Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



8944
Papyri, P.Murabba'T, 19
NaN


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

9 results
1. Mishnah, Bava Batra, 8.7, 10.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

8.7. If a man writes over his property to his son, he must write, “From today and after my death”, according to Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Yose says, “He need not do so.” If a man writes over his property to his son to be his after his death, the father cannot sell it since it is written over to the son, and the son cannot sell it since it is in the possession of the father. If his father sold the property, it is sold [only] until he dies; if the son sold the property, the buyer has no claim until the father dies. The father harvests the crops and gives them to whomever he wishes, and what he has left harvested belongs to [all] his heirs. If he left elder sons and younger sons, the elder sons may not take care of themselves [from the estate] at the expense of the younger sons, nor may the younger sons claim maintece at the cost of the elder sons, rather they all share alike. If the elder sons married [at the expense of the estate] so too the younger sons may marry [at the expense of the estate]. If the younger sons said, “We will marry in the way you married”, they do not listen to them, for what their father gave them, he has given." 10.6. If a man’s debt document was erased, he must have witnesses testify with regards to the loan, and come before the court to make this attestation: “So and so, the son of so and so, his debt document was erased on such and such a day, and so and so and so and so are his witnesses.” If a man had paid part of his debt, Rabbi Judah says: “He should exchange the debt document for a new one.” Rabbi Yose says: “He should write a receipt.” Rabbi Judah said: “It turns out that this one (the debtor) will have to guard his receipt from mice.” Rabbi Yose said to him: “That’s good for him, as long as the rights of the other (the creditor) have not been damaged."
2. Mishnah, Gittin, 9.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.3. The body of the get is: “Behold you are permitted to any man.” Rabbi Judah says: [he must add] “And this shall be to you from me a writ of divorce and a letter of release and a bill of dismissal, with which you may go and marry any man that you wish.” The body of a writ of emancipation is: “Behold you are a free woman”, “Behold you belong to yourself.”"
3. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 4.7, 5.1, 7.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

4.7. If he did not write a kethubah for her, a virgin still 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 [for the full amount] because it is a condition laid down by the court." 5.1. 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.After betrothal [but before marriage], a virgin collects two hundred zuz and a widow only one maneh, for the man wrote her [the additional amount] in order to marry her. If she was widowed or divorced, either after betrothal or after marriage, she is entitled to collect the entire amount. Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah says: [a woman widowed or divorced] after marriage receives the entire amount; 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 [he may write a document for] a maneh and she writes, “I have received from you fifty zuz”. Rabbi Meir says: Any man who gives a virgin less than two hundred zuz or a widow less than a maneh is engaging in licentious sex." 7.6. These leave [their marriage] without their ketubah: A wife who transgresses the law of Moses or Jewish law. And what is the law of Moses? Feeding her husband with untithed food, having intercourse with him while in the period of her menstruation, not separating dough offering, 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 her husband’s parents in his presence. Rabbi Tarfon says: also one who has a loud voice. And who is regarded as one who has a loud voice? A woman whose voice can be heard by her neighbors when she speaks inside her house."
4. Tosefta, Ketuvot, 4.9 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

4.9. Hillel the Elder would explain lay-language [of contracts as if it were the biblical text]. When the people of Alexandria would betroth wives, another would come and seize her from the street. The matter came to the Sages. They sought to make their children bastards [since the betrothal was valid, so when they are married to others in the meantime their children will be illegitimate]. Hillel the Elder said to them: \"Bring to me the ketubah of your mothers.\" They brought them for him, and it was written in it \"When you enter my house, you will be my wife according to the law of Moshe and Yisrael\" [in other words, based on a fine reading of the ketubah text, the betrothal only takes full effect when she enters his house, which means that the other husband was not illegitimate and her children aren't bastards]."
5. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

56a. אלא תרוייהו אזלי בתר אומדנא,מאן דאמר הלכה שפיר מאן דאמר אין הלכה הכא נמי אומדן דעתא הוא משום איקרובי דעתא הוא והא איקרבא ליה דעתא,יתיב רב חנינא קמיה דרבי ינאי וקאמר הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה אמר ליה פוק קרי קראך לברא אין הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה,אמר רב יצחק בר אבדימי משום רבינו הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה אמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה,ורב נחמן דידיה אמר אין הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה ונהרדעי משמיה דרב נחמן אמרי הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה ואע"ג דלט רב נחמן ואמר כל דיינא דדאין כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה הכי והכי תיהוי אפילו הכי הלכה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה והלכה למעשה כרבי אלעזר בן עזריה:,בעי רבין נכנסה לחופה ולא נבעלה מהו חיבת חופה קונה או חיבת ביאה קונה,תא שמע דתני רב יוסף שלא כתב לה אלא על חיבת לילה הראשון אי אמרת בשלמא חיבת חופה קונה היינו דאמר לילה הראשון אלא אי אמרת חיבת ביאה קונה ביאה בלילה הראשון איתא מכאן ואילך ליתא,ואלא מאי חופה חופה בלילה איתא ביממא ליתא ולטעמיך ביאה בלילה איתא ביממא ליתא הא אמר רבא אם היה בבית אפל מותר הא לא קשיא אורח ארעא קא משמע לן דביאה בלילה,אלא חופה קשיא חופה נמי לא קשיא כיון דסתם חופה לביאה קיימא אורח ארעא קא משמע לן דבלילה,בעי רב אשי נכנסה לחופה ופירסה נידה מהו אם תימצי לומר חיבת חופה קונה חופה דחזיא לביאה אבל חופה דלא חזיא לביאה לא או דלמא לא שנא תיקו:,רבי יהודה אומר רצה כותב לבתולה וכו': וסבר רבי יהודה דכותבין שובר והתנן מי שפרע מקצת חובו רבי יהודה אומר יחליף רבי יוסי אומר יכתוב לו שובר,אמר רבי ירמיה כששוברתה מתוכה,אביי אמר אפילו תימא בשאין שוברתה מתוכה בשלמא התם ודאי פרעיה דלמא מירכס תברתא ומפיק ליה לשטרא והדר גבי זימנא אחרינא הכא ודאי יהב לה מילתא בעלמא היא דאמרה ליה אי נטריה נטריה אי לא נטריה איהו הוא דאפסיד אנפשיה,בשלמא אביי לא אמר כרבי ירמיה לא קתני שוברתה מתוכה אלא ר' ירמיה מ"ט לא אמר כאביי גזירה שובר דהכא אטו שובר דעלמא,טעמא דכתבה ליה אבל על פה לא אמאי דבר שבממון הוא ושמעינן ליה לר' יהודה דאמר דבר שבממון תנאו קיים,דתניא האומר לאשה הרי את מקודשת לי על מנת שאין ליך עלי שאר כסות ועונה הרי זו מקודשת ותנאו בטל דברי רבי מאיר ר' יהודה אומר בדבר שבממון תנאו קיים,קסבר רבי יהודה כתובה דרבנן וחכמים עשו חיזוק לדבריהם יותר משל תורה,הרי פירות דרבנן ולא עבדו להו רבנן חיזוק דתנן רבי יהודה אומר לעולם הוא אוכל פירי פירות עד שיכתוב לה דין ודברים אין לי בנכסיך ובפירותיהן ובפירות פירותיהן עד עולם 56a. In any case, it has been established that Rav also follows the principle of assessing one’s intention, which calls into question the conclusion that Rabbi Natan is the one who said that the ihalakhais in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya. bRather,the Gemara concludes: bBothRav and Rabbi Natan bfollowthe principle of bassessingintention, and the debate can be explained in a different way.,According to bthe one who saysthe ihalakha /iis in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, this works out bwell.According to bthe one who saysthe ihalakhais notin accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, bhere too, this is an assessmentof his bintention.Why did he give her the additional sum of the marriage contract? bIt was due to a sense of intimacybetween them, as they were betrothed and were planning to get married. Since bhe diddemonstrate ba sense of intimacywith her, the assessment is that he intended to give her the additional sum., bRav Ḥanina,who was known for teaching biblical verses, bsat before Rabbi Yannai and said:The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya.Rabbi Yannai bsaid to him: Go outand bread your verses outside.Your area of expertise is biblical verses, not ihalakha /i. What you said is incorrect and should not be said in the study hall, as the ihalakhaisactually bnot in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya. /b, bRav Yitzḥak bar Avdimi said in the name of our teacher,Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya. Rav Naḥman saidthat bShmuel said:The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya. /b, bAnd Rav Naḥmanalso bsaid hisown statement: The ihalakhais not in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya. Andthe Sages bof Neharde’a say in the name of Rav Naḥman:The ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya.The Gemara comments: bAnd although Rav Naḥman cursedthem band said: Any judge who rules in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya, such and suchunspecified misfortune bwill happen to him, even sothe ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya.Since the Gemara presented a number of different opinions, it concludes: bAnd the practical ihalakhais in accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Elazar ben Azarya. /b,§ Since the practical ihalakhais that a woman who was divorced or widowed after betrothal receives the main sum of her marriage contract but not the additional sum, bRavin asks: What isthe ihalakhawith regard to a woman who bentered the wedding canopy andis then widowed or divorced bwithout having had sexual intercourse?Does the baffectionmanifest in the bwedding effectthe marriage, and therefore she receives the additional sum as a married woman? bOr,is it the baffectionmanifest in the bintercoursethat beffectsthe marriage, and consequently this woman is no different than a betrothed woman for the purpose of this ihalakha /i?, bComeand bhear that Rav Yosef taughtthe following ibaraita /i: bHe wrotethe additional sum in the marriage contract bfor her only on account of the affectioncharacteristic bof the first nightof the marriage. The Gemara asks: bGranted, if you saythat the baffectionmanifest in the bwedding effectsthe marriage, bthis iswhy bit says theaffection characteristic of bthe first night,as the wedding ceremony is performed on the first night only. bBut if you saythat the baffectionmanifest in the bintercourse effectsthe marriage, bis there intercourseonly bon the first nightand then bfrom thispoint bforward there is none?Consequently, the ibaraitaimplies that the affection manifest in the wedding effects the marriage, and from that point on she is entitled to the additional sum of the marriage contract.,The Gemara rejects this proof: bBut rather, whatis the advantage of interpreting the expression: Affection characteristic of the first night, as a reference to the bwedding? Is there a weddingonly bat nightand bnot during the day?The Gemara responds: bAnd according to your reasoning, is there intercourseonly bat nightand bnot during the day?Didn’t bRava saythat although the Sages generally prohibited engaging in intercourse during the day, bif it was in a dark houseit is bpermitted?The Gemara rejects this question: bThisis bnot difficult.By employing this phrase, bit teaches us the ordinary mode of behavior,i.e., bthat intercoursegenerally takes place bat night. /b, bRather,the opinion that the expression is a reference to the bwedding is difficult,as a wedding does not have to take place at night. The Gemara responds: bThe weddingreference is balso not difficult, sincea reference to ba wedding without specificationmeans a wedding that btakes placein order to lead directly bto intercourse.By using this phrase, bitsimilarly bteaches us the ordinary mode of behavior,i.e., that intercourse generally takes place bat night.Consequently, this ibaraitacannot be used as a proof for either possibility., bRav Ashi asksa question similar to Ravin’s: If the bride bentered the wedding canopy and began menstruating,and the husband then died without ever engaging in intercourse with his wife, bwhat isthe ihalakhawith regard to the additional sum of the marriage contract? bIf you saythat the baffectionmanifest in the bwedding effectsthe marriage, does this refer specifically to ba weddingin which the couple is bfit toengage in bintercourse,which involves greater affection, band a weddingin which the couple bis not fit toengage in bintercoursedoes bnoteffect the marriage? bOr, perhaps it is not different.The Sages could not answer this, so the question bshall standunresolved.,§ The mishna states: bRabbi Yehuda says:If bhe wishes, he may writea marriage contract bfor a virginfor two hundred dinars, and she may then write a receipt as if he had paid part of that sum. They ask: bAnddid bRabbi Yehuda holdthat one bwrites a receiptfor partial payment of a debt? bBut didn’t we learnin a mishna ( iBava Batra170b): In the case of bone who repaid part of his debt, Rabbi Yehuda says: He should exchangethe original promissory note for a new one that states the amount still owed, and bRabbi Yosei says:The lender bshould write him a receiptfor the money he received? According to Rabbi Yehuda, a new note is preferable to a receipt because if the borrower loses the receipt, the lender is still in possession of a promissory note for the full amount and can collect a second time., bRabbi Yirmeya said:In the mishna, Rabbi Yehuda is referring to a case bwhere the receipt iswritten bwithinthe marriage contract itself and not as a separate document. The husband is therefore not required to hold on to a receipt, and consequently Rabbi Yehuda’s restriction against writing a receipt is not necessary., bAbaye said: Evenif byou saythat the mishna is referring to a case bwhere the receipt is notwritten bwithin it,it is logical that Rabbi Yehuda would make an exception in this case. bGranted, there,in an ordinary case of a receipt, bit is certainthat the borrower brepaidpart of the loan, and consequently there is concern that bperhapshe bwill lose the receiptand the lender will btake out thepromissory bnote and return and collectthe entire payment bagain.But bhere,in the mishna, did the husband bdefinitely givethe wife part of the payment for the marriage contract? The receipt bmerelyamounts to bsomething she said to himin order to waive part of the payment, although she did not actually receive it. bIf he savedthe receipt, bhe saved it; if he did not save it, it is he himself who will lose.Therefore, in this case, Rabbi Yehuda agrees that one writes a receipt.,They ask: bGranted,it is understandable why bAbaye did not sayhis explanation bin accordance withthe opinion of bRabbi Yirmeya,as the mishna bdoes not teachexplicitly that the breceipt iswritten bwithinthe marriage contract. bHowever, what is the reasonthat bRabbi Yirmeya did not sayan explanation bin accordance withthe opinion of bAbaye?Why does Rabbi Yirmeya limit the mishna to a case where the receipt was written within the marriage contract? The Gemara responds: Although this is an unusual case, as there is no concern that the receipt may be lost, there is nevertheless a rabbinic bdecreewith regard to bthis receipt due to the typicalcase of breceipts.Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda would not allow a receipt unless it was written into the marriage contract itself.,With regard to the crux of the issue, the Gemara notes: bThe reasonthat Rabbi Yehuda holds that the wife can waive part of the main sum of her marriage contract bisspecifically because bshe wrote hima receipt. bHowever,if she said it bverbally, no,it is not effective, even according to Rabbi Yehuda. The Gemara asks: bWhynot? bThis is a monetary matter, and wehave bheard that Rabbi Yehuda said:With regard to bmonetary mattersin which someone makes a verbal stipulation, bhis stipulation stands. /b,This is bas it is taughtin the iTosefta( iKiddushin3:7): In the case of bone who says to a woman: You are hereby betrothed to me on the condition that you have noability to claim bfrom me food, clothing, or conjugal rights, she is betrothed and his stipulation is void;this is bthe statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says:With regard to bmonetary matters,such as food and clothing, bhis stipulation stands;therefore, if she verbally waives part of the marriage contract, and thereby makes a stipulation about a monetary matter, it should be effective.,The Gemara answers: bRabbi Yehuda holds:The bmarriage contract is a rabbiniclaw, band the Sages reinforced their pronouncements with greaterforce bthan Torah law.Therefore, if the wife waives part of the main sum of the marriage contract, Rabbi Yehuda holds that her declaration has no force unless it is written down. However, a Torah obligation, such as food and clothing, does not require this reinforcement, and consequently the wife may waive it with a verbal stipulation.,The Gemara challenges this answer: The husband’s entitlement to the bproduceof his wife’s property bis a rabbinicdecree, bandnevertheless bthe Sages did not reinforcehis rights to bthem, as we learnedin a mishna (83a): bRabbi Yehuda says:Even if the husband wrote that he waived his rights to the produce of his wife’s property, bhe may actually consume the produce of the produceof her property, meaning that he could invest the produce in additional property, which would also belong to his wife, but he would consume its produce. This applies bunless heexplicitly bwritesto bher: I do not have any claim to your property, its produce, or the produce of its produce, forever. /b
6. Papyri, P.Hever, 65, 69, 8-9, 50

7. Papyri, P.Murabba'T, 20

8. Papyri, P.Yadin, 14-16, 18-19, 21-22, 25-27, 37, 10

9. Papyri, Cpj, 128



Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
akiva, rabbi Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 61
alexandria Eckhardt, Jewish Identity and Politics Between the Maccabees and Bar Kokhba: Groups, Normativity, and Rituals (2011) 25
alimentation Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 61
arabia Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 119
aramaic Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 119, 183
augustus Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
babatha Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 61
continuity Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 97
divorce Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 60, 97, 183
dominical letters Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
dowry Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 60, 61, 97, 183
egypt, egyptian Eckhardt, Jewish Identity and Politics Between the Maccabees and Bar Kokhba: Groups, Normativity, and Rituals (2011) 25
egypt Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28
emperor Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
estate Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60
gift Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 97
hai gaon Eckhardt, Jewish Identity and Politics Between the Maccabees and Bar Kokhba: Groups, Normativity, and Rituals (2011) 25
halakhah Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 97
hands Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60
hebrew Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 61, 119, 120
hebrew (language) Eckhardt, Jewish Identity and Politics Between the Maccabees and Bar Kokhba: Groups, Normativity, and Rituals (2011) 25
house of hillel Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60
house of shammai Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60
jacob Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 183
jerusalem Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 61, 119, 120
judaean desert Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 97
julian (jurist) Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
julian calendar Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
ketubbah Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 61, 97
landed property Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 61
lien Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60
loan Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28
marriage Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 60, 97
marriage contracts (ketubot) Eckhardt, Jewish Identity and Politics Between the Maccabees and Bar Kokhba: Groups, Normativity, and Rituals (2011) 25
meir, rabbi Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 61, 97
moses Eckhardt, Jewish Identity and Politics Between the Maccabees and Bar Kokhba: Groups, Normativity, and Rituals (2011) 25
movables Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 61
nabataean Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 119
papyrus Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 183
penalty Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28, 183
phernē Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28
proix Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28
prosphora Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 28
rabbis Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 61
right Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 97
saturday Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
tarfon, rabbi Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 61
tuesday Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
week Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 120
widow' Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 97
widow Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 61
yehudah (bar ilai), rabbi Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 60, 61, 97
yossi, rabbi Katzoff, On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies (2019) 183