Study Ketubot folio 75B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אבל במומין שבגלוי אינו יכול לטעון. ואם יש מרחץ באותה העיר — אף מומין שבסתר אינו יכול לטעון, מפני שהוא בודקה בקרובותיו.
But with regard to visible blemishes, he cannot claim that the betrothal was in error, as he presumably saw and accepted them before the betrothal. And if there is a bathhouse in the city, where all the women go to bathe, even with regard to hidden blemishes he cannot make this claim, because he examines her through the agency of his female relatives. He would have asked one of his relatives to look over the woman he is about to marry.
גמ׳ טעמא דמייתי האב ראיה, הא לא מייתי האב ראיה — (ה)בעל מהימן. מני? רבי יהושע היא, דאמר: לא מפיה אנו חיין.
Talmud: The Mishnah states that if the woman had blemishes while she was in her father’s house, the father must bring proof that they developed after the betrothal. The Talmud infers: The reason the father’s claim is accepted is due to the fact that the father brings proof, but if the father does not bring proof then the husband is deemed credible when he claims the betrothal was a mistaken transaction because the blemishes predated it. The Talmud asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this Mishnah? It is the opinion of R' Yehoshua, who said in a Mishnah (12a) with regard to a case when the wife claims that she was raped after her betrothal while her husband says it happened beforehand, that we don’t live from, i.e., we don’t rely on the words of her mouth, but rather she must substantiate her claim.
אימא סיפא: נכנסה לרשות הבעל — הבעל צריך להביא ראיה. טעמא דמייתי הבעל ראיה, הא לא מייתי הבעל ראיה — (ה)אב מהימן. אתאן לרבן גמליאל דאמר נאמנת! אמר רבי אלעזר: תברה, מי ששנה זו לא שנה זו.
The Talmud continues: Now say the latter clause of the Mishnah: If she had entered the husband’s domain, the husband must bring proof. Again the Talmud infers: The reason his claim is accepted is due to the fact that the husband brings proof, but if the husband does not bring proof then the father is deemed credible. We arrive at the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, who said that the woman is deemed credible when she says that the incident occurred after the betrothal. Consequently, the first and last clauses of the Mishnah appear to contradict one another. R' Elazar said: This Mishnah is disjointed, and does not follow a single opinion; the tanna who taught this halakha did not teach that halakha.