Study Ketubot folio 44A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
הכא נמי היינו טעמא דלא גביא, מדלא כתב לה ״אוסיפית לך מאה אמאתים״, אחולי אחילתיה לשעבודא קמא.
Here too, this is the reasoning for the ruling that she does not collect the additional 100 dinars from the second stipulated time, as he did not write to her in the second marriage contract: I added 100 dinars to your original marriage contract of 200 dinars. Evidently, he did not add to the existing marriage contract. Rather, she forgave her rights to the first marriage contract, including the lien on his property from the date it was written, in order to accept the second marriage document.
אמר מר: אי בעיא — בהאי גביא, אי בעיא — בהאי גביא. לימא פליגא דרב נחמן? דאמר רב נחמן: שני שטרות היוצאין בזה אחר זה — ביטל שני את הראשון.
§ After clarifying Rav Huna’s opinion, the Talmud turns its attention to a more general issue, connected to his last statement. The Master, i.e., Rav Huna, said, as indicated in the above discussion, that if she wishes she can collect the sum specified in this marriage contract, and if she wishes she can collect the sum specified in that marriage contract. The Talmud asks: should we say that this opinion disagrees with that of Rav Naḥman? As Rav Naḥman said: With regard to two documents that pertain to the same issue and that are produced one after the other, e.g., a pair of documents that ascribe the transfer of ownership over a particular field to different times, the second, later document nullifies the first. Here too, the second marriage contract should negate the first one entirely.
לאו מי איתמר עלה, אמר רב פפא: ומודה רב נחמן דאי אוסיף ביה דיקלא, לתוספת כתביה. הכא נמי, הא אוסיף לה מידי!
The Talmud refutes this suggestion: Was it not stated with regard to this halakha of Rav Naḥman that Rav Pappa said: And Rav Naḥman concedes that if he added so much as a palm tree in the second document, this shows that he wrote it as an addition, and therefore the second document does not cancel the first, but adds to its sum? Here too, he added something for her, as the sum of money specified in the second marriage contract is larger than that specified in the first.