Ketubot 69b — the Talmud in English

As for the body of the incident, how was it? [

Tell me, my friend, what was the actual event]?

He said to him,

Rav Anan:

This and this was the event.

He said to him,

Mar Ukva: And you, who are

a man who does not know what “marzihah” is, sent to Rav Huna, “Huna, our colleague”?! [

Can a person who does not know what “marzihah” is send Rav Huna a question and begin it with the expression “Huna, my colleague”]?!

What is “marzihah”? —

Mourning.

As it is written (

Jeremiah 16):

“So said the Lord: Do not enter the house of mourning

and do not go to eulogize

,” and so on.

And “house of mourning” means the house of the mourner.

And since the matter of “mourning” was brought, the Gemara brought another statement connected with mourning:

Rav Abbahu said: From where [do we know] that a mourner reclines at the head?

As it is stated (

Job 29):

“I would choose their way, and sit at the head, and dwell as a king among the troops, as one who comforts mourners.”

And we raise an objection:

Does “he will comfort” imply others?

That is to say, it is not the mourner who reclines at the head, but the one who comforts him sits at the head?

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: “He will be comforted” is written [

with a kubbutz under the nun], and this refers to the mourner himself.

Mar Zutra said: From here

it may be learned that the mourner sits at the head:

As it is written [Amos 6]:

“And the mourning-house of those reclining shall depart.”

And we expound it as follows:

“Mar ve-zah” —

one whose soul is bitter and whose mind is haughty, that is, a mourner,

becomes “a prince over those reclining.”

He sits at the head, even when those greater than he come to comfort him.

And the conclusion of the discussion:

Rava said: The halakha is,

they collect only

from land, and not from movable property —

whether for sustenance, whether for the marriage contract, whether for a livelihood allowance.

Mishna:

One who entrusts money to a trustee for his daughter —

one who placed money in the hands of a trustee for the needs of his daughter before his death, and instructed him to purchase land for her or to give her a dowry when she marries.

And she says,

when she has married —

“My husband is trusted by me!”

Give him the money, and he will purchase land for me.

The trustee shall do with it what it was entrusted for,

and he himself shall purchase the land. Since there is a mitzva to fulfill the words of the deceased,

these are the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yose says: Is it anything but land, and she wishes to sell it? Behold, it is sold from now!

That is to say: If the law follows Rabbi Meir, that the trustee must purchase the land himself, then after the trustee purchases the land and gives it to the daughter, she may immediately sell it and give its money to her husband. And if so, why should the money not be given to the husband immediately ?

When are these words

that she is heeded?

With an adult. But with a minor —

a minor’s act is of no consequence.

And this matter will be explained in the Gemara.

Gemara:

The Sages taught: One who entrusts money to a trustee

for his son-in-law [

for the sake of his son-in-law],

to purchase land with it for his daughter,

and the husband will consume the produce of the land

. And she says, let it be given

the money

to my husband,

and he will purchase the land for me, and the father died.

From the marriage,

that is, after the daughter has married,

the authority is hers

to instruct the agent to give the money to her husband, and he will purchase the land. Since the father, too, gave it to the trustee only until she married. For once she marries, the husband consumes the produce of the land.

But

from the betrothal —

the trustee shall do with it what it was entrusted for.

For there is a mitzva to fulfill the words of the deceased.

These are the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yose says: With an adult, whether from the marriage or from the betrothal —

the authority is hers

to instruct that the money be given to her husband.

And if she was

a minor: whether from the marriage or from the betrothal —

the trustee shall do with it what it was entrusted for.

And the Gemara analyzes:

What is between them,

between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose?

If you say [

if it is said],

the minor from the marriage is the matter between them ,

for Rabbi Meir holds that she has the authority to demand the money from the trustee in order to give it to her husband,

and Rabbi Yose comes to say, even from the marriage as well —

an adult, yes,

yes.

A minor, no.

Consider the latter part —

“But with a minor, a minor’s act is of no consequence,”

Who taught this [

who is the tanna who taught this law]?

If you say

only

Rabbi Yose

holds this, and not Rabbi Meir,

behold, from the first part you learn it, for Rabbi Yose said: Is it anything but land, and she wishes to sell it? Behold, it is sold from now.

And it is clear that specifically

an adult, who is fit for transactions [

whose sale is a valid sale],

yes!

But

a minor, who is not fit for transactions, no!

Rather,

certainly,

it is Rabbi Meir!

And something is missing from the text, and this is what it teaches —

“The trustee shall do with it what it was entrusted for. When are these words applicable? From the betrothal, but from the marriage the authority is hers.

When are these words applicable? With an adult. But with a minor, a minor’s act is of no consequence.”

And it is clear that even according to Rabbi Meir a minor’s act is of no consequence. And if so, the question returns: “What is between them”

? And we answer:

Rather, an adult from the betrothal is the matter between them. According to Rabbi Meir, the trustee shall do with it what it was entrusted for, since there is a mitzva to fulfill the words of the deceased. But according to Rabbi Yose, it is to be given to the husband. Since she is an adult and has the authority to sell, the authority is hers .

По мнению рабби Меира, третий должен сделать то, для чего ему были переданы деньги, поскольку существует заповедь исполнить слова умершего. По мнению же рабби Йоси деньги следует передать мужу, поскольку она совершеннолетняя и вправе продать поле; следовательно, она вправе распорядиться деньгами.

It was stated: Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel —

the halakha follows Rabbi Yose.

Rava said in the name of Rav Naḥman —

the halakha follows Rabbi Meir,

since there is a mitzva to fulfill the words of the deceased.

And the Gemara brings an incident:

Ilfa [

the name of an amora, a colleague of Rabbi Yoḥanan],

tied himself to the mast of a ship [

he hung himself from the top of a ship’s mast ], and

said:

If

someone comes who tells me a matter of Rabbi Ḥiyya and Rabbi Oshaya, and I cannot resolve it from the Mishna, I shall fall from the mast and drown! [

If a person comes and tells me a beraita for which I cannot find support from a Mishna, I will throw myself from the mast and drown].

That old man came and taught it to him [

he taught the following beraita before him]:

“One who says, ‘Give a shekel to my sons each week,’ and it is evident [

and we see that one shekel is not sufficient to sustain the sons, but it is necessary]

to give

them a sela —

they give them a sela.

Since, if the father had known that the cost of food would rise and one shekel would not suffice for them, he would certainly have been pleased for them to receive a sela.

And if he said,

the father,

‘Give them no more than a shekel’ —

they give them no more than a shekel.

Since he explicitly protested against it, he made them heirs only to this amount.

And if he said — the father added and said:

“If they die [

if my sons die without leaving sons who will inherit them ] —

others

people

shall inherit

specific

in their place,”

then

whether he said, “Give

my sons a shekel per week

,” whether he said, “Do not give

them more than a shekel,”

they give them no more than a shekel.

Since he made those who come after them heirs, he certainly intended to say that his sons inherit only a shekel per week. This concludes the beraita.

And that old man asked him: What is the source for this beraita from the Mishna?

Ilfa said to him,

Ilfa:

This

beraita

whose —