Daf Yomi - Kesuvos 64 - Highlights

Refusing Yibum

Rav Tuvi bar Kisna said in the name of Shmuel: We write a certificate of rebelliousness against an arusah (who refuses to enter into nisuin), but we do not write a certificate of rebelliousness against a yevamah (who refuses to enter into yibum).

The Gemora asks from the following braisa: Both a woman who is betrothed and married, even if she is a menstruant, even if she is sick, and even if she is waiting yibum; all can be regarded as rebelling. (Evidently, we would write a certificate for a yevamah awaiting yibum if she refuses)!?

The Gemora answers: The braisa is referring to a case where the yavam is demanding that the yevamah should avail herself to him, whereas Shmuel is discussing a case where she is demanding of him. For Rav Tachlifa bar Avimi said in the name of Shmuel: Beis Din gets involved to help the yavam when he demands of her and she refuses; however, they do not get involved to help her when she demands of him and he refuses.

The Gemora asks: If Shmuel is referring to a case where she demands of him and he refuses, he should have said: We write a certificate of rebelliousness for an arusah (not against the arusah)?

The Gemora answers: Let us emend Shmuel’s statement to read: We write a certificate of rebelliousness for an arusah.

The Gemora asks: What is the reason that we don’t write a certificate of rebelliousness against the yavam? It must be because we tell the yevamah, “Go, you are not obligated to have children!” Shouldn’t the same logic apply by an arusah also? When she is demanding to be married with nisuin, we should tell her, “Go, you are not obligated to have children!”

Perhaps you will say that it is referring to a case where the arusah is coming with a valid claim, saying, “I wish to have a staff in my hand and a spade for my burial (a son who will provide for me while I am alive and arrange for my burial when I die).” If so, the same claim can be said by a yevamah as well; why is the arusah’s claim any stronger?

Rather, the Gemora reverts to its original understanding: Both the braisa and Shmuel are discussing a case where the yavam is demanding of the yevamah; the difference is as follows: The braisa is referring to a case where the yavam is demanding that the yevamah should submit to chalitzah (we write a certificate of rebelliousness against her because chalitzah is regarded as the preferred option). Shmuel is discussing a case where the yavam is demanding that yibum should be performed (we do not write a certificate of rebelliousness against her). For Rabbi Pedas said in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: Beis Din gets involved to help the yavam when he demands that the yevamah should submit to chalitzah; however, however, they do not get involved to help her when he demands yibum.

The Gemora asks on this explanation: What is the reason that we don’t write a certificate of rebelliousness against the yevamah when she refuses yibum? It must be because we tell the yavam, “Go and marry a different woman.” Shouldn’t we be able to say the same thing when his yevamah refuses to submit to chalitzah?

Perhaps you will say that the yavam can counter and say, “Since the yevamah is attached to me, another woman will not want to marry me,” and therefore, the braisa rules that Beis Din assists him. If so, we can say the same argument in Shmuel’s case, when she refuses yibum. Why should the two cases be different?

Rather, the Gemora explains that both the braisa and Shmuel are discussing a case where the yavam is demanding of the yevamah to avail herself for yibum; the difference is as follows: The braisa is following the opinion of the original Mishna (the mitzvah of yibum is more preferable than chalitzah; and therefore, the yevamah is regarded as rebellious if she refuses yibum). Shmuel is following the opinion of the later Mishna (the mitzvah of chalitzah is more preferable than yibum; and therefore, the yevamah is not regarded as rebellious if she refuses yibum). For we learned in the following Mishna: The mitzvah of yibum takes precedence over the mitzvah of chalitzah. This was only initially, when the people intended solely for the sake of the mitzvah, but now that they have ulterior motives involved, the mitzvah of chalitzah takes precedence. (64a)

Compensation for Rebellion
The Mishna had stated: One who rebels against his wife must add three dinar a week to her kesuvah. Rabbi Yehuda says three trapaics.

The Gemora asks: What are trapaics?

Rav Sheishes said: A trapaic is equivalent to an astira (a provincial sela).

The Gemora asks: And how much is an astira?

The Gemora answers: It is half a (Tyrian) zuz (the Tyrian coins were made out of pure silver, whereas, the provincial coins had only one part silver and seven parts were made from base metal; hence, the Tyrian coins were valued at eight times more than a provincial coin; there are four zuz (or dinars) in a sela and consequently, a provincial sela is equivalent to half of a Tyrian zuz).

The Gemora cites a braisa, which supports this explanation: Rabbi Yehudah said: Three Trapaics (per week), which are equivalent to nine ma’ahs (since there are six ma’ahs in a zuz and a trapaic is half a zuz; three trapaics are equivalent to nine ma’ahs), which amounts to (a reduction) of a ma’ah and a half per day (six days of the week).

(It emerges from this braisa that when we increase her kesuvah on account of his rebelliousness, we do not include Shabbos.) Rav Chiya bar Yosef asked of Shmuel: Why is it that when we decrease her kesuvah on account of her rebelliousness, we include Shabbos (as Rabbi Yehudah stated: Seven dinars per week; one dinar per day), and yet, when we increase her kesuvah on account of his rebelliousness, we do not include Shabbos?

Shmuel answers: When we decrease her kesuvah on account of her rebellion, it does not have the appearance of “Shabbos pay”; however, where we are increasing his kesuvah on account of his rebellion (if we would include Shabbos), it would appear as “Shabbos pay.”(It is Rabbinically forbidden to earn money on Shabbos, for this may result in buying, selling and renting on Shabbos.)

Rav Chiya bar Yosef asked of Shmuel: Why is that a rebellious woman loses more than a rebellious man?

Shmuel replied: Go out and learn from a market of harlots; who hires whom? (Since the man hires the woman, it is obvious that his desire for intimacy is greater, and the lack of intimacy causes more anguish to him than to her.) Another explanation: The man’s desires are recognizable on the outside (his erection and therefore, he is more embarrassed), whereas a woman’s is on the inside. (64a – 64b)
Mishna
The Mishna states: If a man provides for his wife through a third party, he may not give her less than two kavs of wheat, or four kavs of barley per week. Rabbi Yosi said: Barley was granted to her only by Rabbi Yishmael, who was close to Edom. He also gives her half a kav of beans, a half a log of oil, and a kav of dried figs, or a maneh of pressed figs. And if he has none, he must provide in their stead produce from another place.

He must provide for her a bed, a mattress, and a mat. And he must give her a kerchief for her head, and a belt for her loins, and shoes from festival to festival, and clothing of fifty zuz from year to year. And he does not give her, either new clothes in the summer, worn-out in the winter, but he gives her new clothes worth fifty zuz in the winter, and she covers herself in their worn condition in the summer, and the worn-out ones are hers.

The Mishna continues: He gives her a ma'ah of silver for her needs, and she eats with him on Friday nights. And if he does not give her a ma'ah of silver for her needs, her earnings are hers.

And what work must she do for him? She is required to spin the weight of five selas of warp in Judea, which equals ten selas in the Galil; or the weight of ten selas of weft in Judea, which are twenty selas in the Galil. But if she was nursing, they decrease her earnings obligation and increase her maintenance. To what does this refer? These minimums are applicable to a poor person in Israel. But with a wealthy person, everything is according to his honor. (64b)

Amount of Meals
The Gemora asks: Who is the Tanna of our Mishna (that we give the wife two kavs of wheat per week)? It cannot be Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka, nor can it be Rabbi Shimon. For we learned in the following Mishna: What is the quantity needed to make an eruv techumin (one who places a certain amount of food in a place up to 2,000 amos away from his current location; he is then permitted to walk 2,000 amos beyond there because the location of his food is regarded as his residence)? Food of two meals for each person that needs the eruv. This is referring to food for a weekday meal, and not for Shabbos meals; these are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehudah says: This is referring to food for Shabbos meals, and not for his weekday meals. Both opinions intended to be lenient (Rabbi Meir used to consume at a weekday meal less bread than at a Shabbos meal, which had more courses and since he ate bread with each course, he ate more bread; Rabbi Yehudah, however, consumed on Shabbos less bread than he would on weekdays because he satisfied himself with the extra courses). Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka says: The required amount of bread for an eruv is a loaf that is purchased for a pundyon when four se'ahs of grain are purchased for a sela. (Each sela = four dinars, each dinar = six ma'ahs and each ma'ah = two pundyons. Consequently, a sela = (4 X 6 X 2) forty eight pundyons. Since a se'ah = six kavs, four se’ahs = twenty-four kavs. If four se’ahs (twenty-four kavs) sell for a sela (forty-eight pundyons), one can purchase one kav with two pundyons and a half of a kav with one pundyon; it emerges that the loaf of bread measures a volume of twelve eggs since there are twenty-four eggs in a kav.) Rabbi Shimon says: The required amount of bread for an eruv is two thirds of a loaf when there are three loaves to a kav. (One loaf is made from 1/3 kav, the volume of 8 eggs, and 2/3 of a loaf measures 5 1/3 eggs.) Half of the loaf is used to determine if one’s clothes have been contaminated when he entered a house with tzaraas. (A person who enters a house inflicted with tzaraas becomes tamei immediately, but he is not required to wash his clothes unless he remained in it the time necessary for eating. The Sages learned from this that only if a person stayed in the house a length of time needed for eating, is required to wash his clothes. And the time is long enough "to eat a peras", i.e., ½ a loaf. The Mishna teaches us that according to Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka, who holds that a whole loaf is ¼ a kav [the volume of 6 eggs], the volume of the “eating of a peras” is 3 eggs; and according to Rabbi Shimon, who holds that a loaf is a 1/3 of a kav [8 eggs], the volume of the “eating of a peras” is 4 eggs.) And a half of its half (a quarter of the loaf) is the amount of tamei food eaten that will render someone unfit to eat terumah. And a half of a half of a half of the loaf is the amount required to contract food tumah.

Now, the Gemora explains its question: Who is the Tanna of our Mishna (that we give the wife two kavs of wheat per week)? If it is Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka (who maintains that the two meals for an eruv measures half a kav), then two kavs of wheat will be only eight meals (and she needs fourteen for the week)? If it is Rabbi Shimon (who maintains that the two meals for an eruv measures two thirds of a one third kav loaf, then one meal is one ninth of a kav), then two kavs of wheat will be eighteen meals (which would be more than necessary)?

The Gemora answers: The Tanna of the Mishna can be Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka, and it is like Rav Chisda said elsewhere: Deduct a third for the profit of the shopkeeper, so too here also, take a third (though the shopkeeper buys at the rate of four se'ahs for a sela, which is equal to half a kav for a pundyon, he sells it at a higher price, leaving for himself a profit of one third of the purchase price; for each pundyon, he sells only two thirds of half a kav;. one third of half a kav or one sixth of a kav thus provides one meal, two kavs therefore, would produce (2 x 6) = twelve meals) and add it (the four meals) to the eight meals that we calculated before.

The Gemora asks: That is still only twelve meals (and she needs fourteen meals)?

The Gemora answers: Since she eats with her husband on Friday night, it is not necessary to provide for that meal.

The Gemora asks: Firstly, this is only understandable according to the opinion who holds that the Mishna means that she actually eats together with him, but according to the opinion who maintains that “eating” is merely a euphemism for marital relations, how can it be explained? Secondly, even without the Friday night meal, she still requires thirteen meals, and two kavs will only provide twelve meals?

The Gemora answers: The Tanna of the Mishna can be Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka, and it is like a different statement that Rav Chisda said elsewhere: Deduct a half for the profit of the shopkeeper, so too here also, take a half and add it (the eight meals) to the eight meals that we calculated before.

The Gemora asks: The two statements of Rav Chisda contradict each other!

The Gemora answers: One statement refers to a place where the wheat sellers supply wood to the bakers, whereas the other refers to a place where they do not supply the wood (and the shopkeeper sells at a profit equal to half of his purchase price to compensate himself for the cost of the wood).

The Gemora asks: Even according to this explanation, two kavs of wheat will provide sixteen meals and she needs only fourteen?

The Gemora answers: It is going according to Rav Chidka, who says that one is obligated to eat four meals on Shabbos (and consequently, she needs sixteen meals a week).

Alternatively, the Gemora answers that it can be according to the Rabbis who hold that one is required to eat only three meals on Shabbos, but one meal is reserved for guests and occasional visitors.

The Gemora concludes: Now that we explained the Mishna in this way, we can say that our Mishna follows the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. That which we asked that according to him, two kavs provide for eighteen meals, we can answer that we deduct meals, which are reserved for guests and occasional visitors. (64b)

[END]