Ketubot 8

הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ נְכָסִים עַד שֶׁלֹּא תִתְאָרֵס, מוֹדִים בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּבֵית הִלֵּל שֶׁמּוֹכֶרֶת וְנוֹתֶנֶת וְקַיָּם. נָפְלוּ לָהּ מִשֶּׁנִּתְאָרְסָה, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, תִּמְכֹּר, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, לֹא תִמְכֹּר. אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ מוֹדִים, שֶׁאִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה, קַיָּם. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אָמְרוּ לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הוֹאִיל וְזָכָה בָאִשָּׁה, לֹא יִזְכֶּה בַנְּכָסִים. אָמַר לָהֶם, עַל הַחֲדָשִׁים אָנוּ בוֹשִׁין, אֶלָּא שָׁאַתֶּם מְגַלְגְּלִין עָלֵינוּ אֶת הַיְשָׁנִים. נָפְלוּ לָהּ מִשֶּׁנִּשֵּׂאת, אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ מוֹדִים שֶׁאִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה שֶׁהַבַּעַל מוֹצִיא מִיַּד הַלָּקוֹחוֹת. עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשֵּׂאת וְנִשֵּׂאת, רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, אִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה, קַיָּם. אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן עֲקִיבָא, אָמְרוּ לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הוֹאִיל וְזָכָה בָאִשָּׁה, לֹא יִזְכֶּה בַנְּכָסִים. אָמַר לָהֶם, עַל הַחֲדָשִׁים אָנוּ בוֹשִׁין, אֶלָּא שֶׁאַתֶּם מְגַלְגְּלִים עָלֵינוּ אֶת הַיְשָׁנִים:

If property fell to a woman before she were betrothed [and she were then betrothed], Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel agree that she may sell it or give it as a gift, and it (the transaction) stands. If it fell to her after she were betrothed, Beth Shammai say: She may sell it [while she is still betrothed, but not after she were married], and Beth Hillel say: She may not sell it. Both agree that if she sold it or gave it as a gift, it stands. R. Yehudah said: They said before R. Gamliel: If he acquires the woman, [the woman becoming his betrothed], should he not acquire the property! He answered: "We are ashamed over the new [which fell to her after she was married. Why did the sages see fit to say that if she sold it or gave it as a gift, her husband can take it from the receiver], and you would "roll" the old upon us!" [property that fell to her while she was still betrothed, saying that if she sold it the sale is void, her husband having acquired it.] If it fell to her after she were married, both agree that if she sold it or gave it as a gift, her husband can take it from the receiver. (If it fell to her) before she were married, and she were then married, R. Gamliel says: If she sold it or gave it as a gift, it stands. R. Chanina b. Akiva said: They said before R. Gamliel: If he acquires the woman, should he not acquire the property! He answered: "We are shamed over the new, and you would roll the old upon us!"

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חוֹלֵק בֵּין נְכָסִים לִנְכָסִים. נְכָסִים הַיְדוּעִים לַבַּעַל, לֹא תִמְכֹּר. וְאִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה, בָּטֵל. שֶׁאֵינָן יְדוּעִים לַבַּעַל, לֹא תִמְכֹּר. וְאִם מָכְרָה וְנָתְנָה, קַיָּם:

R. Shimon differentiates between property and property. Property which is known to the husband, she may not sell; and if she sold it or gave it as a gift, it is void. Property which is not known to the husband, she may not sell; and if she sold it or gave it as a gift, it stands. [Some understand "property which is known" as land, and "property which is not known" as chattel. And others understand both of these as "property that is known," and what fell to her abroad while she resided here as "property which is not known." The halachah is that both property that fell to her before she was betrothed and property that fell to her after she was betrothed — if she sold it after she were married, her husband may take from the receiver fruits in her lifetime, and the land itself after her death. And the halachah is in accordance with R. Shimon, who differentiates between property known to the husband and property not known to the husband.]

נָפְלוּ לָהּ כְּסָפִים, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. פֵּרוֹת הַתְּלוּשִׁין מִן הַקַּרְקַע, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. וְהַמְחֻבָּרִין בַּקַּרְקַע, אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, שָׁמִין אוֹתָן כַּמָּה הֵן יָפִין בְּפֵרוֹת וְכַמָּה הֵן יָפִין בְּלֹא פֵרוֹת, וְהַמּוֹתָר, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, הַמְחֻבָּרִין לַקַּרְקַע, שֶׁלּוֹ. וְהַתְּלוּשִׁין מִן הַקַּרְקַע, שֶׁלָּהּ, וְיִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת:

If money fell to her, land is bought for it, and he eats fruits. (If there fell to her) fruits torn from the land, land is bought for them and he eats fruits. And, as to what is attached to land, R. Meir said: The land is assessed — how much it is worth with fruits and how much it is worth without fruits, and land is bought with the difference, and he eats fruits. [For he holds that what grew in his domain is called "fruits," and what did not grow in his domain is called "keren" (principal). Therefore, the greater worth of the land now because of produce is "keren," and she must be given the money, and land be bought, and he eat the fruits.] And the sages say: What is attached to the land is his [Even what did not grow in his domain was accorded the status of "fruits," since the land "stands" for her. The halachah is in accordance with the sages.], and what is torn from the land is hers, and land is bought for them, and he eats fruits.

רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, מְקוֹם שֶׁיָּפֶה כֹחוֹ בִכְנִיסָתָהּ, הוּרַע כֹּחוֹ בִיצִיאָתָהּ. מְקוֹם שֶׁהוּרַע כֹּחוֹ בִכְנִיסָתָהּ, יָפֶה כֹחוֹ בִיצִיאָתָהּ. פֵּרוֹת הַמְחֻבָּרִין לַקַּרְקַע, בִּכְנִיסָתָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ וּבִיצִיאָתָהּ שֶׁלָּהּ. וְהַתְּלוּשִׁין מִן הַקַּרְקַע, בִּכְנִיסָתָהּ שֶׁלָּהּ וּבִיצִיאָתָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ:

R. Shimon says: The place where his strength is superior when she enters, his strength is inferior when she leaves [if he comes to divorce her]; and the place where his strength is inferior when she enters, his strength is superior when she leaves. Fruits connected to the land are his when she enters [That is, when the land falls to her, they are his, as per the sages.], and when she goes out, they are hers. And what is torn from the land — when she comes in they are hers, and when she goes out, they are his. [The sages and R. Shimon will differ in regard to fruits connected to the land when she leaves, the sages not speaking of them. They do not agree with R. Shimon that when she leaves they are hers, holding that what grows in his domain is his. The halachah is in accordance with R. Shimon.]

נָפְלוּ לָהּ עֲבָדִים וּשְׁפָחוֹת זְקֵנִים, יִמָּכְרוּ וְיִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, לֹא תִמְכֹּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן שְׁבַח בֵּית אָבִיהָ. נָפְלוּ לָהּ זֵיתִים וּגְפָנִים זְקֵנִים, יִמָּכְרוּ לְעֵצִים וְיִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, לֹא תִמְכֹּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן שְׁבַח בֵּית אָבִיהָ. הַמּוֹצִיא הוֹצָאוֹת עַל נִכְסֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ, הוֹצִיא הַרְבֵּה וְאָכַל קִמְעָא, קִמְעָא וְאָכַל הַרְבֵּה, מַה שֶּׁהוֹצִיא הוֹצִיא, וּמַה שֶּׁאָכַל אָכָל. הוֹצִיא וְלֹא אָכַל, יִשָּׁבַע כַּמָּה הוֹצִיא וְיִטֹּל:

If there fell to her, old bondsmen and bondswomen, they are sold, and land is bought for them, and he eats fruits. R. Shimon b. Gamliel says: They are not to be sold, for they are the "pride" of her father's house. [She can prevent it. The halachah is in accordance with him.] If old olive (trees) and vines fell to her, they are sold for wood and land is bought for them and he eats fruits. R. Yehudah says: They are not to be sold, for they are the "pride" of her father's house. [The halachah is in accordance with him.] If one expended money on his wife's property — if he expended much and ate little, [even a minute mount], or if he expended a little and ate much — what he expended he expended and what he ate he ate. If he expended and he did not eat, he swears how much he expended and takes. [This oath is similar to a Torah oath. This is so when the appreciation were as much as the expenditure or more; but if the expenditure were more than the appreciation, he swears a Torah oath that he expended against the appreciation, and he takes only the amount of the appreciation and forfeits the rest. And all this is when the husband divorced her. But if she rebelled, whether or not the husband ate, he swears how much he expended and takes against the appreciation. And in tzon-barzel (mortmain) property, all of the appreciation is his, for we say: "If they increased (in value), they increased for him."]

שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לָהּ נְכָסִים, מוֹדִים בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּבֵית הִלֵּל שֶׁמּוֹכֶרֶת וְנוֹתֶנֶת וְקַיָּם. מֵתָה, מַה יַּעֲשׂוּ בִכְתֻבָּתָהּ וּבַנְּכָסִים הַנִּכְנָסִין וְהַיּוֹצְאִין עִמָּהּ. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, יַחֲלֹקוּ יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל עִם יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, נְכָסִים בְּחֶזְקָתָן, כְּתֻבָּה בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הַבַּעַל, נְכָסִים הַנִּכְנָסִים וְהַיּוֹצְאִים עִמָּהּ בְּחֶזְקַת יוֹרְשֵׁי הָאָב:

One awaiting yibum, to whom property fell [from her father's house, while she was still awaiting yibum] — Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel agree that she may sell it and give it as a gift, and it stands. If she died, what should be done with her kethubah [one manah, or two manah, the addition, and the dowry that she brought in to him and for which he assumed responsibility], and with the property that goes in and goes out with her [nichsei melog, which, when she goes in, goes in with her, and, when she leaves her husband, goes out with her]? Beth Shammai say: The heirs of the husband (i.e., the yavam) divide it with the heirs of the father, [for there is a possibility that she is (considered) married to the yavam, who acquires half the inheritance as per this possibility.], and Beth Hillel say: The property [tzon barzel] remains in its status [And it is not specified whether in the status (i.e., ownership) of the heirs of the husband, in that he had been responsible for it, or in the status of the heirs of the woman, the property having been hers. This Mishnah is to be found in the fourth chapter of Yevamoth (4:3)], and her kethubah is in the status of the heirs of the husband. The property which goes in and out with her is in the status of the heirs of the father.

הִנִּיחַ אָחִיו מָעוֹת, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. פֵּרוֹת הַתְּלוּשִׁין מִן הַקַּרְקַע, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. הַמְחֻבָּרִין בַּקַּרְקַע, אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, שָׁמִין אוֹתָן כַּמָּה הֵן יָפִין בְּפֵרוֹת וְכַמָּה הֵן יָפִין בְּלֹא פֵרוֹת, וְהַמּוֹתָר, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, פֵּרוֹת הַמְחֻבָּרִים בַּקַּרְקַע, שֶׁלּוֹ. וְהַתְּלוּשִׁין מִן הַקַּרְקַע, כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם זָכָה בָהֶן. קָדַם הוּא, זָכָה. קָדְמָה הִיא, יִלָּקַח בָּהֶן קַרְקַע וְהוּא אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת. כְּנָסָהּ, הֲרֵי הִיא כְאִשְׁתּוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁתְּהֵא כְתֻבָּתָהּ עַל נִכְסֵי בַעְלָהּ הָרִאשׁוֹן:

If his [the yavam's] brother left money, land is to be bought for it, and he eats fruits. [For her kethubah rests on the property of her first husband, so that the property of the dead brother stands security for her kethubah. It is just that the yavam eats fruits if he takes her in yibum. He (this tanna) holds that chattel is bound (as security) for her kethubah.] (If his brother left) fruits torn from the land, he buys land for them, and he eats fruits. (If his brother left fruits) attached to the land, R. Meir said: The land is assessed — how much it is worth with fruits and how much it is worth without fruits, and land is bought with the difference, and he eats fruits. [For whatever grew in the domain of the dead brother is bound (as security) for the kethubah.] And the sages say: Fruits attached to the land are his. [The gemara asks: But are not all of his possessions bound as security for the kethubah? And it answers: Read it "hers" (instead of "his.")] Fruits torn from the land — Whoever takes them first acquires them. [They hold that chattel is not bound (as security) for the kethubah, unless she seized it; and such seizure is necessary in the husband's lifetime. And they differ likewise in respect to money. For how is money different (in principle) from torn off fruits? And the halachah is in accordance with the sages.] If he (the yavam) took them first, he acquires them. If she took them first, land is to be bought for them and he eats fruits. If he married her, she is like his wife in every respect. [He divorces her with a get and he may take her back, and we do not say: The Torah said (Deuteronomy 25:5): "Veyibmah" ("And he shall take her in levirate marriage"), and her first yibum (obligation) is still upon her, so that a get does not suffice. And, likewise, once he divorced her, we would say: He already performed the mitzvah imposed upon him by the Torah, so that she should now remain forbidden to him as "his brother's wife," and he should not be able to take her back. The Torah, therefore, apprises us (Ibid.): "And he shall take her for himself as a wife." Once he has taken her, she is as a wife to him (in all respects).] It is only that her kethubah rests upon the property of her first husband.

לֹא יֹאמַר לָהּ, הֲרֵי כְתֻבְּתִיךְ מֻנַּחַת עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, אֶלָּא כָּל נְכָסָיו אַחֲרָאִין לַכְּתֻבָּה. וְכֵן לֹא יֹאמַר אָדָם לְאִשְׁתּוֹ, הֲרֵי כְתֻבְּתִיךְ מֻנַּחַת עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן, אֶלָּא כָל נְכָסָיו אַחֲרָאִין לִכְתֻבָּתָהּ. גֵּרְשָׁהּ, אֵין לָהּ אֶלָּא כְתֻבָּתָהּ. הֶחֱזִירָהּ, הֲרֵי הִיא כְּכָל הַנָּשִׁים וְאֵין לָהּ אֶלָּא כְתֻבָּתָהּ בִּלְבָד:

The yavam) may not say to her: "Here is (the money to cover) your kethubah lying on the table"; but all of his property [that he inherited from his brother] is bound (as security) to her kethubah. Likewise, a man may not say to his wife: "Here is your kethubah lying on the table," but all of his property is bound to her kethubah. If he (the yavam) divorced her, she receives only (the amount of) her kethubah. [But so long as he did not divorce her, she is like all other women, and she has only her (original) kethubah alone. [For one who divorces his wife and takes her back, takes her back within the framework of her first kethubah. And it is necessary to apprise us that this obtains, too, with a yevamah; that we not say that this is so only with his wife, whom he had written a kethubah resting upon his property, but not with a yevamah, where he had not written it, but where the property of her first husband had been bound as security for it — so that in an instance where he divorced her and took her back, I might think that he would have to provide her with his own kethubah. We are hereby apprised that this is not so.]