Kesubos 96a

כתובות צ״ו ע״א

Ketubot 96a

Learn Kesubos 96a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Kesubos 96a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

The widow and the heirs: her finds, her work, seizing property for support, losing support through silence, and a parallel rule for a תלמיד serving his רבי.

Overview

The amud opens with a proof from שמואל, who says a widow keeps the lost items she finds. The proof tries to show that the משנה reads "הניזונת" and not "ניזונת". The גמרא rejects the proof: a husband gets his wife's finds only to avoid איבה, and that reason does not apply to the heirs. רבי יוסי בר חנינא teaches that a widow does all of a wife's household jobs for the heirs, except the personal ones. In a parallel rule, רבי יהושע בן לוי teaches that a תלמיד does all of a slave's jobs for his רבי except untying his shoe. רבא and רב אשי narrow that shoe rule, and רבי יוחנן and רב נחמן בר יצחק warn a teacher not to stop his student from serving him. Back to widows: a widow who seized movables for her מזונות keeps them, which is backed by a ברייתא and a real case. רבינא limits this to food and excludes the כתובה; מר בר רב אשי challenges him, and a tradition from רבא backs רבינא. A widow who stays silent for two or three years loses her past מזונות but not her future support. The amud ends with רבי יוחנן asking who must bring proof when the heirs say they paid and she says she got nothing.

Opening lines

The steps (20)

1. ProofA proof from שמואל: the widow keeps what she finds
2. RejectionRejection: the husband's right to her finds is only about avoiding bad feelings
3. StatementWhat jobs a widow does for the heirs
4. StatementWhat a student does for his teacher
5. StatementThe shoe rule applies only where the student is not known
6. StatementEven among strangers, wearing תפילין removes the problem
7. StatementStopping a student from serving withholds kindness from him
8. StatementHe also takes away the student's fear of Heaven
9. StatementA widow keeps movables she seized for her support
10. ProofA ברייתא teaches the same ruling
11. ProofA real case: the חכמים could not take back the seized bag of coins
12. Statementרבינא limits the rule to seizing for food
13. Challengeמר בר רב אשי asks why the marriage contract should be different
14. Proofרבא is reported to agree with רבינא
15. StatementA widow who waits years without asking loses her support
16. ChallengeWhy say three years if two is enough?
17. ResolutionTwo years for a poor woman, three for a rich one
18. ResolutionOr: two years for a bold woman, three for a modest one
19. StatementShe loses only the past support, not future support
20. QuestionWho must prove whether the widow got her support?