Si l'on dépose de l'argent pour sa fille [S'il dépose de l'argent auprès d'un tiers pour les besoins de sa fille, pour lui acheter un champ ou une dot quand elle se marie], et qu'elle dit: "Je fais confiance à mon mari" [c'est-à-dire, donnez l'argent à lui], le tiers fait ce qu'il lui a demandé. [Il achète le champ, et elle n'est pas écoutée, car c'est une mitsva d'accomplir la demande de celui qui est mort.] Ce sont les paroles de R. Meir. R. Yossi dit: N'est-ce pas seulement un champ? Si elle souhaitait le vendre, elle pourrait le vendre maintenant. [Autrement dit, même si le champ avait déjà été acheté et qu'elle souhaitait le vendre, elle pouvait le faire. Par conséquent, nous l'écoutons.] Quand est-ce ainsi, quand elle est majeure; mais si elle était mineure, l'acte d'une mineure n'a aucune importance. [R. Yossi et R. Meir ne diffèrent que vis-à-vis de celui qui est majeur, lors des fiançailles. Car après son mariage, tous s'accordent à dire qu'elle est écoutée. Et en ce qui concerne un mineur également, R. Yossi convient que l'acte d'un mineur n'a aucune importance et qu'elle n'est pas prise en compte. La halakha est conforme à R. Meir.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
המשליש מעות לבתו – He [i.e., the father] transferred money in the hands of a third-party for the needs of his daughter to purchase for her a field or a dowry when she gets married.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
Introduction
This mishnah discusses a father who set aside a sum of money for his daughter for her to use for a specific purpose and then died or went away. The question is, when the daughter gets married, can the trustee give it to her husband and allow him to use it for a different purpose.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
If a man deposited a sum of money with an agent for his daugher, and [after she was betrothed] she says, “I trust my husband”, the trustee must act in accordance with the condition of his trust, the words of Rabbi Meir. As explained above, the father gave money to an agent to be used for his daughter for a specific purpose, for instance to buy a field. Now that the father is no longer there and the daughter has been married, she wants the husband to receive the money, for she trusts him. According to Rabbi Meir the agent must do whatever the father told him to do. The Talmud explains that this is because it is a commandment to fulfill the wishes of a dead person.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
יעשה שליש כו' – he should purchase/acquire the field and we don’t listen to her for it is a Mitzvah to fulfill the words of the dead person.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
Rabbi Yose says: were [the trust] a field and she wished to sell it, it would be as if it was sold immediately! Rabbi Yose responds that even if the agent had already bought the field which the father wanted him to buy, and the daughter now had possession of the field, she could sell it and give the money to her husband. Therefore, there is no reason for the agent to buy the field and give it to her, rather he can give her directly the money for her to give to her husband.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
וכי אינה אלא שדה – meaning to say, even if the field was already acquired and she wants to sell, she can sell it; therefore we listen to her. And the dispute of Rabbi Yosi and Rabbi Meir is specifically with regard to an adult woman from betrothal. For is she had already gotten married, everyone states that we listen to her, and with a minor also, Rabbi Yosi admits that there is nothing in the actions a minor at all, and we don’t listen to her. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Meir.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
To whom does this apply? To [a daughter] who has reached majority age, but in the case of a minor, there is no validity at all to the act of a minor. The debate between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose is only with regard to a daughter who has reached majority age. At this age she could have sold the field, and therefore Rabbi Yose holds that the money is given to her husband. However, if she is still a minor she cannot engage in business. Even if the agent had bought her the field, she could not have sold it. Since Rabbi Yose’s reasoning is not applicable in this case, the agent must do what he was told to do by the father.
