Study Ketubot folio 52A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
ממזרת ונתינה לישראל — אינו חייב לפדותה, שאין אני קורא בה ״ואותבינך לי לאנתו״. רבא אמר: כל שאיסור שבייה גורם לה — חייב לפדותה, איסור דבר אחר גורם לה — אינו חייב לפדותה.
In the case of a mamzeret or a Gibeonite woman married to an Israelite, who are entitled to a marriage contract despite the fact that the relationship is forbidden and they must get divorced, he is not obligated to redeem her, as I do not apply to her the clause: And I will restore you to me as a wife, as she is forbidden to him. Rava said: In any case where the prohibition of her captivity, i.e., the fact that she was taken captive, causes her to be forbidden to her husband, as in the case of a priest’s wife who was taken captive, he is obligated to redeem her. However, if another prohibition causes her to be forbidden to her husband, e.g., the case of a widow who is married to a High Priest, he is not obligated to redeem her.
לימא כתנאי: המדיר את אשתו ונשבית — רבי אליעזר אומר: פודה, ונותן לה כתובתה. רבי יהושע אומר: נותן לה כתובתה, ואינו פודה.
The Talmud suggests: Let us say that this is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im. As it is taught in a baraita: In the case of one who vows that his wife may not derive benefit from him, in which case he must divorce her, and she is then taken captive, R' Eliezer says: He redeems her and gives her the payment for her marriage contract. R' Yehoshua says: He gives her the payment for her marriage contract but he does not have to redeem her, as he may not take her back as his wife, due to his vow.
אמר רבי נתן, שאלתי את סומכוס: כשאמר רבי יהושע נותן לה כתובתה ואינו פודה, כשהדירה ולבסוף נשבית, או בנשבית ולבסוף הדירה?
R' Natan said: I asked Sumakhos: When R' Yehoshua said that he gives her the payment for her marriage contract but he does not have to redeem her, was he referring to a case where he vowed that she may not derive benefit from him and she was subsequently taken captive, or was he speaking of one who was taken captive and he subsequently vowed that she may not derive benefit from him?