Yerushalmi Ketubot 9:8 ירושלמי כתובות ט׳:ח׳

MISHNAH: If she had compromised her ketubah, how is that? If her ketubah was 1‘000 zuz and he said to her, you received your ketubah, but she says, I received only one mina, she shall not be able to collect without an oath.
If one witness testifies that [the ketubah] was paid, how is that? If her ketubah was 1‘000 zuz and he said to her, you received your ketubah, but she says, I received nothing, and one witness testifies that [the ketubah] was paid, she shall not be able to collect without an oath.
From encumbered property, how is that? If he sold his real estate to others and she collects from the buyers, she shall not be able to collect without an oath. From orphans’ property, how is that? If he died and left his estate to the orphans, if she is paid out by the orphans she shall not be able to collect without an oath. Not in his presence, how is that? If he went overseas¹⁶⁴If the husband sends his wife a bill of divorce from abroad, the court handling the delivery of the bill of divorce to the wife will require her to swear that no part of the ketubah had been paid before overseeing the payment of the ketubah.
The Mishnah is repeated in Šebuot7:7. and she collects in his absence, she shall not be able to collect without an oath. Rebbi Simeon says, any time she asks for her ketubah, the heirs can require an oath from her. If she does not ask for her ketubah, the heirs cannot require an oath from her¹⁹⁸If the widow prefers to be supported by the estate for an unlimited period, the heirs can never ask for an oath that she did not receive part payment of the ketubah (which would disqualify her from being supported) during her husband’s lifetime. But if she asks for her ketubah, they do not have to pay unless she swears, even if her husband had freed her from any obligation to swear. R. Simeon disagrees with Mishnaiot 5,6..

HALAKHAH: “If she had compromised her ketubah, how is that? If her ketubah was l‘000 zuz,” etc. “If one witness testifies that [the ketubah] was paid,” etc. So is the Mishnah¹⁹⁹J. N. Epstein, ²מבוא לנוסח המשנה p. 475 notes that this כיני מאתניתא is not an emendation but simply a quote from the third Mishnah which belongs to this Halakhah.: “If she collects in his absence, she shall not be able to collect without an oath.”

“If she collects in his absence, she shall not be able to collect without an oath.²⁰⁰The Halakhah (after the introductory paragraph) appears also in Šebuot 7:7; it seems to be closer to the original form. That text for the main section is given here in smaller type; it is taken as basis of the translation, with the deviations from the text in Ketubot noted in the Commentary.
The quote from the Mishnah is not in Šebuot since the Mishnah there deals with creditors in general, not only the divorcee or widow. Since the text from Šebuot has all the characteristics of being the original, the discussion of the Halakhah refers to contracts in general, not only to ketubot.” Can one collect from a person in his absence²⁰¹It is a general principle in Jewish law that זָכִי‌ן לָאָדָם שֶׁלֹּא בְפָנָיו וְאֵין חָבִין לָוֹ אֶלָּא בְפָנָיו “one may benefit a person without his knowledge but one may not obligate him without his knowledge,” Mishnah Giṭṭin 1:6. Since a ketubah, and also a loan document in general, is executed as a lien on all of the debtor’s properties, not on a specified piece of real estate, it cannot be foreclosed without court proceedings in the presence of the debtor or his representative.? Rebbi Jeremiah says, explain it about a contract for which interest is due²⁰²In that case the court will act for the benefit of the debtor if this satisfies the creditor.. Would the court collect interest²⁰³Since taking interest among Jews is forbidden, the court will not enforce any interest clause in a contract.? Explain it that it was guaranteed for a Gentile²⁰⁴If the Jewish defendant is sued as guarantor for a Gentile from whom the Jewish creditor may take interest legally, the court will recognize the contract as valid..

Alexis said before Rebbi Mana: We act much better than you do²⁰⁵In the Ketubot text, R. Mana speaks to the Gentile Alexis. In that text it is not always clear who is the speaker.. We send edicts²⁰⁶Greek διατάγματα; in Roman praxis referring to edicts of the emperor or the provincial prefect. The corresponding Aramaic word דִּין מוּגְמָרִין in the Ketubot text, if it is not simply a corruption, means “judgment that cannot be appealed.” Since the prefect also was the chief judge of the province, there is really no difference between the Roman administrative edict and the Jewish court’s letter of summons.. If he²⁰⁷The debtor who refuses to appear in court for foreclosure proceedings. comes, it is good. If he does not come, we irrevocably give away his properties. He answered him, we also act in this way, we have the herald announce for thirty days²⁰⁸The verb כרז “to announce” is formed from Greek κῆρυξ “herald”. Public announcements were usually made Mondays and Thursdays, the market days.. If he comes, it is good. If he does not come, we irrevocably give away his properties. He said to him, think of it, if he was in distant corners. He said to him, we send three letters, one after thirty days, one after the next thirty days, and one after the next thirty days²⁰⁹This was Roman practice in Egypt, cf. R. Taubenschlag, The Law of Graeco-Roman Egypt in the Light of the Papyri, New York 1944, p. 383. In Jewish Babylonia, the person who did not obey the first summons was put in the ban (Babli, 88a; against Tosafot s. v. ורבא).. If he comes, it is good. If he does not come, we irrevocably give away his properties. Rebbi Ḥanina²¹⁰In Ketubot: R. Mattaniah. said, that is, if he was present at the trial and then fled²¹¹Once the validity of a claim has been established in court, the execution of the court order may proceed in the absence of the debtor.. But if he was not present at the trial, we²¹²In Ketubot: “they” (third person). cannot irrevocably give away, but only announce.

You find that one may say that Ḥanan²¹³Mishnah 13:1. If a man travelled overseas and his wife asks permission from the court to sell of his property for her upkeep, Ḥanan says that she can sell and only swears at the end, if either the husband returns or notice of his death is received, that she did not retain any of the husband’s property over and above the amount she was entitled to. Ḥanan’s opponents also require her to swear before permission is granted by the court. and Rebbi Simeon said the same thing²¹⁴He admits the widow’s oath only if she demands her ketubah. The Babli, 88b, rejects this statement and finds other cases to which R. Simeon may refer. It therefore also rejects the conclusion (Note 216) reached here.. Just as Ḥanan said, she shall swear only at the end, so Rebbi Simeon says, she shall swear only at the end. Just as you say, practice follows Ḥanan²¹⁵Mishnah 13:1, on the highest authority of R. Joshua., so here practice follows Rebbi Simeon²¹⁶By inference from the decision of Ḥanan..