## Gittin Daf 35a

###### Gittin 35a:1
[Gittin 35a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:1)

מִשּׁוּם חִינָּא אַקִּילוּ רַבָּנַן גַּבַּהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Due to** the increased **desirability** that this would bring her when trying to remarry, since this would ensure she would bring assets with her into a new marriage, **the Sages were lenient with her,** as the Sages issued several decrees in connection with the marriage contract in order to enable women to collect more easily. Therefore, the mishna **teaches us** that this is not the case.


###### Gittin 35a:2
[Gittin 35a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:2)

נִמְנְעוּ מִלְּהַשְׁבִּיעָהּ: מַאי טַעְמָא? אִילֵּימָא מִשּׁוּם דְּרַב כָּהֲנָא – דְּאָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא; וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, אָמַר רַב: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאָדָם אֶחָד בִּשְׁנֵי בַצּוֹרֶת, שֶׁהִפְקִיד דִּינַר זָהָב אֵצֶל אַלְמָנָה; וְהִנִּיחַתּוּ בְּכַד שֶׁל קֶמַח, וַאֲפָאַתּוּ בְּפַת, וּנְתָנַתּוּ לְעָנִי;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught that the court **refrained from administering an oath to her.** The Gemara asks: **What is the reason** that they refrained from administering oaths to widows? **If we say** that it is **because** of the statement **of Rav Kahana, as Rav Kahana says, and some say** that it was **Rav Yehuda** who **says** that **Rav says:** There was **an incident involving a person during years of famine who deposited a gold dinar with a widow, and she placed** the gold dinar **in a jug of flour and** unwittingly **baked it in** a loaf of **bread** along with the flour, **and** she **gave** the bread as charity **to a poor man.**


###### Gittin 35a:3
[Gittin 35a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:3)

לְיָמִים בָּא בַּעַל הַדִּינָר, וַאֲמַר לַהּ: הָבִי לִי דִּינָרִי. אָמְרָה לֵיהּ: יְהַנֶּה סַם הַמָּוֶת בְּאֶחָד מִבָּנֶיהָ שֶׁל אוֹתָהּ אִשָּׁה, אִם נֶהֱנֵיתִי מִדִּינָרְךָ כְּלוּם! אָמְרוּ: לֹא הָיוּ יָמִים מוּעָטִין עַד שֶׁמֵּת אֶחָד מִבָּנֶיהָ; וּכְשֶׁשָּׁמְעוּ חֲכָמִים בַּדָּבָר, אָמְרוּ: מָה מִי שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּע בֶּאֱמֶת – כָּךְ, הַנִּשְׁבָּע עַל שֶׁקֶר – עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**After a period of time, the owner of the dinar came and said to her: Give me my dinar. She said to him: May poison benefit,** i.e., take effect on, **one of the children of that woman,** i.e., my children, **if I derived any benefit from your dinar. It was said: Not** even **a few days** passed **until one of her children died, and when the Sages heard of** this **matter, they said: If one who takes an oath truthfully** is punished in **this** way for sin, **one who takes an oath falsely, all the more so.**


###### Gittin 35a:4
[Gittin 35a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:4)

מַאי טַעְמָא אִיעֲנַשָׁה? דְּאִישְׁתָּרַשׁ לַהּ מְקוֹם דִּינָר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara first clarifies the details of the incident: **What is the reason** that **she was punished** if she in fact did not derive any benefit from the dinar? The Gemara answers: **Because she benefited** [***ishtarshi***] **from the place of the dinar,** as the dinar took up space in the bread, enabling her to use less flour. Therefore, she did derive some small benefit from the dinar.


###### Gittin 35a:5
[Gittin 35a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:5)

וּמַאי ״מִי שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּע בֶּאֱמֶת״? כְּמִי שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּע בֶּאֱמֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If she in fact did derive benefit from the dinar, then **what** is meant by the statement: **One who takes an oath truthfully?** Wasn’t her oath actually false? The Gemara answers: It means that she was **like one who took an oath truthfully,** as her oath was truthful to the best of her knowledge. In any case, this woman was punished severely for a small mistake. The severity of taking a false oath, even inadvertently, is why the Sages ceased administering oaths to widows.


###### Gittin 35a:6
[Gittin 35a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:6)

אִי מִשּׁוּם הָא, מַאי אִירְיָא אַלְמָנָה? אֲפִילּוּ גְּרוּשָׁה נָמֵי! אַלְּמָה אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא אַלְמָנָה, אֲבָל גְּרוּשָׁה מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions if this could be the reason for the ordinance: **If** they refrained from administering oaths **due to this** reason, then **why** would this be limited **specifically** to **a widow? Even a divorcée** should not be allowed to take an oath to collect her marriage contract **as well. Why** then does **Rabbi Zeira say** that **Shmuel says: They taught** this **only** with regard to **a widow; however,** with regard to **a divorcée,** the court does **administer an oath to her?** Why would this concern not apply in the case of a divorcée as well?


###### Gittin 35a:7
[Gittin 35a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:7)

אַלְמָנָה שָׁאנֵי; דִּבְהָהִיא הֲנָאָה דְּקָא טָרְחָה קַמֵּי דְּיַתְמֵי, אָתְיָא לְאוֹרוֹיֵי הֶיתֵּרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **A widow is different,** as she continues to live in the house with the orphans and performs many services for them in the running of the home. Therefore, there is a concern that **due to the benefit** they receive from her as a result of **the efforts** she exerts **for the orphans, she will rationalize and permit** herself to take an oath that she had not collected any of her marriage contract, when in fact she had received a part of it.


###### Gittin 35a:8
[Gittin 35a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:8)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא: רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ, לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּבֵית דִּין, אֲבָל חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין – מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ. אִינִי?! וְהָא רַב לָא מַגְבֵּי כְּתוּבָּה לְאַרְמַלְתָּא! קַשְׁיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Yehuda said** that **Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said:** It is **Rav and Shmuel who both say** that **they taught only** that an oath is not administered to the widow **in court,** as the oath that one takes in court is a severe oath, which involves the mentioning of God’s name and the holding of a sacred object. **However, outside of court,** where an oath is not taken in this manner, the judges **administer an oath to her.** The Gemara asks: **Is that so? But Rav does not collect** payment of **a marriage contract for a widow** because she has not taken an oath, which indicates that he also would not administer an oath to her outside of the court. The Gemara answers: This is **difficult,** as it contradicts the statement of Rav Yehuda.


###### Gittin 35a:9
[Gittin 35a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:9)

בְּסוּרָא מַתְנוּ הָכִי. בִּנְהַרְדְּעָא מַתְנוּ הָכִי – אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּבֵית דִּין, אֲבָל חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין – מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ. וְרַב אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין נָמֵי אֵין מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**In** the city of **Sura they taught** the statement with regard to the opinions of Rav and Shmuel **like this,** as stated above. However, **in** the city of **Neharde’a they taught** the statement with regard to the opinions of Rav and Shmuel **like this: Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says** that **they taught only** that an oath is not administered to the widow **in court; however, outside of court** the judges **administer an oath to her. And Rav says: Even outside of court as well,** the judges **do not administer an oath to her.**


###### Gittin 35a:10
[Gittin 35a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:10)

רַב לְטַעְמֵיהּ – דְּרַב לָא מַגְבֵּי כְּתוּבָּה לְאַרְמַלְתָּא. וְלִיאַדְּרַהּ וְלַיגְבְּיַיהּ! בִּשְׁנֵי דְּרַב קִילִי נִדְרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara points out that according to this version of their statements, **Rav** conforms **to his** standard line of **reasoning, as Rav does not collect** payment of **a marriage contract for a widow** in any case. The Gemara asks with regard to Rav’s practice: **Let him administer a vow** to the widow, instead of an oath, **and collect** the marriage contract in accordance with the mishna, which states that a widow can take a vow in place of the oath. The Gemara answers: **In Rav’s time vows were** treated **lightly,** and Rav was concerned that widows would not treat the prohibition created by the vow with appropriate severity. This would result in the orphans losing out on part of their inheritance, and the widows violating the prohibitions created by their vows.


###### Gittin 35a:11
[Gittin 35a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:11)

הָהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא, אֲמַר לַהּ: מָה אֶעֱבֵיד לִיךְ, דְּרַב לָא מַגְבֵּי כְּתוּבָּה לְאַרְמַלְתָּא. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: מִידֵּי הוּא טַעְמָא – אֶלָּא דִּלְמָא נָקֵיטְנָא מִידֵּי מִכְּתוּבָּתִי, חַי ה׳ צְבָאוֹת אִם נֶהֱנֵיתִי מִכְּתוּבָּתִי כְּלוּם! אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: מוֹדֶה רַב בְּקוֹפֶצֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving **a certain** widow **who came before Rav Huna** and attempted to collect payment of her marriage contract from the orphans. **He said to her: What can I do for you, as Rav does not collect** payment of **a marriage contract for a widow.** The widow **said to him: Isn’t the reason** that I cannot collect payment **only** because of a concern that **perhaps I** already **took some** payment **of my marriage contract?** I swear **as the Lord of Hosts lives that I did not** derive **any benefit from my marriage contract. Rav Huna says:** Even though the court does not administer an oath to a widow, **Rav concedes with regard to one who leaps** and takes an oath of her own initiative that her oath is accepted, and she can collect payment of her marriage contract.


###### Gittin 35a:12
[Gittin 35a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:12)

הָהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא, אֲמַר לַהּ: מַאי אֶעֱבֵיד לִיךְ, דְּרַב לָא מַגְבֵּי כְּתוּבָּה לְאַרְמַלְתָּא, וְאַבָּא מָרִי לָא מַגְבֵּי כְּתוּבָּה לְאַרְמַלְתָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving **a certain** widow **who came before Rabba bar Rav Huna** to collect payment of her marriage contract. **He said to her: What can I do for you, as Rav does not collect** payment of **a marriage contract for a widow, and my father, my master,** i.e., Rav Huna, **does not collect** payment of **a marriage contract for a widow?**


###### Gittin 35a:13
[Gittin 35a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:13)

אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: הַב לִי מְזוֹנֵי. אֲמַר לַהּ: מְזוֹנֵי נָמֵי לֵית לִיךְ; דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הַתּוֹבַעַת כְּתוּבָּתָהּ בְּבֵית דִּין – אֵין לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**She said to him:** If I cannot collect payment of the marriage contract, then **provide sustenance** for **me** from my husband’s property, to support me until I remarry. **He said to her: You also do not have** any right to **sustenance, as Rav Yehuda says** that **Shmuel says: One who demands** payment of **her marriage contract in court has no** right to receive **sustenance** any longer. The husband committed to provide for her sustenance only as long as she does not wish to remarry. Generally, once a widow demands payment of her marriage contract, she demonstrates that she wishes now to remarry and is no longer entitled to receive sustenance from her deceased husband’s property.


###### Gittin 35a:14
[Gittin 35a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:14)

אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: אַפְכוּהּ לְכוּרְסְיֵהּ, כְּבֵי תְּרֵי עָבְדַתְּ לִי! הַפְכוּהּ לְכוּרְסְיֵהּ וְתָרְצוּהּ, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי לָא אִיפְּרַק מֵחוּלְשָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The widow became angry and **said to** Rabba bar Rav Huna: **May his chair be overturned,** i.e., he should fall from his position of power, as **he ruled for me in accordance with** the different opinions of **two** people. Since Rabba bar Rav Huna was concerned about her curse, **he overturned his chair** in order to fulfill the curse literally, **and** then **stood it** up, **and even so, he was not saved from** the **weakness** that resulted from her curse.


###### Gittin 35a:15
[Gittin 35a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:15)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יְהוּדָה לְרַב יִרְמְיָה בִּירָאָה: אַדְּרַהּ בְּבֵית דִּין, וְאַשְׁבְּעַהּ חוּץ לְבֵית דִּין, וְלֵיתֵי קָלָא וְלִיפּוֹל בְּאוּדְנִי, דְּבָעֵינָא כִּי הֵיכִי דְּאֶעֱבֵיד בָּהּ מַעֲשֶׂה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to this issue, the Gemara recounts: **Rav Yehuda,** the student of Shmuel, **said to Rav Yirmeya Bira’a:** If a widow comes to collect payment of her marriage contract, **administer a vow in court and administer an oath outside of court,** and **let the report be received in my ears** that you did so, **as I desire to perform an action,** i.e., to enable a widow to collect payment of her marriage contract, in contrast to the statements of Rav’s students, who hold that a widow cannot collect payment of her marriage contract.


###### Gittin 35a:16
[Gittin 35a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:16)

גּוּפָא – אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא אַלְמָנָה, אֲבָל גְּרוּשָׁה – מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara returns to **the** matter **itself.** The mishna taught that the court does not administer an oath to a widow in order to enable her to collect payment of her marriage contract. **Rabbi Zeira says** that **Shmuel says: They taught** this **only** with regard to **a widow; however,** with regard to **a divorcée,** the court does **administer an oath to her.**


###### Gittin 35a:17
[Gittin 35a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/35a:17)

וּגְרוּשָׁה דְּאַדְּרַהּ לָא?! וְהָא שְׁלַחוּ מִתָּם: ״אֵיךְ פְּלוֹנִיתָא בַּת פְּלוֹנִי קַבִּילַת גִּיטָּא מִן יְדָא דְּאַחָא בַּר הִידְיָא דְּמִתְקְרֵי ״אַיָּה מָרִי״; וּנְדַרַת וַאֲסַרַת פֵּירוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם עֲלַהּ דְּלָא קַבִּילַת מִכְּתוּבְּתַהּ אֶלָּא גְּלוּפְקְרָא אֶחָד, וְסֵפֶר תְּהִלִּים אֶחָד, וְסֵפֶר אִיּוֹב, וּמִמְשָׁלוֹת בְּלוֹאִים;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Is that to say that if the court **administered a vow** to **a divorcée** and not an oath, then this is **not** sufficient to enable her to collect payment of her marriage contract? **But didn’t they send from there,** from Eretz Yisrael, a document that states the following: **How so-and-so, the daughter of so-and-so, received a bill of divorce from the hand of Aḥa bar Hidya, who is called Ayya Mari, and she took a vow and prohibited the produce of the world to herself,** based on the truth of her statement **that she did not receive from her marriage contract anything other than one coat** [***gelofkera***], **and one book of Psalms, and a book of Job, and** a book of **Proverbs,** all of which were **worn out.**