Kesubos - Daf 51
- The tannai kesubah that a besulah always gets two hundred zuz and an almanah maneh
The next Mishnah states: לא כתב לה כתובה – In a case where the chosson did not write a kesubah, בתולה גובה מאתים ואלמנה מנה מפני שהוא תנאי בית דין – a besulah collects two hundred and an almanah a maneh, because it is a tannai of Beis Din. כתב לה שדה שוה מנה תחת מאתים זוז ולא כתב לה כל נסכים דאית לי אחראין לכתובתיך חייב שהוא תנאי בית דין – If he wrote that he is giving her a field worth a maneh (one hundred zuz) in lieu of the two hundred zuz and he did not write for her, “All properties that I own are pledged for your full kesubah, he is still chayav two hundred zuz, for it is a tannai Beis Din. Rashi explains that all his fields are guaranteed for the full kesubah amount, and he cannot say to her that she may only take from the field written in the kesubah. The Gemara will seek to determine who the Tanna of the Mishnah is.
- Machlokes regarding a Yisroel’s wife who was violated and completed the act willingly
The father of Shmuel said: אשת ישראל שנאנסה אסורה לבעלה – If a wife of a Yisroel was violated, she is forbidden to her husband חיישינן שמא תחלתה באונס וסופה ברצון – for we are concerned that the beginning of the relations was coerced but its end was done willingly. Rav challenged him from our Mishnah that taught that one of the tannai kesubah is that if the wife is captured, he must pay her ransom and she will be returned to her husband. This implies that we are not concerned that the end was done willingly. Shmuel’s father was silent, to which Rav recited the following passuk: "שרים עצרו במלים וכף ישימו לפיהם" – Ministers would withhold their words, and place their hand to their mouth, implying that Shmuel’s father could have responded. If he had, he could have answered, בשבויה הקילו – they ruled leniently with a captive woman. The Gemara clarifies that according to Shmuel’s father, a woman would only be permitted to return to her husband if witnesses testified that she screamed the entire time. Rava said, כל שתחלתה באונס וסוף ברצון – In any case where the beginning of relations was coerced but its end was done willingly, even if she says, “Leave him alone,” for if the violator had not been with her, she would hire him out to do so, she is permitted to her husband. What is the reason? Because at the beginning of the act which was coerced, יצר אלבשה - the violator clothed her with uncontrollable desire.
- The status of captives of kings and bandits
It was taught in a Baraisa: שבויי מלכות הרי הן כשבויין גנובי ליסטות אינן כשבויין – Captives of the monarchy, which Rashi explains are women taken to be concubines, are like ordinary captive women and may return to their husbands, but women captured by bandits are not like ordinary captives and become forbidden to their husbands. The Gemara says that another Baraisa taught the opposite, and then seeks to reconcile them. The first Baraisa is referring to a malchus like Achashverosh, where the women know that they will not become his wife, and therefore, they act under duress. The other malchus is like Ben Netzer, who Rashi explains captured several cities and ruled over them like a king. Here, the captive woman might think she will marry the ruler and act willingly, thereby becoming prohibited to her husband. In terms of the bandits, the first Baraisa is referring to one like Ben Netzer, whom she might hope to marry, whereas the second Baraisa is referring to ordinary bandits, that a woman would not want to marry, and must be coerced. With regard to Ben Netzer being referred to as a king and a bandit, the Gemara explains that he was a bandit in relation to a king like Achashverosh, but a king in relation to the other bandits.
