## Ketubot Daf 107b

###### Ketubot 107b:1
[Ketubot 107b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:1)

צְדָקָה. מַאן דְּאָמַר צְדָקָה — אֲבָל תַּכְשִׁיט יָהֲבִינַן לַהּ, דְּלָא נִיחָא לֵיהּ דְּתִינַּוַּול.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
he maintains that she does not receive money from his property for **charity,** as the court does not take donations of charity from one’s property without his knowledge. Conversely, **the one who said** that the court does not give money for **charity** would argue: **However, they do give her ornaments,** as it is assumed **that it is not satisfactory for him** for his wife **to be degraded** by a lack of jewelry.


###### Ketubot 107b:2
[Ketubot 107b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:2)

תָּא שְׁמַע: הַיְּבָמָה — שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים נִיזּוֹנֶת מִשֶּׁל בַּעְלָהּ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear:** With regard to **a *yevama*,** a woman whose husband died childless and he has a brother [*yavam*], and who is waiting either to enter into levirate marriage with the *yavam* or perform *ḥalitza*, for the **first three months** after her husband’s death **she is sustained from** the property of **her husband.**


###### Ketubot 107b:3
[Ketubot 107b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:3)

מִיכָּן וְאֵילָךְ, אֵינָהּ נִיזּוֹנֶת לֹא מִשֶּׁל בַּעְלָהּ וְלֹא מִשֶּׁל יָבָם. עָמַד בַּדִּין וּבָרַח — נִיזּוֹנֶת מִשֶּׁל יָבָם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**From then on,** as long as she has not entered into levirate marriage, **she is not sustained, neither from** the property of **her husband nor from** that of the ***yavam*.** If the *yavam* **stood in judgment** and the court ruled that he should enter into levirate marriage, **and he fled, she is sustained from** the property of the ***yavam*.** This apparently contradicts Shmuel’s ruling, as here the woman is provided with sustenance from the estate of the *yavam* in his absence, despite the fact that his obligation toward her is less than that of a husband.


###### Ketubot 107b:4
[Ketubot 107b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:4)

אָמַר לְךָ שְׁמוּאֵל: לְמַאי נֵיחוּשׁ לַהּ לְהַאי? אִי מִשּׁוּם צְרָרֵי — לָא מִיקָּרְבָא דַּעְתֵּיהּ לְגַבַּהּ, אִי מִשּׁוּם מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ — לָא מִשְׁתַּעְבְּדָא לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **Shmuel** could have **said to you: With regard to what** need **we be concerned** in **this** case? **If** the concern is **due to** the possibility that he gave her **a bundle** of money before his departure, **the mind of** the *yavam* **is not** that **close to** this woman that he would leave money with her; **if** the concern is **due to her earnings,** i.e., that he said to her: Spend your earnings to sustain yourself, **she is not** yet **obligated to** give **him** her earnings.


###### Ketubot 107b:5
[Ketubot 107b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלְכָה הִיא וּבַעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, וּבָאת וְאָמְרָה ״מֵת בַּעְלִי״, רָצְתָה — נִיזּוֹנֶת, רָצְתָה — גּוֹבָה כְּתוּבָּתָהּ. ״גֵּירְשַׁנִי בַּעֲלִי״ — מִתְפַּרְנֶסֶת וְהוֹלֶכֶת עַד כְּדֵי כְתוּבָּתָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear:** With regard to **a wife who went with her husband overseas, and she came** back **and said: My husband died,** if **she wishes she is sustained** from his property, and if **she wishes she collects** payment of **her marriage contract.** If she said: **My husband divorced me,** but she does not present a bill of divorce, **she is continually sustained** from his property **up to the amount of her marriage contract.** The reason is that she may collect this money whether or not her claim is believed: If she is still married, she is entitled to her sustenance, and if she is divorced she receives the marriage contract. This once again presents a difficulty for the opinion of Shmuel, as she collects money from her husband’s estate in his absence.


###### Ketubot 107b:6
[Ketubot 107b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:6)

הָכָא נָמֵי כְּשֶׁשָּׁמְעוּ בּוֹ שֶׁמֵּת. וּמַאי שְׁנָא עַד כְּדֵי כְתוּבָּתָהּ? דְּאִיהִי הִיא דְּאַפְסֵידָה אַנַּפְשַׁהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Here, too,** it is referring to a case where **they heard concerning** the husband **that he died.** The Gemara asks: **And what is different** about the sum **up to the amount of her marriage contract;** why is she given no more than this? If he is dead, she should be allowed to sustain herself from all his property until she weds another. The Gemara answers: The reason is **that she is** the one who **caused** the **loss to herself.** By claiming that she was divorced, she forfeits her right to more sustenance.


###### Ketubot 107b:7
[Ketubot 107b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:7)

תָּא שְׁמַע: כֵּיצַד אָמְרוּ מְמָאֶנֶת אֵין לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת? אִי אַתָּה יָכוֹל לוֹמַר בְּיוֹשֶׁבֶת תַּחַת בַּעְלָהּ — שֶׁהֲרֵי בַּעְלָהּ חַיָּיב בִּמְזוֹנוֹת. אֶלָּא כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָלַךְ בַּעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, לָוְתָה וְאָכְלָה עָמְדָה וּמֵיאֲנָה. טַעְמָא דְּמֵיאֲנָה, הָא לֹא מֵיאֲנָה — יָהֲבִינַן לַהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear: How,** i.e., in what case, **did** the Sages **say** that a minor who **refuses** her husband **does not** receive **sustenance? You cannot say** that this *halakha* applies **to** a young girl **who is living under** the authority of **her husband, as her husband is obligated in her sustenance. Rather,** it applies to a case **where her husband went overseas,** and **she borrowed** money **and sustained** herself for a while, and subsequently **she arose and refused** him. The Gemara infers: The **reason** is **that she refused** him, which indicates that if **she did not refuse** her husband, the court **gives** her sustenance. This apparently shows that a woman is sustained from her husband’s property when he goes overseas.


###### Ketubot 107b:8
[Ketubot 107b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:8)

אָמַר לָךְ שְׁמוּאֵל: הָכָא לְמַאי נֵיחוּשׁ לַהּ? אִי מִשּׁוּם צְרָרֵי — צְרָרֵי לִקְטַנָּה לָא מַתְפֵּיס, וְאִי מִשּׁוּם מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ — קְטַנָּה לָא סָפְקָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **Shmuel** could have **said to you: With regard to what** need **we be concerned here? If** the concern is **due to** the possibility that he left her **a bundle** of money before his departure, **one does not give a bundle** of money **to a minor. If** the concern is **due to** the possibility that he instructed her to subsist on **her earnings,** the earnings of **a minor** are **not enough** to cover the expenses of her sustenance. In summary, no resolution has been found for the dispute between Rav and Shmuel, notwithstanding the numerous sources cited by the Gemara.


###### Ketubot 107b:9
[Ketubot 107b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:9)

מַאי הֲוָה עֲלַהּ? כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר: מַעֲשֶׂה בָּא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי בְּבֵית שְׁעָרִים וּפָסַק לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת. לִפְנֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּצִפּוֹרִי, וְלֹא פָּסַק לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת. תָּהֵי בַּהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וְכִי מָה רָאָה רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל שֶׁלֹּא פָּסַק לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת? הָא לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ בְּנֵי כֹּהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים וְחָנָן אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן שְׁבוּעָה, אֲבָל מְזוֹנֵי יָהֲבִינַן לַהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the conclusion that was reached **about this** dispute? How should this case be treated in practice? **When Rav Dimi came** from Eretz Yisrael, **he said: An incident** of this kind **came before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **in Beit She’arim, and he apportioned sustenance for her.** However, a similar incident came **before Rabbi Yishmael in Tzippori, and he did not apportion sustenance for her. Rabbi Yoḥanan wondered about this** ruling: **And what did Rabbi Yishmael see** such **that he did not apportion sustenance for her?** After all, **the sons of High Priests and Ḥanan disagreed** in the mishna **only with regard to** whether she is obligated to swear **an oath, but** as far as **sustenance** is concerned, they concur that the court **gives it to her.**


###### Ketubot 107b:10
[Ketubot 107b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב שֶׁמֶן בַּר אַבָּא: כְּבָר תַּרְגְּמַהּ רַבֵּינוּ שְׁמוּאֵל בְּבָבֶל כְּשֶׁשָּׁמְעוּ בּוֹ שֶׁמֵּת. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פָּתְרִיתוּ בָּהּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Shemen bar Abba said to** Rabbi Yoḥanan: **Our Rabbi in Babylonia, Shmuel, already interpreted it** as referring to a case where **they heard concerning** the husband **that he died.** Rabbi Yoḥanan **said to him** in astonishment: **Have you gone that far** in your analysis of this case that you were able to resolve this problem?


###### Ketubot 107b:11
[Ketubot 107b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:11)

כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין, אָמַר: מַעֲשֶׂה בָּא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי בְּבֵית שְׁעָרִים, וְלֹא פָּסַק לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת. לִפְנֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּצִיפּוֹרִי, וּפָסַק לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מָה רָאָה רַבִּי שֶׁלֹּא פָּסַק לָהּ? דְּהָא לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ חָנָן וּבְנֵי כֹּהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן שְׁבוּעָה, אֲבָל מְזוֹנוֹת יָהֲבִינַן לַהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב שֶׁמֶן בַּר אַבָּא: כְּבָר תַּרְגְּמַהּ שְׁמוּאֵל בְּבָבֶל כְּשֶׁשָּׁמְעוּ בּוֹ שֶׁמֵּת. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פָּתְרִיתוּ בָּהּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael, **he said** a different version of this discussion: **An incident came before Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **in Beit She’arim, and he did not apportion sustenance for her;** an incident came **before Rabbi Yishmael in Tzippori, and he apportioned sustenance for her. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And what did Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **see** such **that he did not apportion sustenance for her? As, the sons of High Priests and Ḥanan disagreed only with regard to an oath, but** when it comes to **sustenance,** the court **gives it to her. Rav Shemen bar Abba said to** Rabbi Yoḥanan: **Shmuel in Babylonia already interpreted it** as referring to a case where **they heard concerning him that he died.** Rabbi Yoḥanan **said to him** in astonishment: **Have you gone that far** in your analysis of this case?


###### Ketubot 107b:12
[Ketubot 107b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:12)

וְהִלְכְתָא כְּוָתֵיהּ דְּרַב, וּפוֹסְקִין מְזוֹנוֹת לְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ. וְהִלְכְתָא כְּוָתֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב. דְּאָמַר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב: יְכוֹלָה אִשָּׁה שֶׁתֹּאמַר לְבַעְלָהּ ״אֵינִי נִיזּוֹנֶת וְאֵינִי עוֹשָׂה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: **And the *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav, and** therefore **one apportions sustenance for a married woman** whose husband went overseas. In passing, the Gemara mentions other rulings of *halakha*. **And the *halakha* is in accordance with** that which **Rav Huna** said that **Rav said. As Rav Huna said** that **Rav said: A woman can say to her husband: I will not be sustained** by you **and** in turn **I will not work,** i.e., you will not keep my earnings. The reason is that this arrangement was enacted by the Sages for the wife’s benefit. Consequently, she can relinquish her rights to her sustenance in this manner.


###### Ketubot 107b:13
[Ketubot 107b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:13)

וְהִלְכְתָא כְּוָתֵיהּ דְּרַב זְבִיד בְּקוּנְיָא. דְּאָמַר רַב זְבִיד: הָנֵי מָאנֵי דְקוּנְיָא — חִיוָּרֵי וְאוּכָּמֵי שְׁרוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Zevid with regard to glazed [*kunya*]** vessels. **As Rav Zevid said:** With regard to **these glazed vessels [*manei dekunya*],** i.e., earthenware vessels that are glazed over, the **white and black ones are permitted** after they have been washed, as the glazing prevents the vessels from absorbing the foods placed inside them. Some earthenware vessels absorb the food and drink that is cooked in them and are therefore rendered forbidden if at any time they contained forbidden food, e.g., wine poured as a libation or leaven on Passover. The white and black vessels are not considered like regular earthenware vessels, which are rendered permanently forbidden.


###### Ketubot 107b:14
[Ketubot 107b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:14)

יְרוּקֵּי אֲסִירִי. וְלָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא דְּלֵית בְּהוּ קַרְטוּפָנֵי, אֲבָל אִית בְּהוּ קַרְטוּפָנֵי — אֲסִירִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Conversely, **green** ones **are forbidden,** as they absorb from the substances placed inside them. **And we said** that white and black ones are permitted **only if they do not have cracks; however, if they have cracks they are forbidden,** as the forbidden food is absorbed by the earthenware through the cracks.


###### Ketubot 107b:15
[Ketubot 107b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:15)

**מַתְנִי׳** מִי שֶׁהָלַךְ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, וְעָמַד אֶחָד וּפִירְנֵס אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, חָנָן אוֹמֵר: אִיבֵּד אֶת מְעוֹתָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In the case of a husband **who went overseas, and someone arose and sustained his wife** in his absence, and upon the husband’s return the provider demands from him the money he spent on his wife, **Ḥanan says:** He has **lost his money,** i.e., the husband is not obligated to repay him, as the provider acted of his own free will and was not instructed to do so by the husband.


###### Ketubot 107b:16
[Ketubot 107b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:16)

נֶחְלְקוּ עָלָיו בְּנֵי כֹּהֲנִים גְּדוֹלִים וְאָמְרוּ: יִשָּׁבַע כַּמָּה הוֹצִיא וְיִטּוֹל. אָמַר רַבִּי דּוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס כְּדִבְרֵיהֶם. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי: יָפֶה אָמַר חָנָן, הִנִּיחַ מְעוֹתָיו עַל קֶרֶן הַצְּבִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The sons of High Priests disagreed** with Ḥanan’s opinion **and said:** The man **swears how much he spent** on behalf of the woman, **and he takes** that sum from the husband. **Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said** that the *halakha* is **in accordance with their statement. Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said: Ḥanan spoke well** in this case, as this man is like one who **placed his money on the horn of a deer** in midflight, i.e., he has no reasonable expectation of reimbursement.


###### Ketubot 107b:17
[Ketubot 107b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/107b:17)

**גְּמָ׳** תְּנַן הָתָם: הַמּוּדָּר הֲנָאָה מֵחֲבֵירוֹ —

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **We learned** in a mishna **there** (*Nedarim* 33a): With regard to **one** who is **prohibited by a vow** from **deriving benefit from another,**