Mishnat Ketubot

And if a man seduce a virgin that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall pay the marriage price for her to be his wife.
If her father refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money according to the marriage price of virgins.

He must write a marriage contract before entry into the chuppah; and afterwards he is permitted to his wife.
The groom pays the scribe's fee.

The sages ordained the requirement of a ketubah for a wife so that it would not be a casual matter for him to divorce her.

. . . For it is forbidden for a man to stay with his wife even a single hour without a ketubah.

A virgin is married on Wednesday and a widow on Thursday, for twice in the week the courts sit in the towns, on Mondays and Thursdays, so that if he had a claim as to the virginity he could go early to the court.

A virgin - her ketubah is 200 [zuz], and a widow a maneh [100 zuz].
A virgin who is a widow, divorced, or a halutzah from betrothal - her ketubah is 200, and there can be a claim of non-virginity.
A proselyte, a redeemed captive, and a slave, who have been redeemed, converted, or freed when less than three years and one day old - their ketubah is 200 and there can be a claim of non-virginity.

A virgin, who was a widow, a divorcee, or a halutzah from marriage her ketubah is a maneh, and there is no claim of non-virginity.
A proselyte, a captive and a slave who have been redeemed, converted, or freed more than three years and one day old - their ketubah is a maneh, and there is no claim of non-virginity.

If an adult has had sexual intercourse with a child, or when a small boy has had intercourse with an adult woman, or a girl who was injured by a piece of wood, their ketubah is 200, according to Rabbi Meir.
But the Sages say: someone was injured by a piece of wood, her ketubah is a maneh.

A virgin who was a widow, a divorcee, or a halutzah from marriage - their ketubah is a maneh [100 zuz], and there is no claim of non-virginity upon her.
A convert, a captive and a slave, who have been redeemed, converted, or freed when more than three years and one day old their ketubah is a maneh, and there is no claim of non-virginity upon her.

He who eats with his father-in-law in Judea without witnesses cannot raise a claim of non-virginity against his wife because he has been alone with her.
Both Israelite and priestly widows have a ketubah is a maneh.
The court of the priests collected for a virgin four hundred zuz, and the sages did not protest.

He who eats with his father-in-law in Judea. – When they were making the betrothal celebration in the house of the bride’s father in Judea, it was the practice that the fiance would be alone with his fiancee in order that "his heart might grow with her".
Therefore, when she gets married after that, there is no claim of non-virginity.

If a man marries a woman and does not find her to be a virgin, and she says, “After you betrothed me I was raped, and so your field has been washed away” while he says, “No, it was before I betrothed you and my acquisition was a mistaken acquisition”, Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: she is believed.
And Rabbi Joshua says: We do not live by her mouth. Rather, she is presumed to have had intercourse before she was betrothed and having deceived him until she brings proof for her statement.

The halakha is like Rabban Gamliel who said she is believed but he should make her swear an oath that she is telling the truth like any claimant.

She says, “I was struck by a piece of wood”, And he says, “No, you, rather you have been trampled by a man” Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: she is believed.
And Rabbi Joshua says: We do not live by her mouth. Rather, she is presumed to have been trampled by a man, until she brings proof for her statement.

They saw her talking with someone and they said to her, “What sort of a man is he?”
“He is so-and-so and he is a priest”.
Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: she is believed.
And Rabbi Joshua says: We do not live by her mouth. Rather, she is presumed to have had relations with a natin or a mamzer, until she brings proof for her statement.

She was pregnant, “What sort of a foetus is this?”
“From so-and-so and he is a priest”.
Rabban Gamaliel and Rabbi Eliezer say: she is believed.
And Rabbi Joshua says: We do not live by her mouth. Rather, she is presumed to have become pregant from a natin or a mamzer, until she brings proof for her statement.

Rabbi Yose said: it happened that a young girl went down to draw water from a spring and she was raped.
Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: if most of the inhabitants of the town marry into the priesthood, this one may marry into the priesthood.

When does the above apply? When the place where she engaged in relations was on a thoroughfare or in a carriage in the fields where everyone passes by, and most of the passersby are acceptable and most of the inhabitants of the city from which these passersby departed are acceptable.
For our Sages elevated the standards required with regard to lineage and required two majorities.

The woman who was widowed or divorced and says, “I was a virgin when you married me” while he says, “Not so, rather you were a widow when I married you”.
If there are witnesses that she went out with a hinuma, and with her head uncovered, her ketubah is two hundred.
Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka says: the distribution of roasted ears of corn is also proof.

"If there are witnesses that she went out with a hinuma."
What is a hinuma? Surḥav bar Pappa said in the name of Ze’eiri: a canopy of myrtle. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: a veil [kerita] under which the bride dozes [menamna].

Rabbi Joshua agrees that, if one says to his fellow, “This field belonged to your father and I bought it from him”, he is believed, for the mouth that forbade is the mouth that permitted.
If there are witnesses that it belonged to his father and he says, “I bought it from him”, he is not believed.

The witnesses who said, “This is our handwriting, but we were forced, we were minors, we were unadmissable as witnesses”, are believed.
If there are witnesses that it is their handwriting, or their handwriting comes out from another place, they are not believed.

If one says, “This is my handwriting and that is the handwriting of my fellow”, and the other says, “This is my handwriting and that is the handwriting of my fellow”, they are believed.
If one says, “This is my handwriting” and the other says, “This is my handwriting”, another must join up with them, according to Rabbi.
And the Sages say: another need not join up with them but, rather, a person is believed when he says, “this is my handwriting".

If a woman says, “I was married and I am divorced”, she is believed, for the mouth that forbade is the mouth that permitted.
If there are witnesses that she was married, and she says, “I am divorced”, she is not believed.
If she says, “I was taken captive but I have remained clean”, she is believed, for the mouth that forbade is the mouth that permitted.
If there are witnesses that she was taken captive and she says, “I have remained clean” she is not believed.
If the witnesses came after she had married, she shall not go out.

If she says, "I am married", and then after some time she says, "I am single and I previously claimed to be married for such-and-such a reason", she is believed and her words are accepted, providing that she gives some reasoning for her original statement and providing that there were no witnesses.

Two women who were taken captive - one says, “I was taken captive and I am pure”, and the other one says, “I was taken captive and I am pure” - they are not believed.
When they testify about each other, they are believed.

And similarly two men - one says, “I am a priest”, and the other says, “I am a priest” - they are not believed.
When they testify about each other, they are believed.

Rabbi Judah said: one does not raise someone to the priesthood through the testimony of a single witness.
Rabbi Elazar said: When? When there are objectors; but when there are no objections, one raises to the priesthood on the testimony of a single witness.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says in the name of Rabbi Shimon the son of the Deputy, one raises to the priesthood on the testimony of a single witness.

A woman was imprisoned by non-Jews - if for money, she is permitted to her husband, and if for a capital offence, she is forbidden.
And similarly, a town that has been conquered by siege-troops: all the priests’ wives who are in it are prohibited. If they have witnesses, even a slave, even a female slave, they are believed, for no-one is believed as to himself.
Rabbi Zechariah ben Ha-Katzav said: “By this temple! Her hand did not move out of my hand from the time that the non-Jews entered Jerusalem until they departed.” They said to him: “No-one may testify concerning himself.”

Rav Idi bar Avin said that Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Ashyan said: If there is a single hideaway there it saves all the women married to priests.

And these are believed when testifying as adults about what they saw as minors.
A person is believed to say, “This is the handwriting of my father”;
“This is the handwriting of my brother”;
“I remember that the wife of that man went out with a hinuma and her head uncovered”;
“That that man used to go out from school to immerse for terumah”;
“That he used to take a share with us at the threshing floor”;
“That this place was a beytperas”;
“That up to here we used to go on Shabbat”;
But a person is not believed when he says: “So-and-so had a path in this place”;
“That man had a place of standing up and eulogy in this place”.

These are believed . . .These issues all require publicity and they are all rabbinic.

If a man finds a virgin who is not betrothed and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are discovered, the man who lay with her shall pay the girl’s father fifty silver, and she shall be his wife. Because he has violated her, he can never divorce her.

These are the girls who have a fine.
Someone who had intercourse with a mamzeret, a netinah, a Samaritan.
Someone who had intercourse with a convert, a captive, or a slave, who was redeemed, converted, or freed under the age of three years and one day.
Someone who had intercourse with his sister, with the sister of his father, with the sister of his mother, with the sister of his wife, with the wife of his brother, with the wife of the brother of his father, or with a woman during menstruation, they have a fine, for even though these are punishable through karet, they have no death penalty from the court.

And these are the ones who do not have a fine.
Someone who had intercourse with a convert, a captive, or a slave, who was redeemed, converted, or freed over the age of three years and one day.
Rabbi Judah says: a female captive who was redeemed is considered to be in her state of holiness even if she is of age.
Someone who had intercourse with his daughter, his daughter's daughter, his son's daughter, his wife's daughter, her son's daughter or her daughter's daughter - they have no fine, because he forfeits his life, for his death is in the hands of the court.
For anyone who forfeits his life pays no money for it is said, “And if no "ason" [in context, death] occurs he shall be fined” (Exodus 21:2.

A girl who was betrothed and then divorced - Rabbi Yose the Galilean says, she does not receive a fine.
Rabbi Akiva says: she receives the fine and the fine belongs to her.

Rabbi Akiva – since we expound upon “who is not engaged” to refer to her father, but she is engaged to herself, and the halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva.

If a man comes upon a virgin who is not engaged and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are discovered, the party who lay with her shall pay the girl’s father fifty [shekels of] silver, and she shall be his wife. Because he has violated her, he can never have the right to divorce her.

If a man seduces a virgin for whom the bride-price has not been paid, and lies with her, he must make her his wife by payment of a bride-price. If her father refuses to give her to him, he must still weigh out silver in accordance with the bride-price for virgins.

The seducer pays three things and the rapist four.
The seducer pays for embarrassment and 'pegam' [blemish] and the fine; the rapist also pays for the pain.
What is there between a seducer and a rapist? The rapist pays for the pain and the seducer does not pay for the pain.
The rapist pays immediately but the seducer only if he sends her away.
The rapist must “drink out of his pot” but the seducer may send her away if he wishes.

Someone who injures his neighbour is liable to pay him five things: the damages, pain, medical treatment, his loss of employment and embarrassment.

What is “he must drink out of his pot”?
Even if she is lame, even if she is blind and even if she is afflicted with boils.
If she was found to have committed a licentious act or was unfit to marry an Israelite he may not continue to live with her, for it is said, “And she shall be for him a wife”(Deut. 22:29) a wife that is fit for him.

An orphan who was betrothed or divorced - Rabbi Elazar says that the rapist is liable but the seducer is exempt.

What is embarrassment? It all depends on the status of the offender and the offended.
Blemish? She is regarded as if she were a slave to be sold in the market place - how much she was worth then and how much she is worth now.
Fine? The same for all.
And any sum that is fixed in the Torah remains the same for all.

When a parent sells a daughter as a maid, she shall not go out as other slaves do.

AND IF A MAN SELL HIS DAUGHTER AS A MAID — The text speaks of a minor daughter (Arakhin 29b).

Wherever there is a sale there is no fine and wherever there is a fine there is no sale.
"Ketana" - a minor - there is sale and there is no fine.
"Na'ara" - a 12 to 12 1/2 year-old - there is a fine but no sale.
"Bogeret" - a 12 1/2 year-old + - there is no sale and there is no fine.

He who says, “I seduced the daughter of so-and-so” must pay compensation for embarrassment and blemish on his own admission but need not pay the fine.
He who says, “I have stolen” must make restitution for the principal on his own evidence but need not repay double, fourfold or fivefold.
“My ox has killed so-and-so” or “the ox of so-and-so” must make restitution on his own evidence.
“My ox has killed the slave of so-and-so” he need not make restitution on his own evidence.
This is the general rule: whoever pays more than the actual cost of the damage he has done need not pay it on his own evidence.

If a young girl was seduced [the compensation for] her embarrassment and blemish and the fine belong to her father; [and the compensation for] pain in the case of one who was raped. If the girl’s case was tried before her father died [all the forms of compensation] are her father’s. If her father [subsequently] died they are her brothers’. If her father died before her case was tried they are hers. If her case was tried before she became of majority age [all forms of compensation] are her father’s. If her father [subsequently] died they are her brothers’. If she became of majority age before her case was tried they are hers. Rabbi Shimon says if her father died before she could collect [the payments] they belong to her. Her handiwork and anything she finds, even if she had not collected [the proceeds] belong to her brothers if her father died.

If a young girl was seduced, her embarrassment and blemish and fine belong to her father; and the pain in the case of rape.
If the girl’s case was tried before her father died they are her father’s; if her father then died they are her brothers’. If her father died before her case was tried they are hers.
If her case was tried before she became of majority age they are her father’s; if her father then died they are her brothers’. If she became of majority age before her case was tried they are hers.
Rabbi Shimon says if her father died before she could collect, they belong to her.
Her handiwork and anything she finds, even if she had not collected them, belong to her brothers if her father died.

If a man gave his daughter in betrothal and she was divorced, he gave her in betrothal and she was widowed, her ketubah belongs to him.
If he gave her in marriage and she was divorced, he gave her in marriage and she was widowed, her ketubah belongs to her.
Rabbi Judah said: the first belongs to her father. They said to him: as soon as he gives her in marriage, her father has no authority over her.

If any man take a wife, and go in to her, and hate her, and lay accusing speeches against her, and bring out an evil name upon her, saying, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not to be a virgin: . . . And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; and they shall fine him a hundred pieces of silver, and give them to the father of the girl, because he has brought out an evil name upon a virgin of Israel; and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
But if this thing be true, and tokens of virginity be not found for the girl: then they shall bring out the girl to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she has perpetrated wantonness in Israel, to play the harlot in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

The daughter of a convert who converted together with her mother and is promiscuous is strangled.
She does not get "at the door of her father’s house" nor "one hundred sela".
If she was not conceived in holiness but her birth was in holiness she is stoned like a daughter of Israel. She does not get "at the door of her father’s house" nor "one hundred sela".
If she was both conceived and born in holiness she is regarded as a daughter of Israel in all respects.
A girl who has a father but no door of her father’s house; or a door of her father’s house but no father, is subject to stoning; “the door of her father’s house” (Deut. 22:21) was only stated as a mitzvah.

The father has the rights to his daugher's betrothal-money whether by money, document or intercourse. He is entitled to anything she finds, to her handiwork and to annul her vows. He receives her get but he has no benefit from her property during her lifetime.
When she marries, the husband surpasses him in that he has benefit from her property during her lifetime. And he is obliged to feed her, to ransom her and to provide for her burial.
Rabbi Judah says: even the poorest man in Israel must provide no less than two flutes and one lamenting woman.

The father has the rights to his daugher's betrothal-money whether by money, document or intercourse.
The father has rights over these things while she is a na'arah, i.e. less than 12 ½ years old because of the verse "in her youth in her father's house" and the tradition teaches this to mean "all the glory of her youth".
But once she reaches the age of majority (12 ½) her father has no rights over her and cannot rule over her.

She remains in the domain of her father until she enters the huppah. If her father delivered her to the agents of the husband she passes into the domain of her husband.
If her father went with the husband’s agents, or if the father’s agents went with the husband’s agents, she remains in the domain of her father.
If her father’s agents delivered her to the husband’s agents she passes into the domain of her husband.

If a man died and left sons and daughters. If the property was great, the sons inherit and the daughters receive maintenance.
If the property was small, the daughters receive maintenance and the sons go begging at people’s doors.

A father is not obliged to maintain his daughter. This drash was made by Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah in front of the sages in the vineyard of Yavneh: “The sons shall inherit and the daughters shall be maintained” just as the sons do not inherit except after the death of their father, so the daughters are not maintained except after the death of their father.

...There are rules about this which I will explain. A person is obliged to support his children until the age of 6 if he wishes or not and they force him to do so whether he is poor or rich.
After this age, if he does not wish to support them, the judge should force him with words . . . . . .

If he did not write a ketubah for her, a virgin collects two hundred zuz and a widow one mane, because it is a condition laid down by court.
If he assigned to her in writing a field that was worth one mane instead of the two hundred zuz and did not write for her, “All property that I possess is a lien for your ketubah”, he is liable because it is a condition laid down by the court.

If he did not write for her, “if you are taken captive I will ransom you and take you again as my wife”, or in the case of a priest’s wife, “I will restore you to your people”, he is liable because it is a condition laid down by court.

If she was taken captive he is obliged to ransom her.
If he said, “Here is her get and her ketubah, let her ransom herself”, he is not permitted.
If she was injured he is obliged to heal her.
If he said, “Here is her get and her ketubah, let her heal herself”, he is permitted.

If he did not write for her, “The male children that shall be born to you from me shall inherit the money of your ketubah over and above their shares with their brothers”, he is liable, because this is a condition of the court.

“The female children that you will have from me will dwell in my house and be maintained out of my estate until they are married to men”, he is nevertheless liable, because this is a condition laid down by the court.

Until they are married – until they will become betrothed, and if they became adults, even though they had not become betrothed, they have no maintenance, for we hold that an adult woman has no support.

“You shall live in my house and be maintained from my possessions all the days of your widowhood”, he is nevertheless liable, because this is a condition laid down by the court.
Thus wrote the people of Jerusalem. The people of Galilee wrote like those of Jerusalem.
And in Judea they used to write: “Until the heirs wish to pay you your ketubah”. Therefore, if the heirs wished, they give her her ketubah and take leave of her.

“You shall live in my house and be maintained from my possessions all the days that you dwell in widowhood”.
The halakha is not like the people of Judea. Rather, as long as she does not claim her ketubah in court and does not remarry she lives in the house where she used to live with her husband when he was alive, and she makes use of any movable property or vessels that she used to use with him in his lifetime.
And the whole of this law is clarified later on (Chapter 12:3), and the meaning of "all the days that you dwell in widowhood" is "after his death".

Although [the Sages] have said: a virgin collects two hundred and a widow one maneh, if he wishes to add, even a hundred maneh, he may do so.
If she was widowed or divorced, either after betrothal or after marriage, she collects the entire amount.
Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah says, from marriage she is entitled to the entire amount but from betrothal, a virgin collects two hundred zuz and a widow only one maneh, because he only wrote it for her in order to marry her.
Rabbi Judah says: if he wishes he may write for a virgin a document for two hundred zuz and she writes “I have received from you a maneh”, or for a widow a maneh and she writes, “I have received from you fifty zuz”.
Rabbi Meir says, giving a virgin less than two hundred zuz or a widow less than a maneh is promiscuity.

A virgin is given twelve months from when the husband claimed her, to prepare herself. Just as it is given to the woman, so is it given to the man to prepare himself.

And for a widow, thirty days.

If their time has come and they are not married, or if their husband has died, they eat from his possessions and they may eat terumah.

Rabbi Tarfon says: They give her everything in terumah. Rabbi Akiva says: One half ordinary food and one half terumah.

A yavam does not feed in terumah. If she had spent six months waiting for her husband and six months waiting for the yavam, or even all of them waiting for her husband less one day waiting for the yavam, he does not feed in terumah.
This was the first mishnah. The court that followed afterwards ruled: a woman may not eat terumah until she has entered the huppah.

If a man consecrated his wife’s handiwork, she continues to work and to eat.
The surplus: Rabbi Meir says: it is consecrated. Rabbi Yohanan the Sandal-Maker says: it is hullin.

The following are the kinds of work which a woman does for her husband: grinding, baking, washing, cooking, nursing her child, preparing the bed, and working in wool.
If she brought one slave-woman into the marriage she does not grind or bake or wash. Two slave-women, she does not cook or nurse her child. Three, she does not prepare his bed or work in wool. Four, she sits in a chair.
Rabbi Eliezer says: even if she brought him a hundred slave-women he compels her to work in wool; for idleness leads to promiscuity.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: if a man forbade his wife under a vow to do any work he must divorce her and give her her ketubah for idleness leads to insanity.

A lady asked Rabbi Eliezer, “Why did the people of the golden calf, although their sin was the same, die in three separate ways?”.

He said to her, “The wisdom of a woman is only in her distaff” and quoted the verse “Every wise-hearted woman spun [yarn] with her hands” (Shemot 35:25).

His son said to him, “By not replying to her with a word of Torah you've lost me 120 m3 of ma'aser every year.”

He said, “Let the the words of Torah be burned and let them not be transmitted to women.”

A man vowed not to have intercourse with his wife: Beth Shammai say two weeks; Beth Hillel say one week.
Students who go away to study Torah without permission, thirty days, and workers one week.
The times for conjugal duty prescribed in the Torah are: for men of independent income, every day; for workers, twice a week; for donkey-drivers, once a week; for camel-drivers, once in thirty days; for sailors, once in six months. These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

If a wife rebels against her husband her ketubah is reduced by seven denarii a week. Rabbi Judah says: seven tropaics.
How long does he continue to reduce? Until the amount of her ketubah. Rabbi Yose says: he may continue to reduce, and in case she receives an inheritance that may collect from it.
Similarly, if a husband rebels against his wife, they add three denarii a week to her ketubah. Rabbi Judah said: three tropaics.

If a man provides for his wife through an agent, he must not give her less than two kavs of wheat or four kavs of barley.
Rabbi Yose said: only Rabbi Ishmael, who lived near Edom, granted her a supply of barley.
He must also give her half a kav of pulse and half a log of oil; and a kav of dried figs or a maneh of pressed figs, and if he has none he must supply her in their stead with fruit from another place.
He must also provide her with a bed and a mattress or if he has no mattress a mat.
He must give her a hat for her head and a girdle for her loins; shoes, from festival to festival; and clothing worth fifty zuz every year.
She is not to be given new in the summer nor worn-out clothes in the winter, but must give her clothes worth fifty zuz during the winter, and she wears them when they are worn-out during the summer; and the worn-out clothes remain her property.

He gives her a silver ma'ah [1/6 of a zuz​​​​​​​] for her needs and she eats with him on Shabbat evenings.

If he does not give her a silver ma'ah for her needs, her handiwork belongs to her.

And what does she do for him? The weight of five sela’s of warp in Judea, which amounts to ten sela's in Galilee, or the weight of ten sela's of woof in Judea, which amounts to twenty sela's in Galilee.

If she was nursing, her handiwork is reduced and her maintenance is increased.
To what does this apply? To a poor person in Israel, but for a more honoured person, it is all according to his honour.

A person has the right not to eat with his wife or not to live with his wife but, rather, to provide for her via a third party and to fulfill the necessary marital relations during the day or night as appropriate.
But in any case he must eat with her onShabbat evenings as mentioned.

A wife’s findings and her handiwork belong to her husband.
As for her inheritance, he has the income [literally, "fruits"] during her lifetime. Compensation for embarrassment or blemish to her belongs to her.
Rabbi Judah ben Batera says, on a hidden place she receives two-thirds while he receives one-third; on an open place he receives two-thirds and she receives one-third.
His share is to be given to him immediately, but with hers land is bought and he enjoys the income.

Someone who pledged money for his son-in-law and his son-in-law died, the Sages say that he can say “I was willing to give to your brother but to you it's not possible.”

If she pledged to bring him one thousand denarii he must agree to give a corresponding sum of fifteen maneh [1,500 denarii].
When corresponding to a valuation, he pledges one-fifth less.
“Valuation at one maneh”, and in fact worth a maneh, he only has a maneh.
“Goods valued at a maneh” [100 denarii], she gives him thirty-one sela and a denar [125 denarii].
“Four hundred”, he gives five hundred [most editions say "she gives"]. When a bridegroom pledges, he agrees one fifth less.

If she pledged to bring him cash, every sela’ counts as six denarii.
The bridegroom accepts upon himself [to give] ten denarii for the basket for each maneh.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: everything follows local custome.

Someone who marries off his daughter without conditions must give her at least fifty zuz.
If he pledged to marry her without a dowry, the husband may not say “When I have taken her into my house I shall clothe her with my clothes”, rather he must provide her with clothing while she is still in her father’s house.
Similarly, if an orphan married they must give her at least fifty zuz. If funds are available they provide for her in accordance with her dignity.

If an orphan was married off by her mother and her brothers and they write her a dowry of a 150 zuz, she may, when she reaches majority, claim from them what should have been given to her.
Rabbi Judah says: if they ["he" in most editions] married off the first daughter, the second must be given as much as the first. And the Sages say, sometimes a man is poor and becomes rich, or is rich and becomes poor. Rather, they value the estate should evaluated and give to her.

If a man deposited money with an agent for his daugher, and she says, “I trust my husband”, the trustee must act in accordance with the condition of his trust, according to Rabbi Meir.
Rabbi Yose says: if it were a field and she wished to sell it, it would be as if it was sold immediately! To whom does this apply? To an adult. But in the case of a minor, there is no validity to the act of a minor.

The agent does what he is mandated to do, as commanded by the father, and they don't listen to her and don't give the husband anything.
And this applies when she is betrothed. But after the marriage she can dispose of her possessions as she wishes, except if she is a minor, for the dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose only relates to an adult who is betrothed (but not married) and the halakah is according to Rabbi Meir.

Someone who vows that his wife should not have any benefit from him may appoint a provider for thirty days, but for longer must divorce her and give her a ketubah.
Rabbi Judah ruled: if he was an Israelite he may hold on for one month, but for two must divorce her and give her a ketubah.
And among priests two, but three he must divorce her and give her a ketubah.

Someone who vows that his wife should not taste a certain kind of produce must divorce her and give her a ketubah.
Rabbi Judah ruled: if he was an Israelite he may hold on for one day, but for two he must divorce her and give her a ketubah.
And among priests two, but three he must divorce her and give her a ketubah.

Someone who vows that his wife should not adorn herself with a certain type of adornment must divorce her and give her a ketubah.
Rabbi Yose says: this is with poor women and with no time limit, and with rich ones thirty days.

Someone who vows that his wife should not go to her father’s house - when the father lives with her in the same town, he may hold on for one month, but for two must divorce her and give her a ketubah.
When they live in another town, he may hold on for one festival, but for two must divorce her and give her a ketubah.

Someone who vows that his wife should not go to a house of mourning or a house of feasting must divorce her and give her a ketubah, because he has locked a door in her face.
If he claims "because of some other cause" he is permitted. If he said to her: “Provided you tell so-and-so what you have told me” or “what I have told you” or “that you will fill and pour out in the garbage”, he must divorce her and give her a ketubah.

Locked in her face – the door of joy and the removal of sorrow. And the door to the house of mourning he locks in her face, for tomorrow she may die, and no one will eulogize her.

But that she should fill and pour out in the garbage, this is a deed of someone who is crazy and thus it means to say that if he ever forces her to do things which make her be thought of as crazy he must divorce her and give her a ​​​​​​​ketubah.

These are divorced without their ketubah: someone who transgresses the law of Moses or Jewish practice.
What is the law of Moses? Feeding him untithed food, having intercourse with him while niddah, not separating hallah, or making vows and not fulfilling them.
And what is Jewish practice? Going out with her head uncovered, spinning wool in the marketplace or conversing with every man. Abba Shaul says: also one who curses his parents in his presence.
Rabbi Tarfon says: also one who has a loud voice. And who has a loud voice? Anyone whose voice is heard by her neighbors when she speaks inside her house.

"She feeds him food that has not been tithed."
What are the circumstances? If he knows, he should abstain. And if he does not know, how does he know?
No, it is necessary when she tells him: So-and-so the priest rectified the pile of grain for me, and he went and asked, and it was found to be a lie.

Having intercourse with him while niddah.
What are the circumstances? If he knows about her, he should abstain. And if he does not know, then he should rely on her. Because Rav Ḥinnana bar Kahana said that Shmuel said: From where is it derived that a menstruating woman can count the days for herself? As it is stated: “Then she shall count to herself seven days” (Leviticus 15:28). “To herself” means by herself.
No, it is necessary when she tells him: So-and-so the sage declared the blood pure and he went and asked, and it was found to be a lie.

Not separating hallah.
What are the circumstances? If he knows , he should abstain. If he does not know, then how does he know?
No, it is necessary when she tells him: So-and-so the kneader rectified the dough for me, and he went and asked, and it was found that to be a lie.

Shmuel raised a dilemma before Rav: she said to her husband, I am impure, and then went back and said, I am pure, what is the halakha?
He said to him: Even then, if she provided a rationale, she is believd.
He learned this from him forty times and even so, Shmuel did not take action with regard to himself.

Someone who betrothed a woman on condition that she was under no vows and she was found to be under vows, she is not betrothed. If he married her unconditionally and she was found to be under vows, she is divorced without her ketubah.
On condition that she has no bodily defects, and she was found to have defects, she is not betrothed. If he married her unconditionally and she was found to have defects, she is divorced without her ketubah, for all defects which disqualify priests also disqualify women.

And the Lord spoke to Moshe, saying, speak to Aharon, saying, Whoever he be of thy seed in their generations that has any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God.
For whatever man he be that has a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that has a flat nose, or anything superfluous, or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, or crookbacked, or a dwarf, or that has a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or whose stones are crushed.

If she had bodily defects while she was still in her father’s house, her father must produce proof that she had these defects after she was betrothed and that his field was flooded.
If she came into her husband’s domain, the husband must produce proof that these defects existed before she had been betrothed and his bargain was made in error, according to Rabbi Meir.
And the sages say, to what does this apply? To concealed defects; but with regard to defects that are exposed he cannot make any claim. And if there was a bath-house in that town he cannot make any claim even about concealed defects, because he examines via his relatives.

A man in whom defects have arisen is not forced to divorce. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said: To what does this apply, to minor defects, but with regard to major defects we force him to divorce her.

These are the ones who are forced to divorce: someone afflicted with boils, someone with a polypus, a gatherer, a coppersmith or a tanner whether they were before they married or whether they learned after they had married.
And about all these Rabbi Meir said, even though she agreed she may say, “I thought I could accept him, but now I cannot accept him.”
The Sages say, she must accept against her will, the only exception being someone afflicted with boils, because she will enervate him.
It happened at Sidon that a tanner died, and he had a brother who was a tanner. The Sages said, she may say, “I was able to accept your brother but I am unable to accept you.”

Rav said, someone who says: I will not sustain my wife and I will not provide a livelihood for her, must divorce her and give her her marriage contract. Rabbi Elazar went and recited this halakha before Shmuel.
He said: Feed [akhsuha] barley to Elazar. Rather than forcing him to divorce, force him to provide for her.
And Rav? A person does not reside in a basket, with a snake.
When Rabbi Zeira ascended to Eretz Yisrael, he found Rabbi Binyamin bar Yefet sitting and reciting this in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan. He said to him: On account of this matter they fed Elazar with barley in Babylonia.

A woman came into the possession of property before she was betrothed, Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that she may sell it or give it and her act is valid.
If she came into possession after she was betrothed, Bet Shammai says: she may sell it, and Beth Hillel says: she may not sell it. Both agree that if she had sold it or given it her act is valid.
Rabbi Judah said: they argued before Rabban Gamaliel, “Since the man acquires the woman does he not also acquire her property?”
He replied, “We are embarrassed with regard to her new possessions and you wish to roll over on us her old ones as well?”
If she came into possession after she was married, both agree that, even if she had sold it or given it away, the husband may seize it from the buyers.
Before she married and then she married, Rabban Gamaliel says: if she sold it or gave it away her act is legally valid.
Rabbi Hanina ben Akavya said: they argued before Rabban Gamaliel, “Since the man acquires the woman does he not also acquire her property?”
He replied, “We are embarrassed with regard to her new possessions and you wish to roll over on us her old ones as well?”

Rabbi Shimon distinguishes between one kind of property and another: Property that is known to the husband she may not sell, and if she has sold it or given it her act is void; that which is unknown to the husband she may not sell, but if she has sold it or given it her act is valid.

If she came to possess money, land should be bought with the money and the husband enjoys the income.
Fruits that were detached from the ground, land should be bought and the husband enjoys the income.
Fruits attached to the ground, Rabbi Meir says, the land is to be valued with and without the produce, land should be bought with the difference and the husband enjoys the income.
And the sages say: fruits attached to the ground belongs to him and fruits detached from it belongs to her; land should be bought with them and the husband enjoys the income.

Rabbi Shimon says: where his strength is greater on marriage it is weaker on divorce; where his strength is weaker on marriage it is greater on divorce.
Fruits which are attached to the ground are his on marriage and hers on divorce, and those detached from the ground are hers on marriage and his on divorce.

If she inherited slaves or maidservants, the old ones are to be sold, and land purchased with the proceeds, and the husband can enjoy the income.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says she should not sell them, because they are the honour of her father’s house.
If she inherited olive-trees or vines, the old ones are to be sold, and land purchased with the proceeds, and the husband can enjoy the income.
Rabbi Judah says she should not sell them, because they are the glory of her father’s house.
Someone who spent money on his wife’s property, whether he spent much and consumed little, spent little and consumed much, what he has spent he has spent, and what he has consumed he has consumed.
If he spent but did not consume he should swear how much he has spent and take.

A woman awaiting yibbum who inherited possessions: Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that she may sell it or give it away, and that her act is valid.
If she dies, what shall be done with her ketubah and with property that comes in and goes out with her?
Bet Shammai say: the heirs of her husband divide it with the heirs of her father.
And Bet Hillel say: the property is to remain with those in whose possession it is: the ketubah is to remain in the possession of the heirs of the husband and the property which comes in and goes out with her remains in the possession of the heirs of her father.

If his brother left money, land shall be bought with it and he enjoys the usufruct. Produce detached from the ground, land shall be bought and he enjoys the income.
Attached to the ground, Rabbi Meir says, the land is to be valued with and without the produce, land should be bought with the difference and he enjoys the income.
And the sages say: produce attached to the ground is his and detached from the ground belongs to the first person who takes it: if he was first he acquires it and if she was first land shall be bought with it and he enjoys the income.
If he married her she is his wife in every respect save that her ketubah remains a debt on her first husband’s estate.

He shall not say to her, “Behold your ketubah lies on the table", rather all of his property is mortgaged to her ketubah.
So too a man may not say to his wife, “Behold your ketubah lies on the table", rather, "All my property is mortgaged to your ketubah."
If he divorced her she is only entitled to her ketubah. If he remarried her she is like all other wives, and is entitled only to her ketubah.

He who writes to his wife, “I have no claim whatsoever upon your property”, may enjoy its income during her lifetime and, when she dies, he inherits her. If so, why did he write, “I have no claim whatsoever upon your property”? That if she sold it or gave it, her act is valid.
He wrote, “I have no claim whatsoever upon your property and on their produce”, he may not enjoy their income during her lifetime but, when she dies, he inherits her.
Rabbi Judah says: he may in all cases enjoy the income unless he wrote to her: “I have no claim whatsoever upon your property and upon its produce and the produce of its produce for ever.”
If he wrote, “I have no claim whatsoever upon your property, its produce and the produce of its produce during your lifetime and after your death”, he may neither enjoy it produce during her lifetime nor does he inherit her when she dies.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: when she dies he inherits her because he is making a condition against what is written in the Torah. For, anyone makes a condition against what is written in the Torah, his condition is void.

Someone who died and left a wife, creditors, and heirs and also had a deposit or a loan in the possession of others, Rabbi Tarfon says it shall be given to the one who is under the greatest disadvantage.
Rabbi Akiva says, there is no mercy in law, but it shall be given to the heirs, for all the others require an oath while the heirs do not need an oath.

If he left produce that was detached from the ground, whoever seizes it first acquires it.
If the wife acquires more than the amount of her ketubah, or a creditor more than the value of his debt, Rabbi Tarfon says that the leftover should be given to the one who is under the greatest disadvantage.
Rabbi Akiva says, there is no mercy in law, but it shall be given to the heirs, for all the others require an oath while the heirs do not need an oath.

And these can be made to take an oath without any claim: partners, tenants, guardians, the wife who transacts business in the house, and the son of the house.
If he said to him, “What do you claim of me?”. “I want you to swear to me”, he must.

Someone who set up his wife as a shopkeeper or appointed her as a guardian may impose upon her an oath whenever he wants.
Rabbi Eliezer said: even in respect of her spindle and her dough.

... but the halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

He wrote to her, “I have no claim upon you for either a vow or an oath”- he cannot make her swear an oath but he may make her heirs and those who have come into her domain swear an oath.
“I have no claim upon you for either a vow or an oath nor upon your heirs nor upon those who come into your domain” - he cannot make her or her heirs or those who have come into her domain swear an oath, but his heirs may make her or her heirs or those who have come into her domain swear an oath.
“Neither I nor my heirs nor those who have come into my domain shall have any claim upon you or upon your heirs or upon those who have come into your domain for either a vow or an oath”, neither he nor his heirs nor those who have come into his domain may make her or her heirs or those who have come into her domain swear an oath.

If she went from her husband’s grave to her father’s house, or returned to her father-in-law’s house but was not made a steward, the heirs may not make her swear an oath.
If she was made a steward they make her swear an oath for the future but they cannot make her swear for the past.

The heirs may not make her swear – about what she had engaged in between death and the burial.
For if the heirs are able to make her take an oath on this, with the result that she needs to bring witnesses to what she is selling and buying for the needs of the burial of the dead, the corpse will wait and will be disgraced.

Someone who impairs her ketubah can only be paid with an oath. And if one witness testifies against her that it has been paid, she can only be paid with an oath.
From mortgaged property, from property belonging to orphans, and from someone who is not present she can only be paid with an oath.

“Someone who impairs her ketubah”. How?Her ketubah was for a thousand zuz; he said to her, “You have already received your ketubah”; and she says, “I received only a maneh” [100 zuz], she is only paid with an oath.
“If one witness testifies against her that it has been paid”. How? He said to her, “You have already received your ketubah”; and she says, “I did not receive it", and one witness testifies against her that she received it, she is only paid with an oath.
“From mortgaged property”. How? She ["he" in printed editions!] had sold his property to others and she seeks to recover payment from the buyers, she is only paid with an oath.
“From the property of orphans”. How? He died and left his possessions to his orphans and she seeks to recover payment from the orphans, she is only paid with an oath.
“Someone who is not present”.How? Her husband went to a country beyond the sea and she seeks to recover payment in his absence, she is only paid with an oath.
Rabbi Shimon says, whenever she claims her ketubah the heirs may make her swear an oath; if she does not claim her ketubah the heirs cannot make her swear an oath.

If she produced a get without a ketubah, she collects her ketubah.
A ketubah without a get - she says, “My get was lost” and he says, “My receipt was lost”, and similarly a creditor who produced a document without a prozbul, these are not paid out.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: from the time of danger a woman collects her ketubah without a get and a creditor collects without a prozbul.
Two gittin and two ketuboth - she collects two ketuboth.
Two ketuboth and one get or one ketubah and two gittin, or a ketubah, a get and death, she collects one ketubah only, for a man who divorces his wife and then remarries her contracts his second marriage on the condition of the first ketubah.
A minor whose his father had given him in marriage, the ketubah of his wife is valid, since it is on this condition that he kept her. A convert who converted with his wife, the ketubah remains valid, since it is on this condition that he kept her.

Someone who was married to two wives and died. The first takes precedence over the second; the heirs of the first take precedence over the heirs of the second.
If he married the first and she died, and then he married a second wife and then he died, the second and her heirs take precedence over the heirs of the first.

Someone who was married to two wives and they died. Afterwards he died, and the orphans claim their mother’s ketubah and there is only enough for the two ketubot, they divide it equally.
If there was a surplus of one dinar, these take their mother’s ketubah and these take their mother’s ketubah.
If the orphans said, “We are raising the estate of our father by a dinar”, in order that they can take their mother's ketubah, they are not listened to, rather the possessions are assessed by the court.

If there was property that would not [the "not" is missing from the printed texts] belong to the estate, and it is not like property in possession, Rabbi Shimon says: even if there was unmortgageable property it is not regarded unless there was mortgageable property worth one dinar more than the two ketubot.

Someone who was married to three wives and died. The ketubah of one was a maneh, and of the other two hundred zuz, and of the third three hundred zuz, and the estate was worth only one maneh - they divide it equally.
If there were two hundred the one with a maneh receives fifty and the one with two hundred and the one with three hundred three gold coins [seventy-five zuz] each.
If there were three hundred zuz, the one with a maneh receives fifty and the one with two hundred a maneh, and the one with three hundred, six gold coins [150 zuz].
Similarly, if three persons contributed to a fund and the fund lost or gained they share in the same manner.

The three of them were signed on one day, for if it were on three separate days, the earliest one with a document comes first in collection, or if he didn’t leave anything other than movable possessions, for there is no law of precedence in movable possessions.

. . . From mortgaged property, from property belonging to orphans, and from someone who is not present she can only be paid with an oath.

Someone who was married to four wives and died.
The first takes precedence over the second, the second over the third and the third over the fourth.
The first must take an oath to the second, the second to the third, and the third to the fourth, and the fourth is paid out without an oath.
Ben Nannus says: Should she be rewarded because she is the last? She too may not be paid out except with an oath.
If all went out on the same day then anyone who preceded another, even if only by one hour, gets paid. And so it was the custom in Jerusalem to write the hours.
If all the ketubot were issued at the same hour and the estate is worth no more than a maneh, they divide equally.

If a man who was married to two wives sold his field, and the first wife wrote to the buyer, “I have no claim whatsoever upon you”, the second wife may take from the buyer, and the first wife from the second, and the buyer from the first wife; and so they go on in a chain until they arrange a compromise between them.
The same applies to a creditor and to a wife with a claim.

A widow is maintained out of the property of the orphans, and her handiwork belongs to them and they are not obliged to bury her.
Her heirs, who inherit her ketubah, are obliged to bury her.

"A widow is maintained out of the property of the orphans."
Either land or movable property, for it is a condition of the ketubah, “You will dwell in my house and be supported from my property.”

A widow, whether after betrothal or after marriage, may sell without permission from a court.
Rabbi Shimon says, after marriage she may sell without the court but, after betrothal, she may only sell with permission from the court, since she is not entitled to maintenance and anyone who is not entitled to maintenance may only sell with permission from the court.

The halakha is not according to Rabbi Shimon.

If she sold her ketubah or part of it; or pledged her ketubah or part of it; or gave it away to someone else or part of it; she may only sell the rest with the court.
And the Sages say: she may sell even in four or five installments. And she may sell for her maintenance without the court, and she writes, “I sold for my maintenance”.
A divorcee may only sell with the court.

If a widow whose ketubah was two hundred zuz sold property worth a maneh for two hundred zuz or worth two hundred zuz for one maneh, she has received her ketubah.

If her ketubah was a maneh and she sold property worth a maneh and a dinar for one maneh, her sale is void. Even if she says, “I will return the dinar to the heirs”, her sale is void.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: her sale always stands unless there was so much land there as to allow her to leave a field of nine kav [30 yards square], and from a garden an area of half a kav [7 yards square], or, according to Rabbi Akiba, a quarter of a kav [5 yards square].
If her ketubah was four hundred zuz and she sold to this one for one maneh, and to this one for one maneh, to a the last one what was worth a maneh and a dinar for one maneh, that of the last one is void but the others stand.

If an valuation of the judges was one sixth less, or one sixth more, their sale is void. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: [their sale is valid] for, if that is the case, of what use is the power of a court?
But if they made a public announcement, their sale is valid even if they sold for two hundred zuz what was worth one maneh or for one maneh what was worth two hundred zuz.

An orphan who refused [her husband, on reaching majority], a secondary forbidden marriage, or an aylonit [someone who congenitally cannot bear children] does not have a ketubah nor income [from her dowry] nor maintenance, nor the worn-out clothes.
If from the outset he took her as an aylonit she has a ketubah.
A widow married to a high priest, a divorced woman or a halutzah married to a regular priest, a mamzeret or a netinah married to an Israelite, or the daughter of an Israelite was to a natin or a mamzer has a ketubah.

Our teachers taught: What are the secondary relationships? His mother’s mother, and his father’s mother, and his father’s father’s wife, and his mother’s father’s wife, and the wife of his father’s maternal half brother, and the wife of his mother’s paternal half brother, and his son’s daughter-in-law, and his daughter’s daughter-in-law.

Someone who married a woman who agreed with him that he should maintain her daughter for five years, he must maintain her for five years.
If she married another man and agreed with him that he should maintain her daughter for five years, he must maintain her for five years.
The first one may not say, “When she resides with me I will maintain her”, rather he must send her maintenance to her at her mother's place.
Similarly, the two husbands cannot say, “We will maintain her jointly”, but one must maintain her and the other give her the cost of maintenance.

If she married, her husband must give her with maintenance and they give her the cost of maintenance.
If they die, their own daughters are maintained out of their free assets only but she must be maintained even out of mortgaged property, because she is like a creditor.
Prudent men used to write, “On condition that I shall maintain your daughter for five years while you are with me”.

A widow who says, “I do not want to move from my husband’s house”, the heirs cannot tell her, “Go to your father’s house and we will maintain you”, rather they must maintain her in her husband’s house and they give her a residence according to her honor.
If she said, “I have no desire to move from my father’s house”, the heirs can say to her, “If you stay with us you will have your maintenance, but if you do not stay with us you will receive no maintenance”.
If she claimed [that she didn’t want to live there] because she is young and they are young, they must maintain her while she lives in the house of her father.

As long as she lives in her father’s house she may collect her kethubah at any time. As long as she lives in her husband’s house she may recover her ketubah, only within twenty-five years, because in the course of twenty-five years she has sufficient opportunities to give favors equal [in value to the amount of] her ketubah, the words of Rabbi Meir who spoke in the name of Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel.
The Sages say: as long as she lives in her husband’s house she may collect her ketubah at any time. As long as she lives in her father’s house she may collect her ketubah only within twenty-five years. If she died, her heirs must invoke her ketubah within twenty-five years.

There were two judges of robberies in Jerusalem, Admon and Hanan ben Avishalom. Hanan stated two rulings and Admon stated seven.
If a man went to a country beyond the sea and his wife claimed maintenance: Hanan says: she must take an oath at the end but not at the beginning.
The sons of the high priests differed from him and ruled that she must take an oath both at the beginning and at the end.
Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas agreed with their ruling. Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai said: Hanan has spoken well; she need take an oath only at the end.

Rabban Yohanan ben Zakai. The halakha is according to him.
And specifically, after three months from the husband departing, they assign maintenance to the wife if she claimed maintenance, but not prior to this time, for it is a presumption that a man does not leave his house empty and leaves.

If a man went to a country beyond the sea and someone supported his wife, Hanan says: he lost his money.
The sons of the high priests differed from him and said: let him take an oath as to how much he spent and recover it.
Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas agreed with their ruling. Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai said: Hanan has spoken well, he put his money on the horn of a deer.

Admon says seven.
Someone who dies and leaves sons and daughters, when the possessions are many the sons inherit and the daughters are maintained.
When the possessions are few, the daughters are maintained and the sons beg at the doors.
Admon says, “Because I’m a male I lose out?” Rabban Gamaliel said; I see the words of Admon.

The oath of the judges is when the claim is two silver coins, and the admission worth a perutah. And if the admission is not of the same kind as the claim, he is exempt.

Someone who claims from his neighbor jars of oil, and he admits about the jars, Admon says, since he admits some of the claim, he must swear.
And the Sages say: the admission is not of the same type as the claim. Rabban Gamaliel said; I see the words of Admon.

Someone who allocated a money to his son-in-law and then "stuck his leg out" - she shall sit until her hair turns white.
Admon says [she may say], “If I had allocated it on my own account I would sit until my hair turns white, but now that my father has allocated it, what can I do? Either marry or release.”
Rabban Gamaliel said; I see the words of Admon.

"He stuck his leg out" – it is the language of contempt, meaning to say, “take the plaster and dust that is under my feet.
Another explanation: “Suspend me by my feet on the tree, for I have nothing to give you".
And Maimonides explained that he walked on a distant journey.

Someone who contests a field and is signed as a witness [on the bill of sale to the owner] - Admon says: He can say, “The second is easy for me, and the first was too hard for me”.
And the Sages say: He lost his right.
If he made it a boundary mark for another person he has lost his right.

If a man went to a country beyond the sea and the path to his field was lost, Admon says: let him walk by the shortest way.
And the Sages say: let him purchase a path for himself even if it costs him a hundred maneh or let him fly through the air.

If a man produced a debt document against another, and the latter produced one that he had sold him the field, Admon ruled:"If I had I owed you, you should have reclaimed your debt when you sold me the field”.
But the Sages say: This was shrewd, since he may have sold him the land in order to be able to take it from him as a pledge.

Two two men produced debt documents against one another.
Admon says [one can say to the other], “Had I been in debt to you how is it that you borrowed from me?”
And the Sages say: This one collects his debt document and this one collects his debt document.

There are three countries in respect of marriage: Judaea, Transjordan and Galilee.
One may not take out from one town to another or from one city to another. But within the same country he may take out with him from one town into another town or from one city into an other city, but not from a town to a city nor from a city to a town.
One may take out from a bad to a beautiful dwelling, but not from a beautiful to a bad dwelling.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: not even from a bad dwelling to a beautiful dwelling, because the beautiful dwelling is a test.

(Quoting Maimonides)
Because the beautiful dwelling tests the body and makes it sick.
For a change in routine, even for good, is the beginning of stomach illness. And the halakha is according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel.
But if a person from the land of Galilee married a woman from the land of Judea or vice versa, we force her to go out with him, for it is on that account that he married her. And in general, one may take out from a city whose inhabitants are mainly idolators to a city which is mainly Jewish, but not from a city which is mainly Jewish to a city whose inhabitants are mainly idolators.

Everyone may bring up to the land of Israel, but not take away.
Everyone may bring up to Jerusalem, but not may take away.
Women and slaves are the same. How?
If a man married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must pay her in the currency of the land of Israel. If he married a woman in the land of Israel and divorced her in Cappadocia he must pay her in the currency of the land of Israel.
If he married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in the land of Israel, he must a gain pay her in the currency of the land of Israel. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says that he must pay her in the currency of Cappadocia.
If he married a woman in Cappadocia and divorced her in Cappadocia, he must pay her in the currency of Cappadocia.

Either one of them can compel the other to go up to the land of Israel or to Jerusalem and if she prevents him then she is divorced with her ketubah and if he prevents [her] then she goes out and he gives her her ketubah.

We will return to you, MasechetKetubot, and you will return to us.
Our mind is on you, MasechetKetubot, and your mind is on us.
We will not forget you, MasechetKetubot, and you will not forget us – not in this world and not in the world to come.

If a man says to his wife, “All vows which you may vow from now until I return from such and such a place behold, they are upheld,” he has not said anything. [If he said: All vows which you may vow from now until I return from such and such a place], behold, they are annulled,”: Rabbi Eliezer says: they are annulled; The Sages say: they are not annulled. Said Rabbi Eliezer: if he can annul vows which have already had the force of a prohibition, surely he can annul those which have not had the force of prohibition! They said to him: behold, it is said, “Her husband may uphold it, and her husband may annul it” (Numbers 30:14), that which has entered the category of upholding, has entered the category of annulment; but that which has not entered the category of upholding, has not entered the category of annulment.

[If the husband declares,] “I knew that there were vows, but I did not know that they could be annulled”, he may annul them [now]. [But if he says:] “I knew that I could annul them, but I did not know that this was a vow,” Rabbi Meir says: he cannot annul it, But the Sages say: he can annul.

If a man is under a vow that his son-in-law shall not benefit from him, and he wants to give money to his daughter, he must say to her, “This money is given to you as a gift, providing that your husband has no rights with it, [and it is only given to you] so that may put to your personal use.”

“But every vow of a widow and of a divorcee… shall be binding upon her” (Numbers 30:9).How is this so? If she said, “Behold, I will be a nazirite after thirty days”, even if she married within the thirty days, he cannot annul it. If she vows while in her husband’s domain, he can annul [the vow] for her. How is this so? If she said, “Behold, I will be a nazirite after thirty days,” [and her husband annulled it], even though she was widowed or divorced within the thirty days, it is annulled. If she vowed on one day, and he divorced her on the same day and took her back on the same day, he cannot annul it. This is the general rule: once she has gone into her own domain [even] for a single hour, he cannot annul.