֹלִין יִזְבַּן. אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא. תַּנֵּי תַּמָן. קְבוּרָה כִמְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אֲמַר תַּמָּן. מוֹכֵר קַרְקַע וְלוֹקֵחַ מְזוֹנוֹת. אַף הָכָא. מוֹכֵר קַרְקַע וְלוֹקֵחַ קְבוּרָה.

Rebbi Hillel bar Pazi asked before Rebbi Yose: If he sold and then she died? He said to him, his sale is invalid; it is as if a son sold during his father’s lifetime and then the father died. If she sold and then he died? He said to him, her sale is valid; it is as if a father sold during his son’s lifetime and then the son died. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Marius asked before Rebbi Jonah: What is the situation if she sold to her husband? He said, since Ḥizqiah said, practice follows Rebbi Judah, this implies that her sale is a sale. It was stated: “If somebody says, my property should be given to X, if X died to Y, [if Y died to Z]. If the first one died the properties should be given to the second, if the second died they should be given to the third. If the second one died during the first’s lifetime; since the second never acquired them, the third cannot acquire them.” He said to him, so did Rebbi Hoshaia, the father of the Mishnah, explain: After him to X, after him to Y; it is as if stated: if the third died during the second’s lifetime, since the second one did not acquire his heirs cannot acquire, one really could say: After him to X, after him to Y. It was stated: “Rebbi says, the first one may sell the real estate and buy movables. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he has only the usufruct.” Ḥizqiah said, practice follows Rebbi. Rebbi Mana said, since Ḥizqiah said, practice follows Rebbi, that implies that he cannot dispose of it by a death-bed will. So said Rebbi Mana before Rebbi Yose: Since this woman’s upkeep is her husband’s responsibility, is it not like a gift of sick persons? He said to him, her upkeep is what is necessary for her: food, oil, and salt. But she wants to sell and buy chickens. This means that if the first one wanted to sell and buy chickens, he may sell. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, her burial is equal to her upkeep. Since you said there, he may sell real estate and buy food, so he may sell real estate and buy a burial.

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְאִילֵּין דְּכָּתְבִין. אִין מִיתַת דְּלָא בְנִין יְהֵא מִדְּלָהּ חֲזַר לְבֵית אָבִיהָ. תְּנָאי מָמוֹן הוּא וּתְנָאוֹ קַיָים.

Rebbi Yose said: Those who write “if she should die childless, her property should return to her father’s family” write a monetary condition which is a valid condition.

Mishnah

משנה: מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אִשְׁתּוֹ וּבַעַל חוֹב וְיוֹרְשִׁין וְהָיָה לוֹ פִיקָּדוֹן אוֹ מִלְוָה בְּיַד אֲחֵרִים רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר יִינָּתְנוּ לַכּוֹשֵׁל שֶׁבָּהֶן. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר אֵין מְרַחֲמִין בַּדִּין אֶלָּא יִינָּתְנוּ לַיּוֹרְשִׁין שֶׁכּוּלָּן צְרִיכִין שְׁבוּעָה וְאֵין הַיּוֹרְשִׁין צְרִיכִין שְׁבוּעָה.

MISHNAH: If somebody died and left his wife, a creditor, and heirs, and he was owed a deposit or a debt by a third party, Rebbi Ṭarphon says, these should be given to the weakest among them. Rebbi Aqiba says, one does not show mercy in law! But these should be given to the heirs for all others have to swear, only the heirs do not have to swear.

Halakhah

הלכה: מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ אִשָּׁה כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָה אָמַר. לַכּוֹשֶׁל שֶׁבִּרְאָיוֹתָיו. כְּגוֹן מַלְוֶה בְעֵדִים וּמַלְוֶה בִשְׁטָר יִינָּתְנוּ לְמַּלוֶה בְעֵדִים. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. לַכּוֹשֵׁל בְּגוּפוֹ. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ הֲוָה עָתִיר. כְּגוֹן אִילֵּין דְּבַר אַנְדְּרַאי. אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא. לַכּוֹשֵׁל בְּגוּפוֹ וְעָנִי. כְּהָדָא. קְּרֵיבָתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אַבָּא יְהָבוּ לֵיהּ מִשֵּׁם כּוֹשֵׁל. אַייתֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ עַבְדּוֹי דְּרִבִּי יוּדָן נְשִׂיָיא וַאַפִּיק מִינֵּיהּ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן הֲוָה מִיסְתַּמֵּיךְ עַל רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מַה נַעֲשֶׂה בְּאוֹתָהּ הָעֲנִיָיה. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אַייתֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ עַבְדּוֹי דְּרִבִּי יוּדָן נְשִׂיָיא וַאַפִּיק מִינָּהּ. וְיָפֶה נַעֲשֶׂה. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. אִי נֹאמַר. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כְּדַעְתֵּיהּ וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן כְּדַעְתֵּיהּ. דְּאִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן. הַכֹּל מוֹדִין שֶׁאִם טָעוּ בְּשִׁיקּוּל הַדַּעַת שֶׁאֵין מַחֲזִירִין. מִדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה מַחֲזִירִין. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּטָעוּת מִשְׁנָה. שֶׁרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. בְּטָעוּת מִשְׁנָה שִׁיקּוּל הַדַּעַת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. טָעוּת מִשְׁנָה דְּבַר תּוֹרָה. הִיא טָעוּת מִשְׁנָה הִיא טָעוּת זְקֵינִים.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody died and left a wife,” etc. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the weakest in his claim. For example, one lent before witnesses, the other lent on a mortgage document; it should be given to the one who lent before witnesses. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the weakest in his body. Think about it, if he is rich, like those of the family Andreas. Rebbi Aḥa said, the weakest in his body and poor. As the following: They gave to a relative of Rebbi Samuel bar Abba as the weakest. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish brought slaves of Rebbi Jehuda the Prince and took it away from her. Rebbi Joḥanan was leaning on Rebbi Simeon bar Abba and said, what was done with that poor woman? He said to him, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish brought slaves of Rebbi Jehuda the Prince and took it away from her. Was he justified in doing this? Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: Should we say that Rebbi Joḥanan follows his doctrine and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish his own? Since they disagree: Everybody agrees that if they err in arguments, one does not reverse. In the words of the Torah, one reverses. Where do they disagree? If one errs in a Mishnah, for Rebbi Joḥanan says, an error in Mishnah is like an error in arguments, but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, an error in Mishnah is like an error in words of the Torah. What is said of the Mishnah is also said of words of the Elders.

הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁפְּטוּרִין מִן הַשְּׁבוּעָה. זוֹ תוֹרָה וְזוֹ אֵינָהּ תּוֹרָה.

Think of it, if they were exempt from swearing? One is biblical, the other is not biblical.