Yerushalmi Ketubot 5:1 ירושלמי כתובות ה׳:א׳

MISHNAH: Even though they said that a virgin collects 200 [zuz] and a widow a mina, if he wants to add even 100 minas, he may add¹The ketubah document is formulated to indicate that the husband obligates himself for 200/100 zuz by law; the additional sum he takes on himself must be spelled out separately.. If she became widowed or divorced, whether preliminarily or definitively married, she collects everything. Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, definitively married, she collects everything; preliminarily married a virgin collects 200 [zuz] and a widow a mina since he added only with the idea to bring her in²Since the document was signed and witnessed beforehand and it is stated that the addition is invalid before the definitive wedding, the question arises when and how the addition becomes enforceable by law..

HALAKHAH: “Even though they said that a virgin collects 200,” etc. How does he become indebted to her? Do not Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both say, if somebody writes a debenture for another person under the assumption that he owes him and it turns out that he does not owe, [he does not have]⁴From the parallel text in Halakhah 12:1, required by the context. If the addition is not valid for the woman who becomes a widow before her definitive wedding, why is the additional gift ever enforceable in court? Can the heirs not argue that the deceased never was obligated to pay the addition and, therefore, his estate is not required to pay? to give to him! He wants to give much to be called X’s son-in-law⁵The addition is payment for value received; this makes it an enforceable obligation.. That is, if he decided this⁶To add to the obligatory amount of the ketubah. at the time of the preliminary marriage. What if he decided this⁶To add to the obligatory amount of the ketubah. at the time of the definitive marriage? He wants to give much for sexual relations with her, which are sweet⁷Old German law knew of a similar gift, called Morgengabe, “gift on the morning (after the nuptials)”; Latin dotalicium. This is the only reason accepted by the Babli, 56a.. That is if he slept with her. If he did not sleep with her? He wants to give much for the acquisition⁸The marriage which is called “acquisition”. he made. If he had decided at the preliminary marriage, at the definitive marriage, he already is called X’s son-in-law, sexual relations are nothing new, there is no new acquisition; from thereon⁹I. e., if the husband should add to the ketubah sum while married, what makes that addition enforceable? he wants to give much that she should not change her mind¹⁰But stay married to him.. But can she? Was it not stated¹¹Mishnah Yebamot 14:2. In strict talmudic law, divorce is a unilateral act by the husband though in cases of spousal abuse the court can force a divorce by punishing the husband “until he says, I want [to divorce]”. Otherwise, the wife cannot force a divorce. that “a man divorces only by his own will”? Rebbi Abin said, she makes his life miserable and he frees her¹²Nobody says that she needs a court to get a divorce..

It was stated: Just as the husband decides¹³He may decide to give to his wife more than the legal minimum., so the father decides¹⁴He decides to give his daughter a dowry. The daughters have a legal right to a dowry from the estate but not from the living father.; only that the husband transfers rights in writing but the father only by speech, restricted to those things that can be acquired by speech¹⁵Dowries of daughters and endowments of sons are the only things that can be finalized by speech only; Babli 102a.. What is that? Gidul in the name of Rav: How much are you giving to your son? Such and such. And how much are you giving to your daughter? Such and such. When he preliminarily married her¹⁶In the Babli, 102a: If the groom preliminarily married the bride immediately after the young couple was promised the money by their respective parents. The Yerushalmi has to be understood in this sense also., the daughter acquired among the daughters. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph said, Gidul found something large and said something small¹⁷By restricting the right of informal acquisition to the daughter.! But it is as follows: How much are you giving to your son? Such and such. How much are you giving to your daughter? Such and such. When he preliminarily married her, the daughter acquired among the daughters and the son among the sons¹⁸This is the Babli’s formulation of Rav Gidul’s statement. “Among the daughters” means that if the father should die before the dowry was paid, its amount does not form part of the estate; the same holds for the son and the capital promised him.. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, is that something small? Does he not acquire a wife on top of movables with one peruṭa’s worth¹⁹The minimum amount a man has to give a woman for the preliminary marriage is one peruṭah (in the tradition of the House of Hillel; Mishnah Qiddušin 1:1). The peruṭah is the smallest coin, about 2 g bronze, valued at 1/144 or 1/192 of a silver denar (1/6 or 1/8 of the smallest Roman coin, the as). That coin disappeared with the Hasmonean kingdom; it remained as the smallest unit of value in legal theory. In rabbinic practice, Šulḥan ‘Arukh Even Ha‘ezer 27:10, the value of a peruṭah is half a grain of sterling silver (0.0324 g).
If the marriage of the couple is contracted by the respective parents, the groom acquires not only a wife but all that is promised him from both sides by giving one peruṭah. Since the peruṭah is the smallest unit of computation, the fact that one may acquire more than one thing with one peruṭah is not trivial and needs to be spelled out.? But nobody can acquire two wives with one peruṭa’s worth²⁰Mishnah Qiddušin 2:6. It is possible for a man to simultaneously preliminarily marry any number of women by giving something of value to one of them if she is empowered by the other women to receive the value on their behalf and if there is at least one peruṭah for each of them.! But cannot a person acquire real estate and several movables with one peruṭa’s worth²¹Real estate can be acquired by money and everything can be acquired with real estate (Mishnah Qiddušin1:5); therefore, any number of things can be acquired by giving one peruṭah for real estate (cf. also Peah, Chapter 3, Notes 135 ff.).? For a person can acquire two pieces of real estate with one peruṭa’s worth, but nobody can acquire two wives with one peruṭa’s worth.

Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: “How much are you giving to your son? Such and such. How much are you giving to your daughter? Such and such. When he preliminarily married her, the daughter acquired among the daughters and the son among the sons,” but only if it is a first marriage²²The waiver of the rules of acquisition explained in the previous paragraph applies only if it is the first marriage for both parties.. This follows what Rebbi Ḥanania said: If somebody definitively married off his son in a house, the latter acquired the house, but only if it is a first marriage²³In the Babli, Baba Batra 144a, only if (1) the son was an adult, (2) marrying a virgin, (3) as his first wife, and (4) is the first of his children to be married. Since “house” usually means “one-room house”, the father gives the house to be used by the pair as bridal chamber, with them staying there alone after all wedding guests have left.. Rebbi Hoshaia said, she²⁴Probably this sentence has to be formulated in the masculine. acquired movables but did not acquire the house. Do they disagree? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Explain it that his father used it for storage²⁵While the newlyweds were living there alone, if the place was used as storage for produce, that is indication enough that it was intended only as a temporary dwelling place and R. Hanania will agree that the son did not acquire the house with the wife.. Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: It is needed in case what was stored was borrowed from the market. Rebbi Abbahu said, if he said it is loaned²⁶If the father tells his son that the house is a loan, not a gift, it is not a gift., he did not acquire it. There came a case before Rebbi Jacob ben Rebbi Abun and he instructed following Rebbi Abbahu. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, essentialy this has no basis²⁷Greek θεμελίωσις “basis”. The acquisition of valuables by speech has no basis in the rabbinic legal system; nevertheless, it is subject to detailed rules. In the Babli, loc. cit., this is called “practice lacking a reason”. but the rabbis build and add to it!

You say that the father decides for his daughter; even if she is an adult²⁸Is the promised dowry for an adult daughter due on a verbal promise if the daughter is already an adult, no longer in the father’s power. Since the Babli (Note 23) requires the bride to be a virgin, it must deny the power of verbal acquisition to the adult daughter.? Let us hear from the following: The father decides for his daughter, but the mother does not decide for her daughter, nor the brother for his sister²⁹Reading of Alfassi (12:1,#384): “Neither the brother for his sister nor the mother for her daughter, even if she is underage.” Mother and brother can give only in the legal forms, by money, document, or handing over.. Is there a difference about his sister whether she is an adolescent or an adult? So here, there is no difference whether she is an adolescent or an adult³⁰Since the baraita formulates no age criterion, there is none.. Rebbi Abba from Carthage asked, even a third party? They said, even if she be an adult? A third party, let us hear from the following: The father decides for his daughter, but the mother does not decide for her daughter, nor the brother for his sister³¹If mother and brother are disqualified from informal giving, so are third parties.. So much more for the adult. Also in money matters it is so: Give your daughter to X and I shall give you so-and-so much. Buy this field and I shall give you so-and-so much³²If close relatives other than the father are excluded, then third parties in general are excluded..

So is the Mishnah³³This is a parapharase of the Mishnah, given also in the Babli, 56a. The problem of the Babli, whether the contract becomes valid by intercourse or by the possibility of intercourse, attributed there to the Galilean R. Abin, seems to have been decided in Galilee without great discussion. Cf. J. N. Epstein, מבוא לנוסח המשנה², p. 494, and Halakhah 2.: “Because he did only add for the love of the first night, when he had intercourse with her.” If he slept with her, divorced her, and took her back³⁴He took her back on the terms of the prior ketubah before he paid her for the divorce; he remains obligated for the entire sum., the love of the first night is still there. If he slept with her, died, and she became available to the levir, the love of the first night is still there³⁵Her claim to the entire sum is intact.. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Alexis in the name of Ḥizqiah: Practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah who said, if they were divorced or widowed after a preliminary marriage she collects 200, after the definitive marriage she collects everything. Rebbi Ḥanania said, practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah. Rebbi Abbai³⁶This name is unknown otherwise. The quote below and the parallel in the Babli (56a) show that one must read: R. Yannai. said, they said to Rebbi Ḥanania, get outside to recite³⁷In the Babli: Get out and recite your verse outside; a standard expression of disapproval.. Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Jonathan said, practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah. Rebbi Yosa, Rebbi Ze‘ira³⁸The Amora quoted here cannot be R. Yose, the colleague of R. Jonah, who proves below that practice follows R. Eleazar ben Azariah. Therefore, the name quoted later, R. Yose bar Ze‘ira (no relative of R. Ze‘ira) seems to be the correct one, characterizing his statement as that of a very minor figure. in the name of Rebbi Jonathan said, practice does not follow Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah. Rebbi Yose said, we had a rule that Ḥizqiah and Rebbi Jonathan said the same thing. As it was stated³⁹Tosephta 4:14, Babli Baba Batra132a.: If somebody’s son went overseas and one heard that he died, [the father] went and wrote his property to somebody else, and after that, the son returned. The gift remains valid; Rebbi Simeon ben Menasia says that the gift is invalid since he would not have written the deed if he had known that his son was alive⁴⁰The deed is a will, executed now to become effective after the testator’s death, and duly signed by two witnesses.. And Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, practice follows Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah, and the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah is the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Menasia⁴¹In the Babli, loc. cit., Rav Naḥman, the great authority in matters of money and contracts, agrees.; and Rebbi Yannai said, they said to Rebbi Ḥanania, get outside to recite. And Rebbi Yose bar Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Jonathan said, practice does not follow Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah⁴²His opinion is not counted against that of R. Jonah, head of the Academy.. An actual case was judged according to Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah⁴³The Babli agrees to the practice after an inconclusive debate, Ketubot56a..