Ketubot 50b — the Talmud in English

Rav Yosef was sitting before Rav Hamnuna, and Rav Hamnuna was sitting and saying: Just as sons inherit only from land, so daughters are supported -

only from land.

Everyone became agitated against him

all the listeners were stirred up against him], and is this indeed the law, that one who

leaves land

who left land] -

his sons inherit him

they are the ones who inherit him], while one who

does not leave land -

do his sons not inherit him?

And do sons not inherit their father's movable property?!

Rav Yosef said to him: Perhaps

with regard to

the sons' ketubah did the Master say

that they inherit only from land; that is, perhaps when you said, “sons inherit only from land,” you intended the sons' ketubah, which indeed comes only from land [as we learned in the Mishna below, on page 91], and from it we learn with regard to the daughters' support, that they too are supported only from land]?

He said to him: Since you are a great man, you know what I am saying

you, who are a great man, understood what I intended]. For certainly it is impossible to learn the law of the daughters' support from ordinary inheritance, since there is no comparison between them. Rather, the daughters' support is learned from the sons' ketubah, for these two matters are conditions of the ketubah.

Rabbi Hiyya bar Yosef said: Rav supported

orphans who came to claim support from their father's property, and there was only movable property there -

from the wheat

from wheat, which is movable property]

of the upper room.

They raised a question:

what did Rabbi Hiyya intend by saying that Rav gave them from the upper room? Was it truly not referring there to support, but rather

it was a dowry,

that is, a dowry for marriage, which is collected even from movable property?

And what is

what is meant by the fact that Rav supported them from

the upper room -

from the father's excellence, and in accordance with Shmuel. For Shmuel said: For a dowry -

one assesses the father,

that is, one assesses according to the father's degree of generosity and frugality, how much he would have given for her dowry had he been alive, and so one gives her from his property, whether from land or from movable property .

Or perhaps it was actual support,

and although the daughters' support is a condition of the ketubah, and a condition of the ketubah is like the ketubah, and the ketubah is not collected from movable property, because every reliance of deeds is upon land, since it always remains extant, nevertheless Rav held that they collect the daughters' support from movable property because of the enactment that was accepted in the upper room.

And what is the upper room? From good matters that were said in the upper room.

For Rabbi Yitzhak bar Yosef said: In the upper room they enacted that daughters should be supported

even

from movable property.

Come and hear: In the possession of Rabbi Banai, the brother of Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba, there was movable property belonging to orphans. They came before Shmuel, and he said to him

to Rabbi Banai]:

Go, support

the daughters from the movable property .

Is it not that

it concerns giving the daughters from movable property

for support, and he holds in accordance with Rabbi Yitzhak bar Yosef!?

And we reject this:

No. There it was for a dowry. And Shmuel follows his own reasoning, for Shmuel said: For a dowry, one assesses the father,

and they give even from movable property, according to his degree of frugality and generosity.

There was an incident in Nehardea, and the judges of Nehardea ruled

to support the daughters even from movable property.

And likewise there was an incident

in Pumbedita, and Rav Hanna bar Bizna collected for

the daughters' support from movable property.

Rav Naḥman said to them

to the judges of Pumbedita]:

Go, return ,

go and return to the orphans what you collected from movable property.

And if not -

I will collect your palaces from you

I will collect your banquet halls from you].

Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi thought

they thought]

to support from movable property.

Rabbi Yaakov bar Idi said to them: Rabbi Yohanan and Resh Lakish did not act upon the matter

to collect from movable property,

and you are acting upon it?!

Rabbi Elazar thought to support

the daughters

from movable property.

Rabbi Shimon ben Elyakim said before him: Rabbi, I know about you that you are not administering the strict measure of judgment,

for the law is that they are not supported from movable property -

but

only from

the measure of compassion,

for you are taking pity on the orphan girls. But nevertheless, it is not proper to act in this way,

lest the students see

that you are acting in this way -

and establish

that this is

the halakha for generations

as a matter of strict law.

There was a certain man who came before Rav Yosef

to ask about the daughters' support.

He said to them: Give her

for her support

from the dates that are upon the mat

give her from the dates lying on the mats that are placed beneath the date palms when the dates are gathered from them].

Abaye said to him

to Rav Yosef:

If he were a creditor,

whose power is greater, since he collects from liened property,

would the Master give him in such a case?

After all, even he does not collect from the movable property of orphans! And how can it be said that with regard to the daughters' support, whose power is weakened, since one does not collect from liened property, they should collect from the movable property of orphans?!

He said to him:

I did not intend that they should collect from dates that had already been detached from the palm, for they are movable property, but rather

I was speaking of what is fit for the mat

that is, that they should collect for them from the dates that are still destined to be cut from the palm].