## Gittin Daf 49b

###### Gittin 49b:1
[Gittin 49b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:1)

תַּנְיָא בְּהֶדְיָא: ״מֵיטַב שָׂדֵהוּ וּמֵיטַב כַּרְמוֹ יְשַׁלֵּם״ – מֵיטַב שָׂדֵהוּ שֶׁל נִיזָּק, וּמֵיטַב כַּרְמוֹ שֶׁל נִיזָּק, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מֵיטַב שָׂדֵהוּ שֶׁל מַזִּיק, וּמֵיטַב כַּרְמוֹ שֶׁל מַזִּיק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is **taught explicitly** in a *baraita*: The verse: **“Of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he pay”** (Exodus 22:4), teaches that the appraisal is of **the best of the fields of the injured** party, **and** of **the best of the vineyards of the injured** party. This is **the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says:** The appraisal is of **the best of the fields of the one who caused the damage, and** of **the best of the vineyards of the one who caused the damage.** This clearly indicates that according to Rabbi Akiva compensation is collected from the superior-quality land belonging to the one who caused the damage.


###### Gittin 49b:2
[Gittin 49b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:2)

רָבִינָא אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם מַתְנִיתִין רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הִיא, דְּאָמַר מִדְּאוֹרָיְיתָא בִּדְמַזִּיק שָׁיְימִינַן; וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא – דְּדָרֵישׁ טַעְמָא דִּקְרָא, וּמָה טַעַם קָאָמַר – מָה טַעַם הַנִּיזָּקִין שָׁמִין לָהֶן בְּעִידִּית? מִפְּנֵי תִּיקּוּן הָעוֹלָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ravina said: Actually, the mishna is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Akiva, who said: By Torah law, we appraise** the property **of the one who caused the damage. And it is** also in accordance with the principle of **Rabbi Shimon, who expounds the reason** underlying **the verse** as a basis for drawing halakhic conclusions. **And** the mishna **is saying: What is the reason** for the *halakha* taught in the mishna? The mishna should be understood as follows: **What is the reason** that the court **appraises land of superior quality for payment to injured** parties? This is **for the betterment of the world.** That is to say, the words: For the betterment of the world, do not indicate a rabbinic enactment. Rather, they provide a reason for the Torah law.


###### Gittin 49b:3
[Gittin 49b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:3)

דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ הַנִּיזָּקִין שָׁמִין לָהֶן בְּעִידִּית? מִפְּנֵי הַגַּזְלָנִים וּמִפְּנֵי הַחַמְסָנִין, כְּדֵי שֶׁיֹּאמַר אָדָם: לָמָה אֲנִי גּוֹזֵל וְלָמָה אֲנִי חוֹמֵס? לְמָחָר בֵּית דִּין יוֹרְדִין לִנְכָסַי וְנוֹטְלִין שָׂדֶה נָאָה שֶׁלִּי, וְסוֹמְכִים עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה: ״מֵיטַב שָׂדֵהוּ וּמֵיטַב כַּרְמוֹ יְשַׁלֵּם״; לְפִיכָךְ אָמְרוּ: הַנִּיזָּקִין – שָׁמִין לָהֶן בְּעִידִּית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is **as it is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Ketubot* 12:2) that **Rabbi Shimon said: For what** reason **did** the Sages **say** that the court **appraises land of superior quality for payment to injured** parties? It is **due to the robbers and due to those who take** that which is not theirs **by force [*ḥamsanin*].** How so? **So that a person will say: Why should I rob and why should I take by force? Tomorrow the court will come down to my property and take my finest field** in order to compensate the victim for what I have robbed or taken by force. **And** the Sages **rely on what is written in the Torah: “Of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he pay”** (Exodus 22:4). **Consequently, they said** that the court **appraises land of superior quality for payment to injured** parties.


###### Gittin 49b:4
[Gittin 49b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:4)

מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ בַּעַל חוֹב בְּבֵינוֹנִית? כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִרְאֶה אָדָם לַחֲבֵירוֹ שָׂדֶה נָאָה וְדִירָה נָאָה, וְיֹאמַר: אֶקְפּוֹץ וְאַלְוֶנּוּ, כְּדֵי שֶׁאֶגְבֶּנּוּ בְּחוֹבִי; לְפִיכָךְ אָמְרוּ: בַּעַל חוֹב בְּבֵינוֹנִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **For what** reason **did** the Sages **say that a creditor** collects his debt **from intermediate-quality land?** It is **so that a person should not see another’s fine field or fine house and say: I will jump** in **and lend** him money **so that** later **I will collect** the field or house **for my debt,** if the borrower does not have enough money to repay the loan. **Therefore,** the Sages **said** that **a creditor** collects his debt only **from intermediate-quality land,** and he would not receive that fine field that would have prompted him to extend the loan in the first place.


###### Gittin 49b:5
[Gittin 49b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:5)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, יְהֵא בְּזִיבּוּרִית! אִם כֵּן – אַתָּה נוֹעֵל דֶּלֶת בִּפְנֵי לוֹוִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If it is so** that the objective is that people not be tempted to lend money for the purpose of acquiring the borrower’s property should he default on the loan, then the *halakha* governing a creditor **should be** to collect his debt **from inferior-quality land.** The Gemara answers: **If so,** then **you would be locking the door before** potential **borrowers,** as no one would be willing to lend them money.


###### Gittin 49b:6
[Gittin 49b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:6)

כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה – בְּזִיבּוּרִית, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: בְּבֵינוֹנִית. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: מִפְּנֵי מָה אָמְרוּ כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה בְּזִיבּוּרִית? שֶׁיּוֹתֵר מִמַּה שֶּׁהָאִישׁ רוֹצֶה לִישָּׂא, הָאִשָּׁה רוֹצָה לִינָּשֵׂא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: Payment of **a woman’s marriage contract** is collected **from inferior-quality land;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says:** It can be collected **from intermediate-quality land. Rabbi Shimon said: For what** reason **did** the Sages **say that a woman’s marriage contract** is collected **from inferior-quality land?** It is **because more than a man wants to marry** a woman, **a woman wants to become married** to a man. Consequently, she will agree to marry even if she knows that she will not be able to collect payment of the marriage contract from superior-quality land.


###### Gittin 49b:7
[Gittin 49b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:7)

דָּבָר אַחֵר: אִשָּׁה יוֹצְאָה לִרְצוֹנָהּ וְשֶׁלֹּא לִרְצוֹנָהּ, וְהָאִישׁ אֵינוֹ מוֹצִיאָהּ אֶלָּא לִרְצוֹנוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Alternatively,** it is because **a woman is sent out** from her husband **with her consent or without her consent, but a man sends** his wife **out** from his house **only with his consent.**


###### Gittin 49b:8
[Gittin 49b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:8)

מַאי דָּבָר אַחֵר? וְכִי תֵּימָא, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּכִי מַפֵּיק לַהּ אִיהוּ – תַּקִּינוּ לַהּ רַבָּנַן כְּתוּבָּה מִינֵּיהּ; כִּי נָפְקָא אִיהִי נָמֵי – לִיתַקְּנִי לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן כְּתוּבָּה מִינַּהּ? תָּא שְׁמַע: אִשָּׁה יוֹצְאָה לִרְצוֹנָהּ וְשֶׁלֹּא לִרְצוֹנָהּ, וְהָאִישׁ אֵינוֹ מוֹצִיא אֶלָּא לִרְצוֹנוֹ – אֶפְשָׁר דִּמְשַׁהֵי לַהּ בְּגִיטָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the reason that he mentions **an alternative** explanation? What problem is there with the first explanation? The Gemara answers: The alternative explanation does not explain why she collects from inferior-quality land, but serves to explain a different matter. Since the Sages instituted a marriage contract in order to strengthen the institution of marriage, it is possible to ask: **And if you would say** that **just as when** a man **divorces** his wife **the Sages instituted a marriage contract for her from him,** so too, **when she leaves him they should similarly institute a marriage contract for him from her;** then **come** and **hear: A woman is sent out** from her husband **with her consent or without her consent, but a man sends** his wife **out** from his house **only with his consent.** Even if she instigates a quarrel with him to bait him into divorcing her, it is nevertheless **possible** for the husband **to keep her waiting for a bill of divorce.** A man gives his wife a bill of divorce only when he wishes to do so, and so in essence the divorce depends solely on him.


###### Gittin 49b:9
[Gittin 49b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:9)

כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה בְּזִיבּוּרִית. אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן: לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא מִיַּתְמֵי, אֲבָל מִינֵּיהּ דִּידֵיהּ – בְּבֵינוֹנִית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that payment of **a woman’s marriage contract** is collected **from inferior-quality land. Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said: We said** that a woman collects her marriage contract from inferior-quality land **only** when her husband died and she collects payment **from** the **orphans** who inherit his estate. **But** if she was divorced and she collects payment **from** the husband **himself,** then she collects it **from intermediate-quality land.**


###### Gittin 49b:10
[Gittin 49b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:10)

מִיַּתְמֵי?! מַאי אִירְיָא כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה? אֲפִילּוּ כֹּל מִילֵּי נָמֵי, דְּהָא תְּנַן: אֵין נִפְרָעִים מִנִּכְסֵי יְתוֹמִים אֶלָּא מִן הַזִּיבּוּרִית! אֶלָּא לָאו מִינֵּיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If the mishna is referring to collecting **from orphans,** then **why** discuss **specifically a woman’s marriage contract? Even all matters,** such as payment for damage, should **also** be collected from inferior-quality land when it is collected from orphans, **as didn’t we learn** in the mishna: If one who owed money died and his children inherited his property, the father’s debt **can be collected from the property of the orphans only from inferior-quality land. Rather, is it not** that the mishna is referring to a case where the woman collects her marriage contract **from** the husband **himself?**


###### Gittin 49b:11
[Gittin 49b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:11)

לְעוֹלָם מִיַּתְמֵי, וּכְתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה אִיצְטְרִיכָא לֵיהּ – סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא: מִשּׁוּם חִינָּא, אַקִּילוּ רַבָּנַן גַּבַּהּ; קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **Actually,** the mishna is referring to a case where the woman collects her marriage contract **from** the **orphans** who inherit their father’s estate. **And it was necessary for** the mishna to teach the *halakha* specifically with regard to **a woman’s marriage contract.** As **it could enter your mind to say** that **the Sages were** more **lenient with her for the sake of desirability,** so that she would be a more desirable partner should she want to remarry, and consequently they allowed her to collect payment of her marriage contract from intermediate-quality land even from orphans, the mishna **teaches us** that even payment for a woman’s marriage contract is not collected from the intermediate-quality land of orphans, but only from their inferior-quality land.


###### Gittin 49b:12
[Gittin 49b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:12)

אָמַר רָבָא: תָּא שְׁמַע, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה – בְּבֵינוֹנִית. מִמַּאן? אִילֵימָא מִיַּתְמֵי, לֵית לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר הָא דִּתְנַן: אֵין נִפְרָעִים מִנִּכְסֵי יְתוֹמִים אֶלָּא מִן הַזִּיבּוּרִית?! אֶלָּא לָאו מִינֵּיהּ? מִכְּלָל דְּרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי בְּזִיבּוּרִית!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Come** and **hear** a proof from a *baraita*: **Rabbi Meir says:** Payment for **a woman’s marriage contract** is collected **from intermediate-quality land.** The Gemara attempts to clarify the case: **From whom** does she collect payment of her marriage contract in this case? **If we say** that she is collecting **from** the **orphans,** it is possible to ask: **Does Rabbi Meir not agree with that which we learned** in the mishna: The father’s debt **can be collected from the property of the orphans only from inferior-quality land? Rather, is it not** that the woman collects payment of her marriage contract **from** her husband **himself?** And since Rabbi Meir maintains that she collects from intermediate-quality land, one can learn **by inference that the Rabbis hold** that she collects **from inferior-quality land,** contrary to the opinion of Mar Zutra.


###### Gittin 49b:13
[Gittin 49b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:13)

לָא; לְעוֹלָם מִיַּתְמֵי, וְשָׁאנֵי כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה – מִשּׁוּם חִינָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: **No, actually** it is possible to explain that the *baraita* is referring to a case where the woman collects her marriage contract **from** the **orphans** who inherit their father’s estate. **And** payment of **a woman’s marriage contract is different** from other debts collected from orphans, which can be collected only from inferior-quality land. The Sages were more lenient with her **for the sake of desirability;** consequently, Rabbi Meir ruled that she may collect her marriage contract from intermediate-quality land even if she is collecting it from orphans.


###### Gittin 49b:14
[Gittin 49b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:14)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, תָּא שְׁמַע: הַנִּיזָּקִין שָׁמִין לָהֶן בְּעִידִּית, וּבַעַל חוֹב – בְּבֵינוֹנִית, וּכְתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה – בְּזִיבּוּרִית. מִמַּאן? אִילֵימָא מִיַּתְמֵי, מַאי אִירְיָא כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה? אֲפִילּוּ כֹּל הָנֵי נָמֵי! אֶלָּא לָאו מִינֵּיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said: Come** and **hear** a proof from what is taught in the mishna: The court **appraises land of superior quality for payment to injured** parties. **And a creditor** collects his debt **from** the debtor’s **intermediate-quality land. And** payment of **a woman’s marriage contract** is collected **from** her husband’s **inferior-quality land.** The Gemara attempts to clarify the case: **From whom** is the collection being made? **If we say** that in all of these cases collection is being made **from** the **orphans, why** mention **specifically a woman’s marriage contract? Even all of these,** i.e., even injured parties and creditors, should **also** collect only from inferior-quality land when collecting from orphans. **Rather, is it not** that the mishna is referring to a case where the woman collects her marriage contract **from** the husband **himself,** and it rules that she collects from inferior-quality land, contrary to the opinion of Mar Zutra?


###### Gittin 49b:15
[Gittin 49b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:15)

אָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב: הָכָא בְּמַאי עָסְקִינַן – כְּגוֹן שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה עָרֵב לְנִזְקֵי בְנוֹ, לְבַעַל חוֹב בְּנוֹ וְלִכְתוּבַּת כַּלָּתוֹ;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said:** No proof can be brought from the mishna against the opinion of Mar Zutra, as the mishna can be understood as follows: **With what are we dealing here?** We are dealing with a case **where** one **became a guarantor** for compensation **for his son’s damages,** and similarly **for** repayment to **his son’s creditor, and** similarly **for** payment of **his daughter-in-law’s marriage contract,** and his son died. Since the guarantor stands in place of his son, collection is made from him as if it were being made from his son.


###### Gittin 49b:16
[Gittin 49b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:16)

וְהַאי כִּי דִינֵיהּ, וְהַאי כִּי דִינֵיהּ; נִיזָּקִין וּבַעַל חוֹב, דְּמֵחַיִּים גָּבוּ, אִיהוּ נָמֵי כִּי מַגְבֵּי – כְּמֵחַיִּים מַגְבֵּי. כְּתוּבַּת אִשָּׁה, דִּלְאַחַר מִיתָה גָּבְיָא, וּלְאַחַר מִיתָה מִמַּאן גָּבְיָא – מִיַּתְמֵי; אִיהוּ נָמֵי כִּי מַגְבֵּי – כִּלְאַחַר מִיתָה מַגְבֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** payment is made in **this** case **in accordance with its *halakha* and** payment is made in **this** case **in accordance with its *halakha*.** Since **an injured** party **and a creditor** ordinarily **collect** from those who owe them money **while they are alive, when** the guarantor **pays** the debt, **he too pays** the debt **as though** the one who caused the damage or borrowed the money **were** still **alive.** Therefore, in these cases collection is made from superior-quality or intermediate-quality land. But in this case, where the father serves as a guarantor for his son, payment of **a woman’s marriage contract is** only **after** her husband’s **death, and after** his **death from whom does she collect? From the orphans.** Consequently, **when** the guarantor **pays** the debt, **he too pays** the debt **as though** it were being paid by the orphans **after** the husband’s **death.** Accordingly, payment for her marriage contract is made from inferior-quality land.


###### Gittin 49b:17
[Gittin 49b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:17)

וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ דְּעָרֵב דִּכְתוּבָּה לֹא מִשְׁתַּעְבֵּד! בְּקַבְּלָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But let him derive** this *halakha* from another *halakha* that states that **the guarantor** of a marriage contract **does not become responsible** for the payment of the marriage contract from his own property. The signature that he adds to the marriage contract serves merely as additional support but does not turn him into a true guarantor. Therefore, even if a collection is made, it is only from inferior-quality land. The Gemara answers: We are dealing here **with an unconditional guarantor,** i.e., one who accepted unconditional responsibility for the obligation, allowing his daughter-in-law to collect payment of her marriage contract either from his son or from him, as she so desires.


###### Gittin 49b:18
[Gittin 49b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:18)

הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: קַבְּלָן, אַף עַל גַּב דְּלֵית לֵיהּ נִכְסֵי לְלֹוֶה – מִשְׁתַּעְבַּד, שַׁפִּיר; אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: אִי אִית לֵיהּ – מִשְׁתַּעְבַּד, אִי לֵית לֵיהּ – לָא מִשְׁתַּעְבַּד, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **This works out well according to the one who says** that **an unconditional guarantor becomes responsible** for repayment of the loan **even if the borrower does not have property** of his own. Therefore, it works out **well** to explain the case in this manner. **But according to the one who says** that **if** the borrower **has** property of his own at the time of the loan, then the unconditional guarantor **becomes responsible,** but **if** the borrower **does not have** property of his own at the time of the loan, then the unconditional guarantor **does not become responsible, what is there to say** in a case where the son did not have any property at the time of the marriage? In such a case, the father never became responsible for his son’s obligations.


###### Gittin 49b:19
[Gittin 49b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:19)

אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: בְּדַהֲווֹ לֵיהּ וְאִישְׁתְּדוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **If you wish, say** that it is a case **where** the son **had** property of his own at the outset, **but** afterward **it was blighted.** Since the son had his own property, the father accepted responsibility for the obligation, and now that the property has no value, the daughter-in-law can collect payment for her marriage contract from the father.


###### Gittin 49b:20
[Gittin 49b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:20)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: כֹּל לְגַבֵּי בְּרֵיהּ, שַׁעְבּוֹדֵי מְשַׁעְבַּד נַפְשֵׁיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if you wish say:** With respect to **anything relating to his son,** it is common for a father to **pledge himself** absolutely, even when the son has no property of his own.


###### Gittin 49b:21
[Gittin 49b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Gittin/r/49b:21)

אִיתְּמַר: עָרֵב דִּכְתוּבָּה – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל לָא מִשְׁתַּעְבַּד;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ Apropos a guarantor for a marriage contract, the Gemara notes: It **was stated** that **everyone agrees** that **a guarantor** who signs **a marriage contract does not** thereby **become responsible** for the payment of the marriage contract from his own property.