## Ketubot Daf 13a

###### Ketubot 13a:1
[Ketubot 13a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:1)

דְּאִם כֵּן, קַשְׁיָא הִלְכְתָא אַהִלְכְתָא. דְּקַיְימָא לַן הִלְכְתָא כְּרַב נַחְמָן בְּדִינֵי, וּבְהָא אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ כִּדְמִשְּׁנֵינַן. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Because if** that were not **so,** it is **difficult,** as there would be a contradiction between one ***halakha*** and another ***halakha*. Since,** on the one hand, **we maintain** a principle in halakhic ruling that **the *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Naḥman in civil law; and,** on the other hand, **in that** case involving the claims of the bride and the groom **Rav Yehuda said** that **Shmuel said: The *halakha*** is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabban Gamliel. Rather,** can we **not conclude from** this apparent contradiction that the matter must be understood **as we are teaching,** that the opinion of Rav Naḥman can be reconciled with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel? The Gemara affirms: Indeed, **conclude from it** that this is the case.


###### Ketubot 13a:2
[Ketubot 13a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:2)

**מַתְנִי׳** הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת: מוּכַּת עֵץ אֲנִי. וְהוּא אוֹמֵר: לֹא כִי, אֶלָּא דְּרוּסַת אִישׁ אַתְּ. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמְרִים: נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: לֹא מִפִּיהָ אָנוּ חַיִּין, אֶלָּא הֲרֵי זוֹ בְּחֶזְקַת דְּרוּסַת אִישׁ, עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא רְאָיָה לִדְבָרֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In a case where **she says: I** am one whose hymen was **ruptured by wood,** i.e., she admits that her hymen is not intact but claims that it was not ruptured through intercourse, **and** the groom **says: No; rather, you are** one who was **trampled by a man,** and your hymen was ruptured through intercourse, **Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: She is deemed credible** and her claim is accepted because she certainly knows what actually happened. **Rabbi Yehoshua says:** It is **not** based on the statement emerging **from her mouth** that **we conduct our lives; rather, she** retains **the presumptive status of** one who **was trampled by a man, until she brings proof** supporting **her statement** that her hymen was ruptured by wood.


###### Ketubot 13a:3
[Ketubot 13a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:3)

**גְּמָ׳** טַעֲנָתַיְיהוּ בְּמַאי? רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: בְּמָאתַיִם וּמָנֶה. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר: בְּמָנֶה וְלֹא כְּלוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **What are their** respective financial **claims? Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** The bride claims that since her hymen was ruptured by wood, her legal status is that of a virgin and she is entitled to a marriage contract of **two hundred** dinars; **and** the groom claims that she engaged in intercourse and is entitled to a marriage contract of **one hundred dinars. Rabbi Elazar said:** The bride claims that although her hymen is not intact she did not completely deceive him, as she never engaged in intercourse, and therefore she is entitled to a marriage contract of **one hundred dinars; and** the groom claims that she engaged in intercourse, rendering the betrothal a mistaken transaction, and therefore she is entitled to **nothing at all.**


###### Ketubot 13a:4
[Ketubot 13a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:4)

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: בְּמָאתַיִם וּמָנֶה, סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר, דְּאָמַר: בֵּין הִכִּיר בָּהּ, וּבֵין לֹא הִכִּיר בָּהּ — מָאתַיִם. וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: בְּמָנֶה וְלֹא כְּלוּם — סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבָּנַן, דְּאָמְרִי: בֵּין הִכִּיר בָּהּ, בֵּין לֹא הִכִּיר בָּהּ — מָנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates. **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** The dispute between the bride and groom is whether the marriage contract **is two hundred** dinars **or one hundred dinars,** because the *tanna* of the mishna **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, who said: Whether** the husband **was aware that her** hymen was ruptured by wood **or whether he was not aware of her** condition, she receives payment of her marriage contract of **two hundred** dinars and it is not a mistaken transaction. **And Rabbi Elazar says: The dispute** between the bride and groom is whether the marriage contract **is one hundred dinars or** whether she is entitled to **nothing at all,** because the *tanna* of the mishna **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis, who said: Whether** the husband **was aware that her** hymen was ruptured by wood or **whether he was not aware of her** condition, she receives payment of her marriage contract of **one hundred dinars.**


###### Ketubot 13a:5
[Ketubot 13a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:5)

בִּשְׁלָמָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר לֹא קָאָמַר כְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן — דְּקָא מוֹקֵי לַהּ כְּרַבָּנַן. אֶלָּא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אָמַר כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, Rabbi Elazar did not state** his explanation of the mishna **in accordance with** the explanation of **Rabbi Yoḥanan because he** preferred to **establish** the mishna **in accordance with** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** according to which the *halakha* is ruled, and not the opinion of Rabbi Meir. **However, what is the reason that Rabbi Yoḥanan did not state** his explanation of the mishna **in accordance with** the explanation of **Rabbi Elazar?**


###### Ketubot 13a:6
[Ketubot 13a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:6)

קָסָבַר: כְּנָסָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת בְּתוּלָה וְנִמְצֵאת בְּעוּלָה — יֵשׁ לָהּ כְּתוּבָּה מָנֶה. הָכָא, הוּא קָאָמַר מָנֶה, וְהִיא קָאָמְרָה מָנֶה, מַאי אִיכָּא בֵּין טַעֲנָה דִידֵיהּ לְטַעֲנָה דִידַהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The reason that Rabbi Yoḥanan explained the mishna in that manner is that **he holds:** If the groom **married** a woman **with the presumptive status of a virgin, and she is found to be a non-virgin, she** receives payment of her **marriage contract of one hundred** dinars. Therefore, **here,** according to the explanation of Rabbi Elazar, who explains the mishna according to the opinion of the Rabbis, **he is saying** that she engaged in intercourse and is entitled to a marriage contract of **one hundred dinars; and she is saying** that her hymen was ruptured by wood and she is entitled to a marriage contract of **one hundred dinars. What** difference **is there between his claim and her claim?** Therefore, Rabbi Yoḥanan explains the mishna in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, who holds that the dispute between the bride and the groom is whether she is entitled to a marriage contract of two hundred dinars or a marriage contract of one hundred dinars.


###### Ketubot 13a:7
[Ketubot 13a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:7)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר — הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי תַּרְתֵּי: חֲדָא לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרָמֵי בַּר חָמָא,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Again we question: **Granted, according to Rabbi Elazar,** who explains that the dispute between the bride and the groom is with regard to whether she is entitled to a marriage contract of one hundred dinars because her hymen was ruptured by wood, or whether she is entitled to nothing because she engaged in intercourse, **that is** why the *tanna* **teaches two** similar disputes, in this mishna and in the previous one. **One** dispute, in this mishna, comes **to exclude** the opinion **of Rami bar Ḥama,** who said: If he was not aware that her hymen was ruptured by wood, everyone agrees that she receives no marriage contract at all, as the marriage was a mistaken transaction. From this mishna it is clear that according to her claim that her hymen was ruptured by wood, she is entitled to one hundred dinars.


###### Ketubot 13a:8
[Ketubot 13a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:8)

וַחֲדָא לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִדְּרַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת. אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן תַּרְתֵּי לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And one** dispute, in the previous mishna, is brought in order **to exclude** that **which Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin** said that **Rav Sheshet said:** If the groom married a woman with the presumptive status of a virgin and she is found to be a non-virgin, she receives payment of her marriage contract of one hundred dinars. In the previous mishna he claims: Before I betrothed you, you were raped and my transaction was a mistaken transaction, indicating that she is entitled to nothing. **However,** according **to Rabbi Yoḥanan, why do I** need the *tanna* to teach **two** similar disputes? In his opinion, the previous mishna could not have been taught to exclude that which Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rav Sheshet said. It has already been established that Rabbi Yoḥanan agrees with the opinion that if she is found to be a non-virgin, she receives payment of her marriage contract of one hundred dinars.


###### Ketubot 13a:9
[Ketubot 13a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:9)

חֲדָא לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, וַחֲדָא לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. קַמַּיְיתָא — לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיכָּא לְמֵימַר מִיגּוֹ — לָא מְהֵימְנָא. בָּתְרָיְיתָא — לְהוֹדִיעֲךָ כֹּחוֹ דְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּלֵיכָּא לְמֵימַר מִיגּוֹ, מְהֵימְנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The two similar disputes were necessary. **One** is **to convey to you the far-reaching nature** of the opinion **of Rabban Gamliel** and the extent of the credibility that he accords to her claim; **and one** is **to convey to you the far-reaching nature** of the opinion **of Rabbi Yehoshua** and the extent to which he does not accord credibility to her claim. The Gemara elaborates: **The first** mishna, where she admits she was raped but claims that it was after betrothal, **conveys to you the far-reaching nature** of the opinion **of Rabbi Yehoshua: That even though there is** room **to say** that her claim is bolstered by a ***miggo*, she is not deemed credible. The second** mishna, where she claims that her hymen was ruptured by wood and he claims that she engaged in intercourse, **conveys to you the far-reaching nature** of the opinion **of Rabban Gamliel: That even though there is no** room **to say** that her claim is bolstered by a ***miggo*,** in his opinion **she is deemed credible.**


###### Ketubot 13a:10
[Ketubot 13a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:10)

**מַתְנִי׳** רָאוּהָ מְדַבֶּרֶת עִם אֶחָד, וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ: מָה טִיבוֹ שֶׁל אִישׁ זֶה? אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי, וְכֹהֵן הוּא. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמְרִים: נֶאֱמֶנֶת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: לֹא מִפִּיהָ אָנוּ חַיִּין, אֶלָּא הֲרֵי זוֹ בְּחֶזְקַת בְּעוּלָה לְנָתִין וּלְמַמְזֵר, עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא רְאָיָה לִדְבָרֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If people **saw** a woman **speaking to one** man, but they did not recognize him, **and they said to her: What is the nature [*tivo*] of this man?** And she said to them: **He is a man** called **so-and-so and he is a priest; Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: She is deemed credible, and Rabbi Yehoshua says:** It is **not** based on the statement emerging **from her mouth** that **we conduct our lives. Rather, she** assumes **the presumptive status of** one who **engaged in intercourse with a Gibeonite or with a *mamzer*,** men of flawed lineage who disqualify her from marrying a priest, **until she brings proof** supporting **her statement.**


###### Ketubot 13a:11
[Ketubot 13a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:11)

הָיְתָה מְעוּבֶּרֶת, וְאָמְרוּ לָהּ: מָה טִיבוֹ שֶׁל עוּבָּר זֶה? מֵאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי, וְכֹהֵן הוּא. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמְרִים: נֶאֱמֶנֶת, וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: לֹא מִפִּיהָ אָנוּ חַיִּין, אֶלָּא הֲרֵי זוֹ בְּחֶזְקַת מְעוּבֶּרֶת לְנָתִין וּלְמַמְזֵר, עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא רְאָיָה לִדְבָרֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, **if** a single woman **was pregnant, and** people **said to her: What is the nature of this fetus?** And she says to them: **It is from a man** called **so-and-so and he is a priest; Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: She is deemed credible, and Rabbi Yehoshua says:** It is **not** based on the statement emerging **from her mouth** that **we conduct our lives. Rather, she** assumes **the presumptive status of** one who **conceived from a Gibeonite or a *mamzer*, until she brings proof** supporting **her statement.**


###### Ketubot 13a:12
[Ketubot 13a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:12)

**גְּמָ׳** מַאי מְדַבֶּרֶת? זְעֵירִי אָמַר: נִסְתְּרָה, רַב אַסִּי אָמַר: נִבְעֲלָה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לִזְעֵירִי, הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי מְדַבֶּרֶת. אֶלָּא לְרַב אַסִּי, מַאי מְדַבֶּרֶת? לִישָּׁנָא מְעַלְּיָא, כְּדִכְתִיב: ״אָכְלָה וּמָחֲתָה פִיהָ וְאָמְרָה לֹא פָעַלְתִּי אָוֶן״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: **What is** the meaning of **speaking** mentioned in the mishna? **Ze’eiri said:** It means that **she secluded herself** with a man and it is unknown whether she engaged in intercourse. **Rav Asi said:** It means that **she engaged in intercourse. Granted, according to Ze’eiri, that is** why the mishna **teaches** the case employing the term **speaking,** as it is certain only that they were in seclusion. Perhaps all they did was speak. **However, according to Rav Asi, what is** the reason the mishna employed the term **speaking** if the reference is to intercourse? The Gemara answers: The mishna employed **a euphemism, as it is written** with regard to licentious women: **“She eats and wipes her mouth and says: I have done no wickedness”** (Proverbs 30:20). The verse euphemistically ascribes the act of intercourse to the mouth instead of to the appropriate body part.


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

בִּשְׁלָמָא לִזְעֵירִי — הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי תַּרְתֵּי: ״מְדַבֶּרֶת״, וּ״מְעוּבֶּרֶת״. אֶלָּא לְרַב אַסִּי — תַּרְתֵּי לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to Ze’eiri,** who said that speaking means that she secluded herself with him, **that is** the reason **that** the *tanna* **teaches two** cases in the mishna: A woman **speaking** to a man **and** a woman who is **pregnant. However, according to Rav Asi,** if speaking means that she engaged in intercourse, **why do I** need **two** cases addressing the same issue?


###### Ketubot 13a:14
[Ketubot 13a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:14)

חֲדָא, לְהַכְשִׁיר בָּהּ. וַחֲדָא, לְהַכְשִׁיר בְּבִתָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: The *tanna* teaches **one** case, the case of speaking to a man, **to deem her fit** to marry a priest, because although she engaged in intercourse, Rabbi Eliezer and Rabban Gamliel rule that she is deemed credible and is not considered to have engaged in intercourse with a man of flawed lineage. **And** the *tanna* teaches **one** case, the case of the single woman who is pregnant, in order **to deem her daughter** born from that pregnancy **fit** to marry a priest, as Rabbi Eliezer and Rabban Gamliel rule the mother is deemed credible.


###### Ketubot 13a:15
[Ketubot 13a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:15)

הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: לְדִבְרֵי הַמַּכְשִׁיר בָּהּ — מַכְשִׁיר בְּבִתָּהּ. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: לְדִבְרֵי הַמַּכְשִׁיר בָּהּ — פּוֹסֵל בְּבִתָּהּ, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר? רַב אַסִּי סָבַר כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לְדִבְרֵי הַמַּכְשִׁיר בָּהּ — מַכְשִׁיר בְּבִתָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **This works out well according to the one who says:** With regard **to the statement of the one who deems her fit** to marry a priest, **he deems her daughter fit** to do so as well. **However, according to the one who says:** With regard **to the statement of the one who deems her fit** to marry a priest, **he** nevertheless **deems her daughter unfit, what is there to say?** Why did the mishna cite two cases addressing the same issue? The Gemara answers: **Rav Asi holds in accordance with** the opinion of **the one who said:** With regard **to the statement of the one who deems her fit** to marry a priest, **he deems her daughter fit** to do so as well.


###### Ketubot 13a:16
[Ketubot 13a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְאַבָּיֵי: לִזְעֵירִי דְּאָמַר מַאי ״מְדַבֶּרֶת״ — נִסְתְּרָה, וְאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לָא מְהֵימְנָא, הָאָמַר רַב: מַלְקִין עַל הַיִּחוּד — וְאֵין אוֹסְרִין עַל הַיִּחוּד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa said to Abaye:** According **to Ze’eiri, who said: What is** the meaning of the term **speaking?** It means that **she secluded herself, and Rabbi Yehoshua said** that she is **not deemed credible** to say that she engaged in intercourse with a man of proper lineage, but the assumption is that she engaged in intercourse with a man of flawed lineage. **Didn’t Rav say: One flogs** a man and a woman **for** entering into **seclusion,** for violating rabbinic law, **but one does not render** a woman **forbidden** to her husband **for** entering into **seclusion?** Only if it is established as a certainty that she engaged in intercourse with a man other than her husband, is she forbidden to her husband.


###### Ketubot 13a:17
[Ketubot 13a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:17)

לֵימָא דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ? אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ — מַעֲלָה עָשׂוּ בְּיוּחֲסִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Let us say that** this statement of Rav is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua,** as Rabbi Yehoshua rules that she assumes the presumptive status of one who engaged in intercourse with a Gibeonite or with a *mamzer*, and she is forbidden to marry a priest even for entering into seclusion. The Gemara rejects that conclusion. **Even** if you **say** that Rav’s statement is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua,** the Sages **established a higher standard with regard to** matters of **lineage.** Although she is not forbidden to her husband for entering into seclusion, she is deemed unfit to marry a priest.


###### Ketubot 13a:18
[Ketubot 13a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/13a:18)

מֵיתִיבִי: רָאוּהָ שֶׁנִּכְנְסָה עִם אֶחָד לְסֵתֶר,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection: If** people **saw that** a woman **entered with one** man **into seclusion,**