Talmud for Ketubot 12:4

כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהִיא בְבֵית אָבִיהָ, גּוֹבָה כְתֻבָּתָהּ לְעוֹלָם. כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהִיא בְּבֵית בַּעְלָהּ, גּוֹבָה כְתֻבָּתָהּ עַד עֶשְׂרִים וְחָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים, שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּעֶשְׂרִים וְחָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים שֶׁתַּעֲשֶׂה טוֹבָה כְנֶגֶד כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר שֶׁאָמַר מִשּׁוּם רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהִיא בְּבֵית בַּעְלָהּ, גּוֹבָה כְתֻבָּתָהּ לְעוֹלָם. כָּל זְמַן שֶׁהִיא בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ, גּוֹבָה כְתֻבָּתָהּ עַד עֶשְׂרִים וְחָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים. מֵתָה, יוֹרְשֶׁיהָ מַזְכִּירִין כְּתֻבָּתָהּ עַד עֶשְׂרִים וְחָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים:

So long as she is in her father's house [and the heirs feed her there], she can always [i.e., whenever she wishes] claim her kethubah. So long as she is in her husband's house, she can claim her kethubah for twenty-five years; for there is in the twenty-five years (enough time) for her to do good against (the amount of) her kethubah. These are the words of R. Meir in the name of R. Shimon b. Gamliel. And the sages say: So long as she is in her husband's house, she can always claim her kethubah. So long as she is in her father's house, she can claim her kethubah for twenty-five years. [The twenty-five years were not mentioned to cause her to lose her kethubah because of the good she does from the property of the orphans, but (they were mentioned) in respect to "waiving" (the kethubah), i.e., since she remained silent and did not claim it all of these years, she has waived it. Therefore, so long as she is in her husband's house, her silence does not constitute "waiving," for since they honor her, she is ashamed to claim her kethubah. But in her father's house, if she remained silent for twenty-five years, this constitutes "waiving."] If she died, her heirs "mention" her kethubah for twenty-five years. [That is, they must claim her kethubah within twenty-five years. And this is only when she swore to (not having collected) her kethubah before she died. But if she had not sworn to her kethubah, her heirs collect nothing of it, for "a man does not bequeath an oath to his sons."]

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

MISHNAH: For tort victims one estimates with best quality land¹If a person is due damages and is not paid, he can ask the court for foreclosure. If the guilty party owns several pieces of land, the tort victim is indemnified, up to the value of his claim, from the land which carries the highest value per unit of surface area. A creditor whose mortgage does not specify a particular piece of land is indemnified from land which the court’s experts assess to be of average value among all of the debtor’s holdings., for a creditor with average quality, and for a woman’s ketubah with lowest quality. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel²In all other Mishnah sources mentioned in M. S. Feldblum, Diḳduḳe Soferim - Gittin (New York 1966), the name is R. Meїr. says, also for a woman’s ketubah with average quality.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

If there is only best quality, one collects from the best quality, [only] average quality one collects from average quality, [only] worst quality one collects from worst quality. Best and average, torts are assessed from best quality, creditors and a woman’s ketubah from average. Average and worst, torts and creditors are assessed from average, a woman’s ketubah from worst. If his best quality was like everybody’s best quality, it is best quality. If his average quality was like everybody’s average quality, it is average quality. If his worst quality was like everybody’s worst quality, it is worst quality³⁵The statement up to here is a baraita, quoted as such in the Babli, Baba Qama 7b. One can foreclose only existing property; the only question which arises is how to classify claims if there are properties of two different qualities but claims for all three. The Babli formulates this as: Do the notions of best, average, and worst refer to the available land or are these general notions used by realtors to classify properties?. If his best quality was like everybody’s average? Rebbi Ze‘ira and Rebbi Ila asked: Let us hear from the following: Average and worst, torts and creditors are assessed from average, a woman’s ketubah from worst. But just as you need in the case that you have best and average quality, torts push creditors to the average, so in this case, of average and worst quality, should not torts push creditors to the worst quality³⁶If his best quality is classified by realtors as average, nevertheless it is his best, reserved for satisfaction of tort judgmens, and creditors should be satisfied with second best quality, even if that is worst in universal classification. This seems to prove that the classifications mentioned in Mishnah and baraita are universal, not referring to the debtor.? Rebbi Yose bar Abun in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Explain it that he had best quality which he sold, and the creditors were already pushed to average quality³⁷His explanation is also given by Rav Ḥisda in the Babli, Baba Qama 8a. As Rashi explains, the loan was taken when there was best quality land; then automatically the average quality land was pledged to the creditor. When later the best quality land was sold, the pledge was not removed. When then a claim for torts was entered, it only could be additional to the existing lien. (The Babli lists three other possible explanations, all agreeing that in a normal case in which only two qualities of real estate are available, the better one is declared best, reserved for the satisfaction of tort claims.).

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Previous Verse Full Chapter Next Verse