Study Ketubot folio 69A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
תלה ליה רב לרבי ביני חטי: האחין ששיעבדו, מהו? הוה יתיב רבי חייא קמיה. אמר ליה: מכרו או משכנו? אמר ליה: מאי נפקא מינה? בין מכרו בין שמשכנו — מוציאין לפרנסה ואין מוציאין למזונות!
§ Rav attached the following question for R' Yehuda HaNasi between the lines of a letter he sent him: With respect to brothers who mortgaged a certain property, what is the halakha? Is this property subject to seizure, if need be, for the benefit of the daughters’ dowries? R' Ḥiyya was sitting before R' Yehuda HaNasi when the letter arrived. He said to him: What is meant in the question? Did they sell the property or did they pledge it as a guarantee, so that it has not yet been transferred? R' Yehuda HaNasi, said to him: What difference does it make? Whether they sold it or pledged it, the court may appropriate the property for support for the daughters’ dowries, but the court may not appropriate it for their sustenance.
ורב, אי מכרו קמיבעיא ליה, נכתוב ליה מכרו? אי משכנו קא מיבעיא ליה, נכתוב ליה משכנו?!
The Talmud asks: And as for Rav himself, if he is raising a dilemma about a case in which they sold the property, let him write explicitly that he is asking about an instance in which they sold the property. And if he is raising a dilemma about a case in which they pledged the property, let him write explicitly that he is asking about an instance in which they pledged the property. Why does Rav instead employ an ambiguous term?
רב תרוייהו קמבעיא ליה וסבר: אי כתיבנא ליה מכרו, הא ניחא אי שלח לי דמוציאין — כל שכן משכנו. אי שלח לי אין מוציאין — אכתי משכנו קמיבעיא לי.
The Talmud answers: Rav was raising a dilemma about both cases and thought: If I write to him that they sold the property, then it works out well if he sends back to me the ruling that the court may appropriate the sold property for the daughters’ dowries. In that case, I would also understand that all the more so, if the brothers merely pledged the property, the court would appropriate it for the dowry. But if he sends to me the reply that the court does not appropriate sold property, still the case in which they pledged the property will be a dilemma for me.