## Ketubot Daf 50b

###### Ketubot 50b:1
[Ketubot 50b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:1)

יָתֵיב רַב יוֹסֵף קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב הַמְנוּנָא וְיָתֵיב רַב הַמְנוּנָא, וְקָאָמַר: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין הַבָּנִים יוֹרְשִׁין אֶלָּא מִן הַקַּרְקַע — כָּךְ אֵין הַבָּנוֹת נִיזּוֹנוֹת אֶלָּא מִן הַקַּרְקַע. אֲוַושׁ עֲלֵיהּ כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא: דְּשָׁבֵיק אַרְעָא — הוּא דְּיָרְתִי לֵיהּ בְּנֵיהּ, דְּלָא שָׁבֵיק אַרְעָא — לָא יָרְתִי לֵיהּ בְּנֵיהּ?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **Rav Yosef sat before Rav Hamnuna** in the study hall, **and Rav Hamnuna sat and said** the following *halakha*: **Just as sons inherit only from land, so too, daughters are sustained only from land.** When Rav Hamnuna taught this *halakha*, **everyone clamored [*avash*] against him,** i.e., all his listeners whispered their surprise to one another: Is it only one **who leaves** behind **land whose sons inherit** from **him,** whereas in the case of one **who does not leave land, his sons do not inherit** from **him?** Rav Hamnuna’s statement indicates that sons inherit only land and nothing else.


###### Ketubot 50b:2
[Ketubot 50b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:2)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף: וְדִלְמָא כְּתוּבַּת בְּנִין דִּכְרִין קָאָמַר מָר?! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מָר, דְּגַבְרָא רַבָּא הוּא, יָדַע מַאי קָאָמֵינָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yosef said to** Rav Hamnuna: **Perhaps the Master was speaking** of the **marriage document** ensuring the inheritance rights of a woman’s **male children,** i.e., her sons’ right to inherit the sum stipulated in her marriage contract in addition to their share of the father’s estate alongside any other brothers. Rav Hamnuna **said to him: The Master, who is a great man, knows what I said,** i.e., that was indeed my intention, while the others failed to understand me properly.


###### Ketubot 50b:3
[Ketubot 50b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:3)

אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר יוֹסֵף: רַב זָן מֵחִיטֵּי דַעֲלִיָּיה. אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: פַּרְנָסָה הֲוַיא, וּמַאי עֲלִיָּיה — מֵעִילּוּיָיא דְאָב, וּכְדִשְׁמוּאֵל. דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לְפַרְנָסָה, שָׁמִין בָּאָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef said: Rav** would **sustain** orphan girls **with wheat according to the *aliyya*** if their fathers did not leave land for them. **A dilemma was raised before** the scholars: **Was** this sustenance that Rav provided in the form of **livelihood,** i.e., a dowry so that they could marry, **and what is** the meaning of the term ***aliyya*?** It means: In keeping with **the status [*illuyya*] of the father, and** this is **in accordance with** the opinion **of Shmuel. As Shmuel said: With regard to** the daughters’ **livelihood,** i.e., their dowry, the court **assesses** the amount they receive from their father’s estate after his death **in accordance with** the temperament and social and financial status of **the father.**


###### Ketubot 50b:4
[Ketubot 50b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:4)

אוֹ דִלְמָא מְזוֹנֵי מַמָּשׁ הֲוָה, וּמַאי עֲלִיָּיה — מִדְּבָרִים טוֹבִים שֶׁנֶּאֶמְרוּ בָּעֲלִיָּיה. דְּאָמַר רַב יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף: בָּעֲלִיָּיה הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ בָּנוֹת נִיזּוֹנוֹת מִן הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or perhaps** it **was actual sustenance,** i.e., provisions so that they would have food, **and what is** the meaning of the term ***aliyya*?** It indicates that this *halakha* is one **of the good statements said in the upper chamber [*aliyya*], as Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef said:** When the Sages sat **in the upper chamber** to rule on certain *halakhot*, which they could not do in the study hall at that time due to persecution by gentiles, **they instituted that daughters should be sustained from movable property** in addition to land.


###### Ketubot 50b:5
[Ketubot 50b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: בִּידֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי בַּנַּאי אֲחוּהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא הֲווֹ מִטַּלְטְלִין דְּיַתְמֵי. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל זוּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a resolution to this dilemma: **In the possession of Rabbi Banai, the brother of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, there was movable property** belonging **to orphans,** deposited with him by their father. The orphan daughters **came before Shmuel,** who **said to** Rabbi Banai: **Go** and **sustain** the daughters from the property.


###### Ketubot 50b:6
[Ketubot 50b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:6)

מַאי לָאו לִמְזוֹנֵי, וְכִדְרַב יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף סְבִירָא לֵיהּ? לָא, הָתָם לְפַרְנָסָה הֲוַאי. וּשְׁמוּאֵל לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לְפַרְנָסָה שָׁמִין בָּאָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What, is it not** correct to say that this means he should provide them **with sustenance, and** this would indicate that Shmuel **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef,** that the Sages instituted an ordinance in the upper chamber that daughters are entitled to their sustenance even from movable property? The Gemara refutes this claim: **No, there it is** stated in reference **to** their **livelihood, and Shmuel** conforms **to his** standard line of **reasoning, as Shmuel said: With regard to livelihood,** i.e., the dowry granted to daughters from their father’s estate, the court **assesses** the amount they receive **in accordance with** the status of **the father.**


###### Ketubot 50b:7
[Ketubot 50b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:7)

הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא בִּנְהַרְדְּעָא, וְדוּן דַּיָּינֵי דִנְהַרְדְּעָא. בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא, וְאַגְבִּי רַב חָנָא בַּר בִּיזְנָא. אֲמַר לְהוּ רַב נַחְמָן: זִילוּ אַהְדַּרוּ, וְאִי לָא — מַגְבֵּינָא לְכוּ לְאַפַּדְנַיְיכוּ מִינַּיְיכוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: **There was an incident** of this kind that came before the court **in Neharde’a, and the judges of Neharde’a ruled** that the daughters must be supported from the movable property that their father had left. Likewise, a case occurred **in Pumbedita, and Rav Ḥana bar Bizna collected** the sum from movable property. **Rav Naḥman said to** the judges: **Go reverse** your decisions, **and if not, I will collect your houses [*appadnaikhu*] from you** in order to compensate those you ruled against.


###### Ketubot 50b:8
[Ketubot 50b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:8)

רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי סְבוּר לְמֵיזַן מִמִּטַּלְטְלֵי. אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי: מִילְּתָא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ לָא עֲבַדוּ בָּהּ עוֹבָדָא אַתּוּן עָבְדִין בַּהּ עוֹבָדָא?!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further relates: **Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi thought** to issue a ruling requiring a man’s heirs **to sustain** his daughters **from** the man’s **movable property. Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said to them:** This is **a matter** about **which Rabbi Yoḥanan and Reish Lakish did not take action,** i.e., they did not issue a ruling to this effect; will **you take action in** this regard? If those great Sages were not sure enough of the *halakha* to issue a practical ruling, how can you do so?


###### Ketubot 50b:9
[Ketubot 50b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:9)

רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר סָבַר לְמֵיזַן מִמִּטַּלְטְלִין. אָמַר לְפָנָיו רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְיָקִים: רַבִּי, יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי בְּךָ שֶׁאֵין מִדַּת הַדִּין אַתָּה עוֹשֶׂה, אֶלָּא מִדַּת רַחְמָנוּת. אֶלָּא, שֶׁמָּא יִרְאוּ הַתַּלְמִידִים וְיִקְבְּעוּ הֲלָכָה לְדוֹרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rabbi Elazar thought** to issue a ruling requiring a man’s heirs **to sustain** his daughters **from** his **movable property. Rabbi Shimon ben Elyakim said before him: My teacher, I know about you that you are not acting** according to **the letter of the law,** but **rather** out of **pity** for these daughters, who have no other source of support. **However,** you should still not do this, **lest the students observe and** mistakenly **establish** the ***halakha*** accordingly **for** future **generations.**


###### Ketubot 50b:10
[Ketubot 50b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:10)

הָהוּא דַּאֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף, אֲמַר לְהוּ: הַבוּ לַהּ מִתַּמְרֵי דְּעַל בּוּדְיָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אִילּוּ בַּעַל חוֹב הֲוָה כִּי הַאי גַּוְונָא, מִי הֲוָה יָהֵיב לֵיהּ מָר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A certain** person **came before Rav Yosef** to inquire about this matter. Rav Yosef **said to** the sons of the deceased man: **Give** the daughter her sustenance **from the dates** that are laid out to dry **on the mats [*budya*].** These fruits are certainly movable property. **Abaye said to** Rav Yosef: **If it was a creditor** who came to collect a debt, **would the Master give him** the right to collect it **in this** manner? Even a creditor, who may collect his claim by repossessing property that the debtor has sold, cannot take movable property from the possession of orphans. A daughter, who cannot collect her sustenance from property that her father sold, should certainly not have the right to collect her sustenance from movable property that belongs to the male orphans.


###### Ketubot 50b:11
[Ketubot 50b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/50b:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: דְּחַזְיָיא לְבוּדְיָא קָאָמֵינָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Yosef **said to** Abaye: I did not mean actual dates lying on mats; rather, **I spoke** of ripe dates ready for plucking, **which are fit for mats.** Since they are still attached to the ground, they are not considered movable property.