Gdyby ketuba wdowy kosztowała dwie manah, a ona sprzedawałaby (majątek dziedziczny) wartą jedną manę za dwie manah; albo wartość dwóch manah za jedną manę, otrzymała dziedzictwo. [Mówimy jej bowiem: „To twoja strata”. A mając wartość jednej manah za dwie manah, mimo że zyskała, nie może powiedzieć: „To mój zysk”, ponieważ jeśli ktoś wyśle swojego posłańca na rynek, aby handlował, a on kupi coś taniego, wszystko należy do niego kto dał pieniądze. Dowiadujemy się stąd tylko o czymś, co nie ma ustalonej ceny, na przykład o ziemi, która ma być sprzedawana szacunkowo; czasami więcej, czasami mniej. Ale jeśli coś ma ustaloną cenę, a posłaniec kupił to za mniej, orzeczenie nie jest jasne z tego (czego się dowiadujemy) tutaj. Zauważyłem, że rabini różnią się w tej kwestii i wydaje mi się, że (w takim przypadku) posłaniec i nadawca dzielą się.] Gdyby jej kethuba była maną, a ona sprzedałaby wartość manah i dinara za a manah, jej sprzedaż jest nieważna. [Ponieważ nie wolno jej było sprzedać tego dinara, więc cała sprzedaż jest „błędna”, a cała sprzedaż miała miejsce w jednym czasie.] Nawet jeśli ona mówi: zwrócę dinara spadkobiercom, jej sprzedaż jest unieważnić. R. Szimon b. Gamliel mówi: Jej sprzedaż jest zawsze ważna [a ona zwraca dinar spadkobiercom. Za co sprawiła, że stracili?]—chyba że istnieje [tak wielkie przeciążenie], że pozostanie [w przypadku braku tego przeciążenia] na polu dziewięć kav [wielkość pola], aw ogrodzie pół kav [wielkość ogrodu]. ] I, według R. Akivy, ćwierć kav. [Halacha nie jest zgodna z R. Szymonem b. Gamliel.] Gdyby jej kethuba wynosiła czterysta zuzów, i sprzedała każdemu z nich (z trzech kupujących wartość jednej manah) za manę; i do końca, wartość manah i dinara za manę— ostatnia (sprzedaż) jest nieważna, a wszystkie inne ważne.
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
שוה מאתים במנה נתקבלה כתובתה – for we tell her “you have suffered loss/ruin and that which is worth a Maneh [that was sold] for two hundred, even though it gained in value, one cannot say: “I will make a profit for a person who sends his agent to the market to do business and he purchased it cheaply, everything goes to the owner of the money and we don’t hear from here other than regarding a thing that has no limit such as the case of land whose manner is for it to be sold through mere sight/estimate – this one for less and that one for more, but a thing that has a limit and the agent purchased it for less, the law is not made clear to us from this and becomes fit for something remarkable for they argued about it and the conclusion is according to [what] appears to us that the agent and the person sending the agent are arguing about.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
Introduction
This mishnah deals with a widow who when selling her field either overestimates or underestimates the value of the field. The questions are, 1) is she deemed to have received her ketubah; 2) is the sale valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
מכרה בטל – that same Denar, she does not have permission to sell, it is found that the entire sale is in error, for it took place at one time.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
If a widow whose ketubah was two hundred zuz sold [land] worth a maneh for two hundred zuz or [land] worth two hundred zuz for one maneh, she has received her ketubah. There are two cases mentioned in this section. In both the widow is selling her husband’s land in order to collect her ketubah, which is worth 200 denar. In the first case she sells a field that was worth 100 zuz (a maneh) for 200 denar. Although her husband’s estate only lost land worth 100 zuz, since she received 200 denar, she has received her ketubah and does not receive anymore. In the second case, she sells land worth 200 zuz for 100 zuz. Since her husband’s estate sold off a field worth 200 zuz, it has paid off her ketubah, even though she only received 100. In other words, the husband’s estate always gets the benefit of the doubt.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
לעולם מכרה קיים – and she should return the Denar to the inheritors for what loss did she cause them? Until it would be a fraudulent representation in order that if it were no overreaching, the field would remain worth nine Kabim which is the measure of the field,
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
If her kethubah was one maneh, and she sold [land] worth a maneh and a denar’ for one maneh, her sale is void. Even if she says, “I will return the denar to the heirs”, her sale is void. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: her sale is always valid unless there was so much land there as to allow her to leave a field of nine kab, and from a garden an area of half a kab, or, according to Rabbi Akiba, a quarter of a kab. If she sells land worth more than her ketubah, the sale is invalid. This land is not hers and she only had permission to sell up to the value of her ketubah. Even if she says that she will pay back the extra denar to her husband’s inheritors, she is not allowed to do, if the inheritors want back their land. Rabbi Shimon disagrees and says that the sale is only nullified if the extra amount sold would have left the inheritors with a field in which nine kab of seed can be planted, about 3750 square amot (a little over 60 x 60 amot). If it was a garden of vegetables, the size is smaller, about 208 square amot or 104 square amot according to Rabbi Akiba. If the size of the extra land sold is smaller than this, the sale is valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
and in the garden within one-half of Kab which is the measure of a garden. But the Halakha is not according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
If her ketubah was four hundred zuz and she sold [land] to [three] persons, to each for one maneh, and to a fourth [she sold] what was worth a maneh and a denar for one maneh, [the sale] to the last person is void but [the sale] to all the others are valid. If her ketubah was 400 zuz, and she sold fields worth 100 to three different people and to the last person she sold a field worth 101, only the last sale is invalid. Each sale is considered on its own merits, and it was only the last sale which went over the limit.
