## Ketubot Daf 93a

###### Ketubot 93a:1
[Ketubot 93a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:1)

עֲסִיקִין, עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֶחְזִיק בָּהּ — יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ, מִשֶּׁהֶחְזִיק בָּהּ — אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר בּוֹ. מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: חַיְיתָא דְּקִיטְרֵי סְבַרְתְּ וְקַבֵּילְתְּ. וּמֵאֵימַת מַחְזֵיק בַּהּ? מִכִּי דָיֵישׁ אַמִּצְרֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**disputants** i.e., individuals who dispute Reuven’s ownership of the field, **as long as** Shimon **has not** yet **taken possession of it, he can renege** on the deal. However, **once he has taken possession,** Shimon **cannot renege** on the deal, **because** at that point the seller, Reuven, **can say to him: You agreed** to **a sack [*ḥaita*] of knots and you received it,** i.e., since you purchased the field with no guarantee, you understood that it was a risky investment. The Gemara asks: **And from when** is Shimon considered to have **taken possession of** the property? The Gemara answers: It is **from when he walks the boundaries** of the land to inspect it.


###### Ketubot 93a:2
[Ketubot 93a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:2)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי אֲפִילּוּ בְּאַחְרָיוּת נָמֵי. דְּאָמַר לֵיהּ: אַחְוִי טִירְפָךְ וַאֲשַׁלֵּם לָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**There are** those **who say** that **even** if Reuven sold him the field **with a guarantee,** Shimon may not demand a refund immediately when he discovers that there are disputants, **as** Reuven **can say to** Shimon: **Show me your** document of **authorization to repossess** property from me, **and I will pay you.**


###### Ketubot 93a:3
[Ketubot 93a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:3)

**מַתְנִי׳** מִי שֶׁהָיָה נָשׂוּי שָׁלֹשׁ נָשִׁים, וָמֵת, כְּתוּבָּתָהּ שֶׁל זוֹ מָנֶה, וְשֶׁל זוֹ מָאתַיִם, וְשֶׁל זוֹ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת, וְאֵין שָׁם אֶלָּא מָנֶה — חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** In the case of **one who was married** to **three women and died** and **the marriage contract of this** wife was for **one hundred dinars and** the marriage contract **of this** second wife was for **two hundred** dinars, **and** the marriage contract **of this** third wife was for **three hundred,** and all three contracts were issued on the same date so that none of the wives has precedence over any of the others, **and** the total value of the estate is **only one hundred dinars,** the wives **divide** the estate **equally.**


###### Ketubot 93a:4
[Ketubot 93a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:4)

הָיוּ שָׁם מָאתַיִם, שֶׁל מָנֶה נוֹטֶלֶת חֲמִשִּׁים, שֶׁל מָאתַיִם וְשֶׁל שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שְׁלֹשָׁה שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁל זָהָב. הָיוּ שָׁם שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת — שֶׁל מָנֶה נוֹטֶלֶת חֲמִשִּׁים, וְשֶׁל מָאתַיִם מָנֶה, וְשֶׁל שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שִׁשָּׁה שֶׁל זָהָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **there were two hundred** dinars in the estate, the one whose marriage contract was **for one hundred dinars takes fifty** dinars, while those whose contracts were **for two hundred and three hundred** dinars take **three** dinars **of gold each,** which are the equivalent of seventy-five silver dinars. If **there were three hundred** dinars in the estate, the one whose marriage contract was **for one hundred** dinars **takes fifty** dinars, the one whose contract was **for two hundred** dinars **takes one hundred** dinars, **and the one whose** contract was **for three hundred** dinars takes **six** dinars **of gold,** the equivalent of one hundred and fifty silver dinars.


###### Ketubot 93a:5
[Ketubot 93a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:5)

וְכֵן שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁהִטִּילוּ לַכִּיס, פִּיחֲתוּ אוֹ הוֹתִירוּ — כָּךְ הֵן חוֹלְקִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Similarly, three** individuals **who deposited** money **into a purse,** i.e., invested different amounts of money into a joint business venture: If they **incurred a loss or earned a profit,** and now choose to dissolve the partnership, **they divide** the assets **in this manner,** i.e., based upon the amount that each of them initially invested in the partnership.


###### Ketubot 93a:6
[Ketubot 93a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:6)

**גְּמָ׳** שֶׁל מָנֶה נוֹטֶלֶת חֲמִשִּׁים? תְּלָתִין וּתְלָתָא וְתִילְתָּא הוּא דְּאִית לַהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks about the *halakha* in the case where the estate has two hundred dinars, in which case the wife whose marriage contract was for one hundred dinars receives fifty dinars. Why should the wife whose marriage contract was **for one hundred take fifty? She should have** the right to collect only **thirty-three and one-third** dinars. Since her claim is only for the first hundred dinars, and all three women have an equal right to this first hundred, it stands to reason that it should be divided equally between the three of them.


###### Ketubot 93a:7
[Ketubot 93a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:7)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּכוֹתֶבֶת בַּעֲלַת מָאתַיִם לְבַעֲלַת מָנֶה ״דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עִמָּךְ בְּמָנֶה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Shmuel said:** This is a case **where** the wife **whose** contract **was for two hundred writes** a document **to** the wife **whose** contract **was for one hundred** dinars: **I do not have** any **legal** dealings **or involvement with you with regard to** the first **hundred dinars.** Since she relinquished her share in the first hundred dinars, only two claimants remain, the one whose contract was for one hundred and the one whose contract was for three hundred, and they divide it equally between them.


###### Ketubot 93a:8
[Ketubot 93a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:8)

אִי הָכִי, אֵימָא סֵיפָא: שֶׁל מָאתַיִם וְשֶׁל שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁלֹשׁ שֶׁל זָהָב. תֵּימָא לַהּ: הָא סַלֵּקְתְּ נַפְשִׁךְ מִינַּהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If that is so, say the latter clause** of that very same statement in the mishna, where it states that the wife **whose** contract **was for two hundred and** the one **whose** contract **was for three hundred take three** dinars **of gold each.** This is difficult, because the wife whose contract was for three hundred **should** be able to **say to** the wife whose contract was for two hundred: **You have removed yourself from** the first hundred dinars, and so you have a claim only against the remaining hundred. It should follow that the wife whose contract was for three hundred should take one hundred in total, fifty from the first hundred and fifty from the second hundred, and the one whose contract was for two hundred should receive only fifty, which is half of the second hundred.


###### Ketubot 93a:9
[Ketubot 93a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:9)

מִשּׁוּם דְּאָמְרָה לַהּ: מִדִּין וּדְבָרִים הוּא דְּסַלִּיקִי נַפְשַׁאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This is not so, **because** the wife whose contract was for two hundred **can say to** the wife whose contract was for three hundred: **I have removed myself** only **from legal** dealings **or involvement,** i.e., I have not completely relinquished my rights to the first hundred; I only agreed not to become involved in litigation with the wife whose marriage contract was for one hundred dinars. However, I maintain my rights to the first hundred dinars with regard to my involvement with you. Consequently, both women have equal rights to the remaining one hundred and fifty dinars, and they divide it equally between them.


###### Ketubot 93a:10
[Ketubot 93a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:10)

הָיוּ שָׁם שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת וְכוּ׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna teaches that if **there were three hundred** dinars in the estate, the money is divided so that the wife whose marriage contract was for one hundred receives fifty dinars, the wife whose contract was for two hundred receives one hundred, and the one whose contract was for three hundred receives one hundred and fifty dinars.


###### Ketubot 93a:11
[Ketubot 93a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:11)

שֶׁל מָאתַיִם מָנֶה? שִׁבְעִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה הוּא דְּאִית לַהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: Why does the one **whose** contract **was for two hundred** receive **one hundred dinars? She should have** the right to receive only **seventy-five.** As Shmuel explained above, since she agreed not to litigate with the wife whose contract was for one hundred with regard to the first hundred, it turns out that she has a claim only for one hundred and fifty of the remaining sum, since she clearly has no rights at all to the third hundred; therefore, she should receive half of what she is suing for, which is seventy-five dinars.


###### Ketubot 93a:12
[Ketubot 93a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:12)

אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: בְּכוֹתֶבֶת בַּעֲלַת שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת לְבַעֲלַת מָאתַיִם וּלְבַעֲלַת מָנֶה ״דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי עִמָּכֶם בְּמָנֶה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that **Shmuel said:** The case is **where** the one **whose** contract **was for three hundred writes** a document **to** the one **whose** contract **was for two hundred and to** the one **whose** contract **was for one hundred** dinars: **I have no legal** dealings **or involvement with you with regard to** the first **hundred dinars.** Due to this agreement, the first hundred is divided between the wife whose contract was for one hundred and the wife whose contract was for two hundred, with each receiving fifty. The second hundred is divided between the wife whose contract was for two hundred and the wife whose contract was for three hundred. As a result of this, the wife whose contract was for two hundred ends up with a full hundred. The third hundred goes exclusively to the wife whose contract was for three hundred, bringing her total to one hundred and fifty dinars.


###### Ketubot 93a:13
[Ketubot 93a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:13)

רַב יַעֲקֹב מִנְּהַר פְּקוֹד מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבִינָא אָמַר: רֵישָׁא בִּשְׁתֵּי תְפִיסוֹת, וְסֵיפָא בִּשְׁתֵּי תְפִיסוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ya’akov of Nehar Pekod said in the name of Ravina:** The mishna is not referring to cases where one of the women waived her rights, but rather to cases in which they did not receive the inheritance all at once, but in installments; each time an installment became available, the women repossessed a portion of the estate. **The first clause** is referring to a case **where** there were **two seizures** of property, **and the latter clause** is similarly referring to **a case where** there were **two seizures** of property.


###### Ketubot 93a:14
[Ketubot 93a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:14)

רֵישָׁא בִּשְׁתֵּי תְפִיסוֹת — דְּנָפְלוּ שִׁבְעִין וַחֲמִשָּׁה בְּחַד זִימְנָא, וּמֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה בְּחַד זִימְנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **The first clause** of the mishna, where two hundred dinars were available, is referring to a case **where** there were **two seizures** of property, **as seventy-five** dinars became available **at one time and one hundred and twenty-five** dinars **at another time.** When the first installment became available, each of the women had an equal claim to the money and they divided it equally, each receiving twenty-five dinars. When the second installment became available, the woman whose contract was for one hundred dinars had a claim to seventy-five dinars, and received one-third of that amount, bringing her total to fifty. The other women also received an equal share of those seventy-five dinars, and divided equally the remaining fifty dinars, bringing their totals to seventy-five dinars apiece.


###### Ketubot 93a:15
[Ketubot 93a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:15)

סֵיפָא בִּשְׁתֵּי תְפִיסוֹת — דְּנָפְלוּ שִׁבְעִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה בְּחַד זִימְנָא, וּמָאתַיִם וְעֶשְׂרִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה בְּחַד זִימְנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The latter clause,** where three hundred dinars were available, is also referring to a case **where** there were **two seizures** of property, **as seventy-five** dinars **became available** to them **at one time and two hundred and twenty-five** dinars **at another time.**


###### Ketubot 93a:16
[Ketubot 93a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:16)

תַּנְיָא: זוֹ מִשְׁנַת רַבִּי נָתָן. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אֵין אֲנִי רוֹאֶה דְּבָרָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי נָתָן בְּאֵלּוּ, אֶלָּא חוֹלְקוֹת בְּשָׁוֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is taught** in a *baraita*: **This is the teaching of Rabbi Natan. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: I do not agree with Rabbi Natan’s statement with regard to these** women; **rather, they divide** the estate **equally.**


###### Ketubot 93a:17
[Ketubot 93a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Ketubot/r/93a:17)

וְכֵן שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁהֵטִילוּ. אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁהִטִּילוּ לְכִיס, זֶה מָנֶה וְזֶה מָאתַיִם —

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was taught in the mishna: **Similarly, three** individuals **who deposited** money **into a purse,** i.e., invested different amounts in a joint business venture, divide the assets in a similar manner. **Shmuel said:** In a case of **two** individuals **who deposited** money **into a purse,** where **this** individual invested **one hundred dinars and that** individual invested **two hundred,**