נַעֲרָה שֶׁנִּתְפַּתְּתָה, בָּשְׁתָּהּ וּפְגָמָהּ וּקְנָסָהּ שֶׁל אָבִיהָ, וְהַצַּעַר בַּתְּפוּסָה. עָמְדָה בַדִּין עַד שֶׁלֹּא מֵת הָאָב, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל אָב. מֵת הָאָב, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל אַחִין. לֹא הִסְפִּיקָה לַעֲמֹד בַּדִּין עַד שֶׁמֵּת הָאָב, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל עַצְמָהּ. עָמְדָה בַדִּין עַד שֶׁלֹּא בָגְרָה, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל אָב. מֵת הָאָב, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל אַחִין. לֹא הִסְפִּיקָה לַעֲמוֹד בַּדִּין עַד שֶׁבָּגְרָה, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל עַצְמָהּ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, אִם לֹא הִסְפִּיקָה לִגְבּוֹת עַד שֶׁמֵּת הָאָב, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל עַצְמָהּ. מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ וּמְצִיאָתָהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא גָבְתָה, מֵת הָאָב, הֲרֵי הֵן שֶׁל אַחִין:
In the case of a young woman who was seduced, the compensation for her humiliation and her degradation and her fine belong to her father. And the same applies to the compensation for pain in the case of a woman who was raped. If the young woman stood trial against the seducer or rapist before the father died, these payments belong to her father, as stated above. If the father died before he collected the money from the offender, the payments belong to her brothers. As the father’s heirs, they inherit the money to which he was entitled before he passed away. However, if she did not manage to stand in judgment before the father died, and she was subsequently awarded the money, the compensation belongs to her, as she is now under her own jurisdiction due to the fact that she no longer has a father. If she stood trial before she reached majority, the payments belong to her father, and if the father died, they belong to her brothers, who inherit the money notwithstanding the fact that she has become a grown woman since the trial. If she did not manage to stand in judgment before she reached majority, the money belongs to her. Rabbi Shimon says: Even if she stood trial in her father’s lifetime but did not manage to collect the payments before the father died, the brothers do not inherit this money, as it belongs to her. By contrast, with regard to her earnings and the lost items that she has found, although she has not collected them, e.g., she had yet to receive her wages, if the father died they belong to her brothers. These payments are considered the property of their father, as he was entitled to them before he passed away.
הַמְאָרֵס אֶת בִּתּוֹ, וְגֵרְשָׁהּ, אֵרְסָהּ וְנִתְאַרְמְלָה, כְּתֻבָּתָהּ שֶׁלּוֹ. הִשִּׂיאָהּ וְגֵרְשָׁהּ, הִשִּׂיאָהּ וְנִתְאַרְמְלָה, כְּתֻבָּתָהּ שֶׁלָּהּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הָרִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁל אָב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מִשֶּׁהִשִּׂיאָהּ, אֵין לְאָבִיהָ רְשׁוּת בָּהּ:
One who betroths his minor daughter to a man, and the man subsequently divorces her, and her father then betroths her to another, and she is widowed, the payment specified in her marriage contract, even from her second husband, is his, i.e., it belongs to the father. However, if her father married her off and her husband divorced her, and her father then married her to another man and she was widowed, even the payment specified in her marriage contract from her first marriage is hers. Rabbi Yehuda says that the payment specified in the first marriage contract belongs to the father. They said to him: If it was after he married her off, even the first time, her father no longer has authority over her.
הַגִּיּוֹרֶת שֶׁנִּתְגַּיְּרָה בִתָּהּ עִמָּהּ, וְזִנְּתָה, הֲרֵי זוֹ בְּחֶנֶק. אֵין לָהּ לֹא פֶתַח בֵּית הָאָב, וְלֹא מֵאָה סָלַע. הָיְתָה הוֹרָתָהּ שֶׁלֹּא בִקְדֻשָּׁה וְלֵדָתָהּ בִּקְדֻשָּׁה, הֲרֵי זוֹ בִסְקִילָה. אֵין לָהּ לֹא פֶתַח בֵּית הָאָב וְלֹא מֵאָה סָלַע. הָיְתָה הוֹרָתָהּ וְלֵדָתָהּ בִּקְדֻשָּׁה, הֲרֵי הִיא כְבַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְכָל דָּבָר. יֶשׁ לָהּ אָב וְאֵין לָהּ פֶּתַח בֵּית הָאָב, יֶשׁ לָהּ פֶּתַח בֵּית הָאָב וְאֵין לָהּ אָב, הֲרֵי זוֹ בִסְקִילָה. לֹא נֶאֱמַר פֶּתַח בֵּית אָבִיהָ, אֶלָּא לְמִצְוָה:
In the case of a female convert whose daughter converted with her and later, as a young woman, the daughter engaged in licentious sexual relations when she was betrothed, she is executed by strangulation, not stoning, the method of execution that would be employed had she been born Jewish. She has neither the halakha of being executed at the entrance to her father’s house, as in the case of a woman who was born Jewish who committed this crime, nor does she receive one hundred sela if her husband defamed her by falsely claiming that she had committed adultery. The reason is that the verses state “Israel” (Deuteronomy 22:19, 21) with regard to these halakhot, indicating that these halakhot apply only to those born as Jews. However, if the daughter’s conception occurred when her mother was not yet in a state of sanctity, i.e., when she was still a gentile, but her birth took place when her mother was in a state of sanctity, as her mother converted during her pregnancy, this daughter is punishable by stoning if she committed adultery as a betrothed young woman. However, she has neither the halakha of being executed at the entrance to her father’s house, nor the right to one hundred sela if it turns out that her husband defamed her. If her conception and birth occurred when her mother was in a state of sanctity, i.e., after she converted, she is like a regular Jewish woman in all matters. If a young woman who is betrothed commits adultery and she has a father but does not have an entrance to her father’s house, i.e., if her father does not possess a house of his own, or if she has an entrance to her father’s house but does not have a father, as he has passed away, she is nevertheless executed via stoning, as the requirement that she is to be executed at the entrance to her father’s house is stated only for a mitzva but it is not an indispensable requirement.
הָאָב זַכַּאי בְבִתּוֹ בְקִדּוּשֶׁיהָ, בַּכֶּסֶף בַּשְּׁטָר וּבַבִּיאָה, וְזַכַּאי בִּמְצִיאָתָהּ, וּבְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ, וּבַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ. וּמְקַבֵּל אֶת גִּטָּהּ, וְאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת בְּחַיֶּיהָ. נִשֵּׂאת, יָתֵר עָלָיו הַבַּעַל שֶׁאוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹת בְּחַיֶּיהָ, וְחַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ, בְּפִרְקוֹנָהּ, וּבִקְבוּרָתָהּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ עָנִי שֶׁבְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, לֹא יִפְחֹת מִשְּׁנֵי חֲלִילִים וּמְקוֹנָנֶת:
A father has authority over his daughter with regard to her betrothal through money, through a marriage document, or through intercourse. Likewise, a father is entitled to items she has found, and to her earnings, and to effect the nullification of her vows, i.e., a father may nullify his daughter’s vows. And he accepts her bill of divorce on her behalf if she is divorced from betrothal before she becomes a grown woman. And although he inherits her property when she dies, e.g., property she inherited from her mother’s family, he does not consume the produce of her property during her lifetime. If the daughter married, the husband has more rights and obligations than her father had before the marriage, as he consumes the produce of her property during her lifetime, and he is obligated to provide her sustenance, her redemption if she is captured, and her burial upon her death. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even the poorest man of the Jewish people may not provide fewer than two flutes and a lamenting woman, which it was customary to hire for a funeral, as these too are included in the duties of burial.
לְעוֹלָם הִיא בִרְשׁוּת הָאָב, עַד שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס לִרְשׁוּת הַבַּעַל לַנִּשּׂוּאִין. מָסַר הָאָב לִשְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל, הֲרֵי הִיא בִרְשׁוּת הַבָּעַל. הָלַךְ הָאָב עִם שְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל, אוֹ שֶׁהָלְכוּ שְׁלוּחֵי הָאָב עִם שְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל, הֲרֵי הִיא בִרְשׁוּת הָאָב. מָסְרוּ שְׁלוּחֵי הָאָב לִשְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל, הֲרֵי הִיא בִרְשׁוּת הַבָּעַל:
Even after she is betrothed, a daughter is always under her father’s authority until she enters her husband’s authority in marriage via the wedding canopy. If the father delivered his daughter to the husband’s messengers to bring her to her husband and the wedding canopy, once she has been handed over she is under the husband’s authority. However, if the father went with the husband’s messengers, or if the father’s messengers went with the husband’s messengers, she is still under the father’s authority, as he has not fully delivered her to the husband’s messengers. If her father sent her with his own messengers and the father’s messengers delivered the woman to the husband’s messengers, from that moment onwards she is under her husband’s authority.
הָאָב אֵינוֹ חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹת בִּתּוֹ. זֶה מִדְרָשׁ דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה לִפְנֵי חֲכָמִים בַּכֶּרֶם בְּיַבְנֶה, הַבָּנִים יִירְשׁוּ וְהַבָּנוֹת יִזּוֹנוּ, מָה הַבָּנִים אֵינָן יוֹרְשִׁין אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתַת הָאָב, אַף הַבָּנוֹת אֵינָן נִזּוֹנוֹת אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן:
A father is not obligated to provide his daughter’s sustenance. This exposition was expounded by Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya before the Sages in the vineyard of Yavne: Since the Sages instituted that after the father’s death, the sons inherit the sum of money specified in their mother’s marriage contract, and the daughters are sustained from their father’s estate, these the two halakhot are equated: Just as the sons inherit only after the father’s death, not during his lifetime, so too, the daughters are sustained from his property only after their father’s death.
לֹא כָתַב לָהּ כְּתֻבָּה, בְּתוּלָה גּוֹבָה מָאתַיִם, וְאַלְמָנָה מָנֶה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין. כָּתַב לָהּ, שָׂדֶה שָׁוֶה מָנֶה תַּחַת מָאתַיִם זוּז, וְלֹא כָתַב לָהּ, כָּל נְכָסִים דְּאִית לִי אַחֲרָאִין לִכְתֻבְּתִיךְ, חַיָּב, שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין:
If a husband did not write a marriage contract for his wife, a virgin collects two hundred dinars and a widow one hundred dinars upon divorce or the husband’s death, because it is a stipulation of the court that a wife is entitled to these amounts. If he wrote in her marriage contract that she is entitled to a field worth one hundred dinars instead of the two hundred dinars to which she is actually entitled, and he did not additionally write for her: All property I have shall serve as a guarantee for the payment of your marriage contract, he is nevertheless obligated to pay the full two hundred dinars; and he cannot say that she should take only a mortgaged field for payment of her marriage contract, as it is a stipulation of the court that all his property is held as surety for the entire sum.
לֹא כָתַב לָהּ, אִם תִּשְׁתַּבָּאִי אֶפְרְקִנָּךְ וְאוֹתְבִנָּךְ לִי לְאִנְתּוּ, וּבְכֹהֶנֶת, אֲהַדְרִנָּךְ לִמְדִינְתָּךְ, חַיָּב, שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין:
Similarly, if he did not write for her in the marriage contract: If you are taken captive I will redeem you and restore you to me as a wife, and in the case of a priestess, i.e., the wife of a priest, who is prohibited to return to her husband if she has intercourse with another man even if she is raped, if he did not write: I will return you to your native province, he is nevertheless obligated to do so, as it is a stipulation of the court.
נִשְׁבֵּית, חַיָּב לִפְדּוֹתָהּ. וְאִם אָמַר, הֲרֵי גִטָּהּ וּכְתֻבָּתָהּ, תִּפְדֶה אֶת עַצְמָהּ, אֵינוֹ רַשָּׁאי. לָקְתָה, חַיָּב לְרַפֹּאתָהּ. אָמַר, הֲרֵי גִטָּהּ וּכְתֻבָּתָהּ, תְּרַפֵּא אֶת עַצְמָהּ, רַשָּׁאי:
If a woman was taken captive, her husband is obligated to redeem her. And if he said: I hereby give my wife her bill of divorce and the payment of her marriage contract, and let her redeem herself, he is not permitted to do so, as he already obligated himself to redeem her when he wrote the marriage contract. If his wife was struck with illness, he is obligated to heal her, i.e., to pay for her medical expenses. In this case, however, if he said: I hereby give my wife her bill of divorce and the payment of her marriage contract, and let her heal herself, he is permitted to do so.
לֹא כָתַב לָהּ, בְּנִין דִּכְרִין דְּיֶהֱווֹן לִיכִי מִנַּאי אִנּוּן יִרְתוּן כְּסַף כְּתֻבְּתִיךְ יָתֵר עַל חוּלְקֵיהוֹן דְּעִם אֲחוּהוֹן, חַיָּב שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין:
If the husband did not write for her in her marriage contract: Any male children you will have from me will inherit the money of your marriage contract in addition to their portion of the inheritance that they receive together with their brothers, he is nevertheless obligated as though he had written it, as it is a stipulation of the court and therefore takes effect even if it is not explicitly stated. Likewise, if he omitted from the marriage contract the sentence: Any female children you will have from me will sit in my house and be sustained from my property until they are taken by men, i.e., until they are married, he is nevertheless obligated as though he had written it, as it too is a stipulation of the court.
בְּנָן נֻקְבִין דְּיֶהֶוְיָן לִיכִי מִנַּאי, יֶהֶוְיָן יָתְבָן בְּבֵיתִי וּמִתְּזָנָן מִנִּכְסַי עַד דְּתִנַּסְּבָן לְגֻבְרִין, חַיָּב, שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין:
Similarly, if he omitted from the marriage contract the clause: You will sit in my house and be sustained from my property all the days you live as a widow in my house, he is nevertheless obligated as though he had written it, as it is a stipulation of the court.
אַתְּ תְּהֵא יָתְבָא בְּבֵיתִי וּמִתְּזָנָא מִנִּכְסַי, כָּל יְמֵי מִגַּד אַלְמְנוּתִיךְ בְּבֵיתִי, חַיָּב, שֶׁהוּא תְנַאי בֵּית דִּין. כָּךְ הָיוּ אַנְשֵׁי יְרוּשָׁלַיִם כּוֹתְבִין. אַנְשֵׁי גָלִיל הָיוּ כוֹתְבִין כְּאַנְשֵׁי יְרוּשָׁלָיִם. אַנְשֵׁי יְהוּדָה הָיוּ כוֹתְבִין, עַד שֶׁיִּרְצוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁים לִתֵּן לִיךְ כְּתֻבְּתִיךְ. לְפִיכָךְ אִם רָצוּ הַיּוֹרְשִׁין, נוֹתְנִין לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּפוֹטְרִין אוֹתָהּ:
The mishna comments: The residents of Jerusalem would write in this manner, that a widow may remain in her husband’s house throughout her widowhood, and the residents of the Galilee would write in this manner as well, like the inhabitants of Jerusalem. In contrast, the residents of Judea would write: Until the heirs want to give you your marriage contract. Consequently, if the heirs wish, they may give her marriage contract to her and release her, and she must find her own living arrangements and provide for herself.