Jeśli ktoś umarł i zostawił żonę, wierzyciela i spadkobierców, a miał zastaw lub pożyczkę (należną mu) w rękach innych, R. Tarfon mówi: To ma być oddane „najsłabszemu” spośród nich . [Niektórzy wyjaśniają: temu, którego akt jest najpóźniejszy, będąc „najsłabszym” ze wszystkich, nie mogąc przejąć majątku, który został sprzedany przed nim (tj. Przed datą aktu). Inni wyjaśniają: do ( kethuba) kobiety. Nazywa się ją „najsłabszą”, ponieważ nie jest właściwe, aby kobieta, tak jak mężczyzna, szukała własności zmarłego mężczyzny i pytała, gdzie ma on ziemię. I chociaż majątek ruchomy sierot nie jest związany z wierzycielem ani z kethubą kobiety, tutaj, gdzie nie znajduje się w ich domenie, R.Tarfon utrzymuje, że jest on zabrany z ręki dłużnika lub z ręki ten, kto ma zastaw i oddany wierzycielowi lub (kobiecie za nią) kethuba]. R. Akiva mówi: „Nie ma litości w sądzie” i zostaje przekazana spadkobiercom [i zajęcie (przez innych ) nic nie da]. Wszyscy bowiem wymagają przysięgi, ale spadkobiercy nie wymagają przysięgi. [Bo jeśli ktoś przychodzi odebrać z majątku sierot, może to zrobić tylko pod przysięgą. Dopóki oni (powodowie) nie przysięgają, nie wiemy, czy są im w ogóle coś winni. Dlatego po śmierci ojca spadkobiercy dziedziczą go (pożyczkę lub zastaw) i jest on w ich domenie].
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
ינתנו לכושל שבהן – there are those who interpret it as one whose promissory note was postdated (which is not disqualified necessarily by the Sages, provided that the lender was willing to accept it – as it presents no opportunity for defrauding other creditors) which is the weakest and with legal disadvantage of them all, for he cannot seize properties for a debt that precede it, and there are those who interpret that is for the Ketubah of a wife and it is called weak, and it is not her manner to return after the property of the dead and to request where he has land like the man. And even tough movables of orphans are not mortgaged to the creditor nor to the Ketubah of a woman, here, where they are not in their domain, he leaves them, Rabbi Tarfon holds that we remove them from the hand of the borrower or from the hand of the one holding the deposit and give them to creditor and for the Ketubah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
Introduction
This remainder of this chapter deals with the wife’s ability to collect her ketubah from the husband’s estate.
In general, inheritors are not liable to pay their father’s debts from movable property which they inherited. Only land is liable for these debts. Our mishnah deals with the specific case where the inheritors have not yet collected what was owed to their father.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
ינתנו ליורשים – possession does not take effect.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Ketubot
A man died and left a wife, a creditor, and heirs and he also had a deposit or a loan in the possession of others: Rabbi Tarfon says: It shall be given to the one who is under the greatest disadvantage. Rabbi Akiva says: We do not show mercy in a matter of law. Rather it shall be given to the heirs, for whereas all the others must take an oath the heirs need not take any oath. The husband dies while having a deposit or a loan in the possession of others. The question is: to whom is this money repaid, to the widow, to the creditor or to the inheritors? According to Rabbi Tarfon the weakest among the parties is the one who receives the money. The Talmud offers two explanations for who is the weakest. According to one interpretation, the weakest is the one whose proof that s/he is owed a debt is weakest. According to another interpretation, the weakest refers to the woman’s ketubah, for it is not easy for a woman to chase down those who owe her the ketubah. In any case, Rabbi Tarfon agrees that although in general movable property is not used to pay off a deceased person’s debt, in this case, since the inheritors had not yet received the money, it is used. Rabbi Akiva categorically rejects Rabbi Tarfon’s application of mercy to a matter of law. Law must operate blindly, ignoring who is weak and who is strong. The law must decide in favor of the one whose claim is the strongest. According to Rabbi Akiva, in our case this is the inheritors. Their case is strongest for they inherit their father’s estate without taking an oath, whereas debtors and widows must swear that they have not already received their due before they collect.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Ketubot
שכולן צריכין שבועה – for a person who comes to collect from the property of orphans, he should not collect without an oath, and all the while that they did not take an oath, we don’t known if they have anything against him; therefore, when the dead person dies, he orphans took possession of them and they are in their domain.
