Eine Witwe verlangt die Zahlung [ihrer Kethuba] vom Eigentum der Waisen nur mit einem Eid [dass sie nichts davon erhalten hat]. Sie (Beth-Din) verboten es, ihr den Eid zu leisten. [Weil sie sich für die Waisenkinder anstrengte, begründete sie ihren Schwur, dass sie nichts erhalten hatte, selbst wenn sie einen kleinen Betrag erhalten hatte, und fühlte, dass sie ihn für ihre Anstrengungen erhalten hatte und nicht als Bezahlung der Kethuba. Deshalb würden sie es unterlassen, ihr den Eid zu leisten, und sie würde ihre Kethuba verlieren.] R. Gamliel, der Ältere, legte fest, dass sie den Waisen schwört, was auch immer sie wollen (Formel des Gelübdes) [wie: "Ich schwöre, dies zu genießen und dieses Essen, wenn ich irgendeinen Nutzen aus meiner Kethuba gezogen habe "], und sie sammelt ihre Kethuba. [Und wenn sie wieder heiratete, bevor die Waisen sie für ihre Kethuba verehrten, in welchem Fall könnte ihr Ehemann ihr Gelübde aufheben, was tun sie dann? Sie tragen sie außerhalb von Beth-Din, einem "Eid der Rabbiner", dessen Übertretung nicht so schwerwiegend ist (wie der eines Tora-Eides), und sie nimmt ihre Kethuba, nachdem sie verheiratet ist. Und wenn sie kommt, um ihre Kethuba abzuholen, bevor sie wieder heiratet, haben die Waisenkinder die Möglichkeit: Wenn sie es wünschen, leisten sie den Eid außerhalb von Beth-Din oder sie schwören sie in Beth-Din. Zeugen melden sich für "das Allgemeinwohl" an. [Dies ("für das Allgemeinwohl") bezieht sich auf beide, nämlich: Eine Witwe wird von den Waisenkindern für "das Allgemeinwohl" geschworen, die Witwen wieder heiraten und sich keine Sorgen machen, ihre Kethuba zu verlieren; und Zeugen unterschreiben auf dem Get für "das Allgemeinwohl". Denn da die Zeugen der Übergabe bewirken, dass das Get wirksam wird, und die Zeugen der Frau, die das Get erhalten haben, die Grundlage für die Scheidung sind, besteht wirklich keine Notwendigkeit für Zeugen, das Get zu unterzeichnen. Aber wegen "des Allgemeinwohls"—weil wir befürchten, dass einer der Zeugen der Übergabe sterben könnte und der Get wie eine bloße Scherbe in ihrer Hand sein könnte (es wurde eingeführt, dass Zeugen unterschreiben)]. Hillel richtete das Prozbol für "das Allgemeinwohl" ein. [Denn weil er sah, wie die Leute es unterließen, sich gegenseitig zu leihen (in der Befürchtung, dass das Darlehen durch das Shemitah-Jahr aufgelöst wird) und (durch ihre Nachsicht) übertreten (5. Mose 15: 9): "Pass auf dich auf, damit es nicht in deinem ist Herz eine Sache der Bosheit usw. "—er stand auf und richtete das prozbol ein. Dies ist der Text des Prozbols: "Ich übergebe Ihnen, Ploni und Ploni, den Richtern (alle meine Ansprüche), damit ich beanspruchen kann, was auch immer Ploni mir schuldet, wann immer ich will"].
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
אין אלמנה נפרעת – Her Ketubah/Jewish marriage contract
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
Introduction
Today’s mishnah contains three different “takkanot”, decrees meant to remedy situations. The first was made by Rabban Gamaliel the Elder, as were those in yesterday’s mishnah. The second is anonymous and the third was made by Hillel.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
מנכסי יתומים, אלא בשבועה – she had not been made the recipient of anything
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
A widow is paid back [her kethubah] from the property of orphans only by taking an oath. [When the court] refrained from imposing an oath on her, Rabban Gamaliel the Elder established that she could take any vow which the orphans wanted and collect her kethubah. We learned this law in Ketuboth 9:7-8. If a widow wants to collect her ketubah money from her husband’s orphans, she must take an oath that she has not already collected. In our mishnah we learn that at some point courts began to refrain from imposing an oath upon her, for fear that she would swear falsely. It is not that she would lie but that she would think that the money she had collected from her husband’s estate was not really her ketubah but payment for helping take care of her husband’s children. If the court would not impose an oath upon her then she could not collect the ketubah and she would be left without any money. In order to fix this problem the rabbis said that the widow could circumvent the court by taking any vow that the orphans so choose. The vow would be something like, “Let such and such an object become forbidden to me if I have already collected my ketubah.” This change in the law also kept the court from being involved in potentially false oaths.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
נמנעו מלהשביע – because she is preoccupied before the orphans, she provides herself with a legal permission to take an oath that she had not taken anything. But even though she took a small amount, she believes that she is taking it as payment for her trouble [involved], but it is not for the paying off of the obligations [owed her] from her Jewish marriage contract.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
Witnesses sign their names on a get because of tikkun olam. According to the letter of the law (contrasted with “takkanot”), a get is valid even if the witnesses had not signed on it. As long as they saw that it was written by the directive of the husband and given to the wife, the get is valid. However, without witnesses written on the get it will be more difficult to validate. Therefore the rabbis established that the get should be signed. We can see that the “tikkun olam” here was done in order to make it easier to validate a get, something that would have been in the best interests of the woman.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
התקין רבן גמליאל שתהא נודרת ליתומים כל מה שירצו – such as קונם/taking upon myself a vow of abstinence from kinds of food if I have derived benefit from my Jewish marriage contract.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Gittin
Hillel instituted the prosbul because of tikkun olam. The third takkanah of our mishnah is the famous takkanah of the prozbul. I shall explain this takkanah briefly. According to the Torah all debts are remitted in the seventh year. While this may be thought of as a benefit for the borrower (and in a perfect society perhaps it would be), in reality it could work against him. If lenders see that their loans will be erased in the seventh year they might not lend money, thereby making it difficult for those in need to take out loans. In order to remedy this problem Hillel established that a creditor could write out a document through which he transmits all debts to the court. According to the rabbis’ interpretation of the Torah, debts to the court are not remitted in the seventh year. In this way the creditor’s loans are not erased and the interests of those who need to borrow money (i.e. farmers) are also served.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
וגובה כתובתה – but if she married to another [man] prior to being made by the orphans to take a vow, and if they made her take a vow after she got married, lest her husband makes her take a vow, How should do this? They make her take an oath imposed by the Rabbis outside of the court for which her punishment would not be great, and she collects her Ketubah/Jewish marriage contract after she has married. But, if she comes to collect [the value of] her Ketubah before she marries another [man], it is up to the orphans [as to what to do]: if they want, they have her take an oath outside of the court or make her take a vow in court.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
העדים חותמים על הגט מפני תיקון העולם – It refers to both [the witnesses signing on the Jewish bill of divorce as well as the widow taking a vow before the orphans before collecting the value of her Jewish marriage contract], concerning a widow who takes a vow to the orphans on whatever they want, for the sake of the social order, so that women can marry their husbands without worrying about losing the value of their Ketubah. But concerning the witnesses who sign the Jewish bill of divorce for the sake of the social order, for since it is the witnesses to the delivery [of the Jewish bill of divorce] that effect the divorce, for the witnesses in whose presence the Jewish bill of divorce is delivered to the woman are the essential [aspect] of the divorce. It would not have been necessary for witnesses to sign the Jewish bill of divorce, other than for the sake of the social order, for we are concerned lest one of the witnesses before whom the Jewish bill of divorce was delivered would die, and that the bill of divorce in her hand without witnesses would be like a mere potsherd.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Gittin
הלל התקין פרוזבול – for he [Hillel] saw that the people were prevented from making loans to one another and they violated what is written in the Torah (Deuteronomy 15:9): “Beware lest you harbor the base thought, [the seventh year, the year of remission is approaching…’],” he [Hillel] ordained the Prozbul. And this is the body of the Prozbul: “I hand over to you, so-and-so and so-and-so, the judges that every debt obligation that I have with so-and-so, I will collect it whenever I want.”
