Texts
Explore
Community
Donate
Log in
Sign up
Site Language
עברית
English
Laws of Divorce
Family Law
Sources
A
The Gemara asks: In cases where they may not reside in the same courtyard or alleyway,
who is ousted in favor of whom?
Which of them must leave? The Gemara suggests:
Come
and
hear
proof
as it is taught
in a
baraita
:
She is ousted in favor of him,
and leaves,
and he is not ousted in favor of her. But if it was her courtyard, he is ousted in favor of her.
A dilemma was raised
before the Sages: If
it was a courtyard
belonging
to both of them, what is
the
halakha
…
Ketubot 28a:2-7
MISHNA:
If a man
married a woman and stayed with her
for
ten years and she did not give birth, he is no
longer
permitted to neglect
the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply. Consequently, he must either divorce her and marry someone else, or take another wife while still married to her. If
he divorced her she is permitted to marry another
man, as it is not necessarily on her account that she and her first husband did not have children,
and the second
husband
is permitted to stay with her
for
ten years…
Yevamot 64a:3
And an epileptic is considered like a hidden blemish,
for it is possible that nobody is aware of her ailment. The Gemara comments:
And this applies
only
if
the sickness comes
at regular intervals,
as the woman and her family can conceal her illness.
But
if the attacks do
not
appear
at regular
intervals and can occur at any time, this
is considered like a visible blemish,
as it is impossible that her condition is unknown to others.
MISHNA:
In the case of
a man who developed blemishes
after marriage…
Ketubot 77a:1-15
Although there is no
explicit
proof for the matter
that one must take another wife if he has not had children after ten years of marriage, there is
an allusion to the matter,
as the verse states: “And Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar…
after Abram had dwelled ten years in the land of Canaan,
and gave her to Abram her husband to be his wife” (Genesis 16:3). Incidentally, this verse also comes
to teach you that
the years spent
dwelling outside of Eretz Yisrael do not count
as part of
his tally…
Yevamot 64a:5
The Gemara cites proof to resolve the dilemma:
Come
and
hear
proof
as it is taught
in a
baraita
: With regard to
one who divorces his wife, she may not marry
and live
in his
immediate
vicinity,
i.e., his courtyard, due to the concern that because of the intimacy they once shared, her living there will lead to transgression.
Ketubot 27b:20
The Sages taught:
If a woman
was married to
her
first
husband
and she did not have children,
and then she was married
to
her
second
husband
and she did not have children, she may not get married to a third
husband
unless
it is
to one who
already
has children
and has fulfilled the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply, as it is presumed that she is unable to have children. If
she got married to one who does not have children
and he had been unaware of her presumptive status…
Yevamot 65a:2-65b:2
And Rav Taḥalifa bar Avimi
said that
Shmuel said: Even
in the case of someone who
married a woman and stayed with her
for
ten years and she did not give birth,
the court
forces him
to divorce her, as he is in violation of a positive mitzva. The Gemara poses a question:
We learned
in the mishna:
And these are
the defects
for
which the court
forces him to divorce
his wife: One
afflicted with boils or one who has a polyp. Granted, according to Rav Asi…
Ketubot 77a:17
Furthermore, if a man marries a woman forbidden to him as a secondary relative,
she does not have
the right to receive payment for her
marriage contract
if divorced or widowed,
nor
is she entitled to payment from her husband for the
produce
of her property that he used,
nor
is she entitled to provisions for her
sustenance
from his estate,
nor
does she get back her
worn clothes
or other objects she brought with her to her marriage.
And
the lineage of
the offspring is unflawed, and
the court
forces him to divorce
her.
Yevamot 84a:11
The Sages taught: A widow
married
to a High Priest,
or
a divorcée or a
ḥalutza
married
to a common priest has
the right to receive payment for her
marriage contract;
and for the
produce of
her property that her husband used; and
sustenance;
and she gets back her
worn clothes
and other objects she brought to the marriage;
and she is disqualified
as a
ḥalala
from marrying a priest;
and her offspring is disqualified
from the priesthood as a
ḥalal
;
and
the court
forces him to divorce
her…
Yevamot 85a:15
This is
like
the case of
a certain
woman
who came before Rabbi Ami
and requested a divorce due to her husband’s inability to father children.
She said to him
:
Give me
the payment for my
marriage contract. He said to her: Go
away, as
you are not commanded
to be fruitful and multiply and have no right to demand a divorce.
She said to him: In her old age, what will be with this woman,
i.e., if I have no children, who will take care of me when I grow old? Rabbi Ami
said:
In a situation
such as this…
Yevamot 65b:15-16
§ It was taught in the mishna that if a man
divorced
his wife after ten years without children,
she is permitted
to marry a second man, who may remain married to her for ten years. The Gemara comments:
A second
husband,
yes,
but
a third
one,
no.
Once she has been married to two men without children for ten years each, it is presumed that she is unable to have children.
Yevamot 64b:8
Concerning this issue, the Gemara relates that
Rabbi Zeira raises a contradiction
between
the mishna and a
baraita
and
then
answers
it:
We learned
in the mishna: With regard to an agent
who brings a bill of divorce and it
was
lost from him, if he finds it immediately
then the bill of divorce is
valid. And if not,
it is
invalid. And
he
raises a contradiction
from a
baraita
that states: If one
found a woman’s bill of divorce in the marketplace,
then
when the husband admits
that he wrote it and gave it…
Gittin 27a:9
Similarly,
Rabbi Zeira raises a contradiction between the mishna and a
baraita
, and he resolves
the contradiction employing the same distinction.
We learned
in the mishna: With regard to an agent
who was bringing a bill of divorce
to a woman
and he lost it,
if
he found it immediately,
the bill of divorce is still
valid, but if not, it is not valid. And
Rabbi Zeira
raises a contradiction
between this mishna and a
baraita
that states: If one
found a woman’s bill of divorce in the marketplace…
Bava Metzia 18b:6
Rava continues: In a case where a bill of divorce is found and it is unclear whether it had been delivered to the wife, and the husband, who reconsidered,
states
the
distinguishing marks of the bill of divorce
and claims that he did not yet give it to his wife,
and
the wife, who wants to be divorced,
states
the
distinguishing marks of the bill of divorce
and claims that she already received it, the document
shall be given to
the wife. The Gemara asks:
With what
distinguishing mark did she describe the bill of divorce?
If we say
that she…
Bava Metzia 28a:9-10
One who divorced his wife from the marriage cannot live with her in the [same] courtyard [because] maybe they will come to impropriety. And if he is a Kohen, she should not live with him in the [same] passageway. A small village has the same law as a passageway. Rem"a: And if she married someone else, even a Yisrael, she should not live with him in the [same] passageway (Tur). And all this is [talking about] a closed passageway. But in a more open passageway through which many people pass, they are permitted to dwell (Beit Yoseif in the name of the Ran who wrote it in the name of Tosaphot)…
Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 119:7-11
If someone finds a woman's bill of divorce in the marketplace, if the woman gives a sign [it is hers], saying, "This hole is next to this letter," and she says she was already divorce with it and it fell off of her, they return it to her. [This is so] even if the husband contradicts her and says that it fell off of him and that he never divorced her ever, but rather he had commanded it to be written but he had yet to give it; even if he also gives a sign. If she does not give a sign, and the husband contradicts her, they don't give it to him, nor to her…
Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 153:1-154:20
If the second agent dies, the first agent may take [the responsibility of agency] from the heirs of the second [agent] and go personally or delegate the task to another. A proxy for receiving does not have the power to appoint a proxy, even if he was under duress, and even if she gave her permission to appoint another proxy, because [all] he has [are] words, and words are not [able to be] passed onwards. And there are those who permit [this] if she gave him the [express] permission to appoint a proxy…
Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 141:42-44
A messenger of receiving that receives a
Get
for a woman, and sends it to her in front of two witnesses, and it reaches her and she takes it, and therefore the
Get
has passed into her hand, but she doesn't know if her husband sent it to her or her receiving messenger received it, or [if it was from] the messenger of the husband, she is [nevertheless] divorced. And if the husband comes a protests that he didn't write it, or that it was an annulled
Get
, we confirm it through its signatures…
Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 141:57
Women and relatives are valid agents for sending a bill of divorce. (Rem"a: Some write that if possible, at the outset the agent should not be related to the man [husband], the woman [wife], or to the judges before whom the bill of divorce is given (in the order of Gittin).) Even those who are rabbinically invalid, in sin [it is a sin to appoint such an agent], are valid agents for sending a bill of divorce. But those Biblically invalid, in sin, are invalid to bring a bill of divorce unless the bill of divorce is upheld by its signers…
Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 141:33-35
whats unique to the requirements of two witnesses [who sign off] on a invoice? its only in a case where there is no proper messenger [between the two parties involved]; But if the messenger is proper, [the invoice] is can be supported with one witness. there are those that seem to disagree on this opinion. THIS IS THE RULING FOR SENDING MESSENGERS In what circumstances do we say that we need the witnesses of the receiving? When the divorce bill was lost or torn. But if the divorce bill comes from the hand of the proxy of receiving, there is no need for the witnesses of the receiving…
Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer 141:9-14
Related
ראו גם
Divorce
Sheets
דפי מקורות
Related Sheets
We use cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site. Click OK to continue using Sefaria.
Learn More
.
OK
אנחנו משתמשים ב"עוגיות" כדי לתת למשתמשים את חוויית השימוש הטובה ביותר.
קראו עוד בנושא
לחצו כאן לאישור