Ketubot 81a — the Talmud in English

Its heirs -

those who are

the heirs of her ketubah,

that is, the heirs of the husband,

are obligated to bury her.

Abaye said: We too have likewise learned [

we too learned this law in the Mishna (below, 95b)] -

“A widow is sustained from the property of the orphans, and her handiwork belongs to them, and they are not obligated to bury her.

And who is obligated to bury her?

Her heirs,

who are

the heirs of her ketubah, are obligated to bury her.”

And

Abaye deduces:

Which widow has two heirs? [

That is, that the heirs of her ketubah are not the same as those who inherit her property.]

You must say: This is a woman awaiting her levirate brother.

And it is proven that the obligation of burial rests upon the heirs of her ketubah.

Rava said: But let him say [

And why can the levirate brother not claim] -

“I inherit my brother; I do not bury his wife,”

that is: This ketubah that I inherit contains nothing from her father’s property, but only the two hundred [zuz] and the additional amount that my brother wrote for her; and I inherit only my brother, not her ?

Abaye said to him: Because they come upon him from two sides:

From whichever way you look at it,

if

you

inherit

your

brother, you should bury his wife.

Just as his brother would have buried her if she had died during his lifetime, even if she had brought him nothing.

And

if he does not bury his wife, he must give

her

her ketubah.

For her burial is in exchange for her ketubah.

He said to him,

Rava:

This is what I am saying -

“I inherit my

brother; I do not bury his wife. And if it is because of the ketubah?! A ketubah was not given to be collected during the lifetime [of the husband]!”

That is: It is not possible to claim ketubah payments as long as the husband is alive, and since I stand in the husband’s place, her ketubah cannot be claimed from me.

The Gemara answers Rava’s claim:

Who is it that you heard holds by the exposition of the ketubah [

Who is the one who holds that “a ketubah was not given to be collected during the lifetime,” and expounds the wording of the ketubah, in which it is stated: “When you marry another, you shall take what is written for you,” and deduces: only when she can marry another, that is, upon the death of the husband or the levirate brother, may she collect her ketubah, but a ketubah was not given to be collected during the lifetime]?

The School of Shammai.

In Yevamot (117a), where they ruled that if she married another, even on the basis of her own testimony, she receives her ketubah .

And

on the other hand,

we have heard from the School of Shammai that they say

that one who has a promissory note against his fellow is considered to have possession of his fellow’s property more than the latter does, since

a document that stands to be collected is considered as collected,

And where was this law taught? -

For we learned

in tractate Sotah: One who warned his wife and she secluded herself, and took her to the court in order to make her drink and establish whether she had committed adultery with him, if she drank and it was established that she had committed adultery, she lost her ketubah; but if

their husbands died before

they drank, the School of Shammai say -

They receive their ketubah, but do not drink. And the School of Hillel say -

Either they drink or they do not receive their ketubah.”

And this is difficult: How did the School of Hillel say

“Either they drink

or they do not receive their ketubah,” implying that they can drink after the husband’s death, when it is stated in the Torah -

“And the man shall bring his wife to the kohen,”

specifically when the man brings the woman,

the Merciful One said, and

in the case that he died,

there is no [man]; and how did the School of Hillel say “Either they drink”?

Rather,

it is recognizable that the School of Hillel intended to say -

Since they do not drink, they do not receive their ketubah.

And the Gemara returns to discuss the words of the School of Shammai -

“The School of Shammai say: They receive their ketubah, but do not drink,”

And we raise an objection:

But why

do they receive their ketubah? Is it not

a doubt: perhaps she committed adultery, perhaps she did not commit adultery,

while the husband’s heirs are certainly in possession of the ketubah money,

and

since

a doubt comes and takes from the hand of certainty?!

Rather, certainly

the School of Shammai hold -

the document

of the ketubah

that stands to be collected is considered as collected.

Therefore the woman is considered to be in possession of her ketubah money .

And according to this, Rava’s earlier difficulty is resolved: Since a document that stands to be collected is considered as collected, the brother cannot claim, “I inherit my brother,” since the ketubah money is considered already collected by the woman; it is as though he inherits the woman, and therefore he is obligated to bury her.

And

we raise a difficulty: In the end, how is the ketubah collected during the lifetime [of the husband]?

For we require

according to the School of Shammai that what is stated in the ketubah be fulfilled -

“When you marry another, you shall take what is written for you,” and there is none,

since she has not yet been permitted to marry another?

Rav Ashi said: A levirate brother is also considered another

[another].

And since the husband died and she fell before the levirate brother, she has already acquired the money of her ketubah, and the levirate brother is obligated to bury her in exchange for her ketubah .

After Abaye answered Rava that “the ketubah was given to be collected during the lifetime of the levirate brother,”

Rava sent him

a letter

to Abaye, by Rav Shemaya bar Zeira,

and wrote to him as follows -

“And who gave a ketubah to be collected during the lifetime

of a levirate brother?

And

indeed

it was taught

in a baraita:

Rabbi Abba said: I asked Sumakhos

A levirate brother

who wishes to

be able to

sell his brother’s property

after he has taken his wife in levirate marriage,

what does he do?

For ordinarily he cannot sell his brother’s property, since it is liened for his wife’s ketubah, as explained in the Mishna.

If he is a kohen,

who cannot divorce his wife and then take her back,

he should make

for her

a fine feast,

to entice her with a wine feast,

and appease

her, so that she will permit him to sell the surplus beyond her ketubah.

And

if he is an Israelite, he divorces

her

with a bill of divorce,

and gives her her ketubah, and he can now sell all the remaining property,

and

afterward

take her back

on the basis of her first ketubah. Thus far the baraita.