Marriage Chapter 19

מִתְּנָּאֵי הַכְּתֻבָּה שֶׁיִּהְיוּ בָּנִים הַזְּכָרִים יוֹרְשׁים כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן וּנְדֻנְיָתָהּ שֶׁהִכְנִיסָה בְּתוֹרַת נִכְסֵי צֹאן בַּרְזֶל וְאַחַר כָּךְ חוֹלְקִין שְׁאָר הַיְרֻשָּׁה עִם אֲחֵיהֶם בְּשָׁוֶה:

One of the provisions of [a woman's] ketubah is that her male offspring will inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah and the nedunyah she brought to the household as nichsei tzon barzel. Afterwards, these children divide the remainder of the estate with their brothers equally.

כֵּיצַד. נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּנְדֻנְיָתָהּ אֶלֶף וְיָלְדָה בֵּן וּמֵתָה בְּחַיָּיו. וְאַחַר כָּךְ נָשָׂא אִשָּׁה אַחֶרֶת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ וּנְדֻנְיָתָהּ מָאתַיִם וְיָלְדָה בֵּן וּמֵתָה בְּחַיָּיו. וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵת הוּא וְהִנִּיחַ אַלְפַּיִם. בְּנוֹ מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹרֵשׁ אֶלֶף שֶׁבִּכְתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ. וּבְנוֹ מִן הַשְּׁנִיָּה יוֹרֵשׁ מָאתַיִם שֶׁבִּכְתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ וְהַשְּׁאָר יוֹרְשִׁים אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁוֶה. נִמְצָא בְּיַד בֶּן הָרִאשׁוֹנָה אֶלֶף וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת. וּבְיַד בֶּן הַשְּׁנִיָּה שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת:

What is implied? A man married a woman whose ketubah and nedunyah were together valued at 1000 [zuz]. She bore a son, and then she died within [her husband's] lifetime. Afterwards, the man married another woman whose ketubah and nedunyah were together valued at 200 [zuz]. She bore a son, and then she died within [her husband's] lifetime. Afterwards, the man died, leaving an estate worth 2000 [zuz]. His first wife's son should inherit 1000 [zuz] by virtue of his mother's ketubah, and his second wife's son should inherit 200 [zuz] by virtue of his mother's ketubah, and the remainder they should [both] inherit and [divide] equally. Thus, the first wife's son will receive 1400 [zuz], and the second wife's son will receive 600 [zuz].

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהִנִּיחַ יוֹתֵר עַל כְּדֵי שְׁתֵּי כְּתֻבּוֹת דִּינָר אֶחָד אוֹ יוֹתֵר כְּדֵי שֶׁיַּחְלְקוּ הַשְּׁאָר בְּשָׁוֶה. אֲבָל אִם לֹא הִנִּיחַ יוֹתֵר דִּינָר חוֹלְקִים הַכּל בְּשָׁוֶה שֶׁאִם יִירְשׁוּ אֵלּוּ כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן וְאֵלּוּ כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן וְלֹא יִשָּׁאֵר דִּינָר אֶחָד לַחֲלֹק אוֹתוֹ בֵּין הַיּוֹרְשִׁים נִמְצָא תְּנַאי זֶה מְבַטֵּל חִלּוּק יְרֻשָּׁה בֵּין הַבָּנִים בְּשָׁוֶה שֶׁהוּא מִן הַתּוֹרָה:

When does the above apply? When [the estate] is worth at least one dinar more than the amount [due the children by virtue of their mothers'] ketubot. If, however, there is not a dinar or more remaining [in the estate], the entire estate should be divided equally [without applying the provision mentioned above]. [The rationale is that] if [the children of one of the mothers] will inherit [what is due them by virtue of] their mother's ketubah, [the other mother's children] will inherit [what is due them by virtue of] their mother's ketubah, and at least one dinar will not remain to be divided among the heirs, then this provision [which is of Rabbinic origin] will supersede [entirely] the equal division of the estate among the children that is required by Scriptural law.

וְהוּא הַדִּין לְמִי שֶׁנָּשָׂא נָשִׁים רַבּוֹת בֵּין בָּזוֹ אַחַר זוֹ בֵּין בְּבַת אַחַת וּמֵתוּ כֻּלָּן בְּחַיָּיו וְלוֹ מֵהֶן בָּנִים זְכָרִים אִם הָיָה שָׁם יוֹתֵר עַל כְּדֵי כָּל הַכְּתֻבּוֹת דִּינָר כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד יוֹרֵשׁ כְּתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ וְהַשְּׁאָר חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה:

The same law applies to a man who married many wives, whether one after the other or several at one time. If they have all died in his lifetime, and they have all borne male children from this man, if his estate contains at least a dinar more than the ketubot of all his wives, each of the [sets of] sons inherits the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah. The remainder [of the estate] is divided equally.

אָמְרוּ הַיְתוֹמִים הֲרֵי אָנוּ מַעֲלִין עַל נִכְסֵי אָבִינוּ יוֹתֵר דִּינָר כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטְּלוּ כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לָהֶם. אֶלָּא שָׁמִין אֶת הַנְּכָסִים בְּבֵית דִּין כַּמָּה שֶׁהָיוּ שָׁוִין בִּשְׁעַת מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתְרַבּוּ אוֹ נִתְמַעֲטוּ אַחֲרֵי מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן קֹדֶם שֶׁיָּבוֹאוּ לַחֲלֹק אֵין שָׁמִין אוֹתָן אֶלָּא כִּשְׁעַת מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן:

[Should the estate not be large enough to satisfy the obligations of both ketubot and the additional dinar,] and the heirs say: "We will increase the value of our father's estate so that there will be more than a dinar [in addition to the value of the ketubot]," so that they can collect [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah, their request is not accepted. Instead, the estate should be evaluated in court according to its value at the time of their father's death [and the decision rendered on the basis of this figure]. Even if the value of the estate increases or decreases [in the time between] the death of their father and the actual division of the property, [the decision whether to grant the heirs their mothers' ketubot] depends only on the value of the estate at the time of their father's death.

הָיָה שָׁם יוֹתֵר עַל כְּדֵי כָּל הַכְּתֻבּוֹת דִּינָר אוֹ יוֹתֵר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו שְׁטַר חוֹב כְּנֶגֶד הַיּוֹתֵר אֵינוֹ מְמַעֵט אֶלָּא כָּל אֶחָד מֵהֶן יוֹרֵשׁ כְּתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ:

If the value of the estate was a dinar or more than the sum of the two ketubot, each of the sons inherits the money due his mother by virtue of her ketubah. Even if there is a promissory note due against the estate for the amount that exceeds the value of the ketubot, it is not considered to have reduced [the value of the estate].

מִי שֶׁהָיָה נָשׂוּי שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים וּמֵתָה אַחַת מֵהֶן בְּחַיָּיו וְאַחַת אַחַר מוֹתוֹ וְלוֹ בָּנִים מִשְּׁתֵּיהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הִנִּיחַ יֶתֶר עַל שְׁתֵּי הַכְּתֻבּוֹת אִם נִשְׁבְּעָה הַשְּׁנִיָּה שְׁבוּעַת אַלְמָנָה קֹדֶם שֶׁתָּמוּת בָּנֶיהָ קוֹדְמִים לִירֻשַּׁת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָן יוֹרְשִׁין כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן בִּתְנַאי זֶה אֶלָּא יְרֻשָּׁה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה וְאַחַר כָּךְ יוֹרְשִׁין בְּנֵי הָרִאשׁוֹנָה כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן בִּתְנַאי זֶה. וְאִם נִשְׁאַר שָׁם כְּלוּם חוֹלְקִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁוֶה. וְאִם מֵתָה קֹדֶם שֶׁתִּשָּׁבַע בְּנֵי הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹרְשִׁים כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן בִּלְבַד וְהַשְּׁאָר חוֹלְקִין בְּשָׁוֶה:

[The following rules apply when a man] was married to two wives. One died within his lifetime and one died afterwards, and he has sons from both wives. Although the value of the estate he left does not exceed the value of the two ketubot, the sons of the [wife who died after her husband's death] have the right to inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah first, [provided] she took the oath required of a widow before she died. [The rationale is] that they do not inherit their mother's ketubah by virtue of this provision, but rather through the Torah's laws of inheritance. Afterwards, the sons of the wife [who died during her husband's lifetime] inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of her] ketubah on the basis of this provision. If anything remains in the estate afterwards, it should be divided equally. If [the woman who died after her husband] died before she was able to take the oath [required of her], only the sons of [the woman who died in her husband's lifetime] are entitled to inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah. The remainder is divided equally.

הָיָה נָשׂוּי שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים וְהָיוּ לוֹ בָּנִים מֵהֶן וָמֵת וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵתוּ הַנָּשִׁים אִם נִשְׁבְּעוּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מֵתוּ כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד יוֹרֵשׁ כְּתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ בִּירֻשָּׁה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה וְלֹא בִּתְנַאי זֶה. לְפִיכָךְ אֵין מַשְׁגִּיחִין אִם יֵשׁ שָׁם מוֹתָר אוֹ אֵין שָׁם. וְיוֹרְשֵׁי הָרִאשׁוֹנָה קוֹדְמִין לְיוֹרְשֵׁי הַשְּׁנִיָּה. וְאִם לֹא נִשְׁבְּעוּ חוֹלְקִין הַבָּנִים הַכּל בְּשָׁוֶה וְאֵין שָׁם יְרֻשַּׁת כְּתֻבָּה לְפִי שֶׁאֵין לָאַלְמָנָה כְּתֻבָּה עַד שֶׁתִּשָּׁבַע:

[The following rules apply when a man] was married to two wives, fathered sons with both of them and then died. If the wives died after the father did, but after taking the oath [required of widows], each of their sons is entitled to inherit [the money due his mother by virtue of] her ketubah according to the Torah's laws of inheritance, and not by virtue of this provision. Therefore, in this instance it is not significant whether the estate is more valuable than the sum of the two ketubot or not. [The claim of] the heirs of the wife married first takes precedence over the claim of the wife married afterwards. If neither of the wives took [the required] oath, the sons [of both women] divide the entire estate equally. Neither has the right to inherit [his mother's] ketubah, for a widow is not entitled to her ketubah until she takes the [required] oath.

אַחַת נִשְׁבְּעָה וְאַחַת לֹא נִשְׁבְּעָה זוֹ שֶׁנִּשְׁבְּעָה בָּנֶיהָ יוֹרְשִׁין כְּתֻבָּתָהּ תְּחִלָּה וְהַשְּׁאָר חוֹלְקִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁוֶה. וְכָל הַיּוֹרֵשׁ כְּתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה בְּחַיֵּי אָבִיו אֵינוֹ טוֹרֵף מִנְּכָסִים מְשֻׁעְבָּדִים אֶלָּא מִבְּנֵי חוֹרִין כְּכָל הַיּוֹרְשִׁין:

[In the above instance,] if one of the widows took the [required] oath and one did not, the sons of the one who took the oath inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah first, and then the remainder of the estate is divided equally [among all the heirs]. Whenever [a son] inherits [the money due his mother by virtue of] her ketubah after she died in his father's lifetime, he does not have the right to expropriate property that was sold to others; [he inherits] only property in the possession of the estate.

וּמִתְּנָאֵי כְּתֻבָּה שֶׁתִּהְיֶינָה הַבָּנוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת מִנִּכְסֵי אֲבִיהֶן אַחַר מוֹתוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְאָרְסוּ אוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ. בָּגְרָה הַבַּת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְאָרְסָה אוֹ נִתְאָרְסָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא בָּגְרָה אֵין לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת. וּבַת הַנִּזּוֹנֶת מִנִּכְסֵי אָבִיהָ לְאַחַר מוֹתוֹ מַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ וּמְצִיאָתָהּ לְעַצְמָהּ לֹא לָאַחִים:

Among the provisions of the ketubah is that after the death of their father, [his wife's] daughters have the right to receive support for their sustenance from their father's estate until they become consecrated or until they reach the age of bagrut. If a daughter reaches the age of bagrut but has not been consecrated, or if she is consecrated before she reaches the age of bagrut, she is not entitled to receive her sustenance. When a daughter receives her sustenance from her father's estate after his death, her earnings and the ownerless objects she discovers belong to her, not to her brothers.

פּוֹסְקִין לַבַּת מְזוֹנוֹת וּכְסוּת וּמָדוֹר מִנִּכְסֵי אָבִיהָ כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁפּוֹסְקִין לָאַלְמָנָה. וּמוֹכְרִין לִמְזוֹן הַבָּנוֹת וּכְסוּתָן בְּלֹא הַכְרָזָה כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמּוֹכְרִין לִמְזוֹן הָאַלְמָנָה וּכְסוּתָהּ. אֶלָּא שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה פּוֹסְקִין לָהּ לְפִי כְּבוֹדָהּ וּכְבוֹד הַבַּעַל וְלַבָּנוֹת פּוֹסְקִין לָהֶן דָּבָר הַמַּסְפִּיק לָהֶן בִּלְבַד. וְאֵין הַבָּנוֹת נִשְׁבָּעוֹת:

An allotment of support, garments and living quarters should be made for a man's daughters from his estate, just as it is made for his widow. His [landed property] may be sold to provide his daughters with their sustenance and garments without a public announcement, just as it is sold to provide for his widow's sustenance and garments. [There is, however, one difference between the two.] The allotment to the widow is made according to her social standing and that of her husband, while his daughters are given only their necessities. The daughters are not, however, required to take an oath.

אֵין הַבָּנִים יוֹרְשִׁין כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן. וְלֹא הַבָּנוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת בִּתְנָאִים אֵלּוּ עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה שְׁטַר כְּתֻבָּה יוֹצֵא מִתַּחַת יָדָם. אֲבָל אִם אֵין שָׁם שְׁטַר כְּתֻבָּה אֵין לָהּ כְּלוּם. שֶׁמָּא מָחֲלָה אִמָּן כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. וְאִם אֵין דַּרְכָּם לִכְתֹּב כְּתֻבָּה יֵשׁ לָהֶן כְּפִי הַתְּנָאִים:

A man's sons are not entitled to inherit [the money due their mother by virtue of] her ketubah, nor are his daughters entitled to receive their sustenance according to the provisions mentioned above unless they manifest possession of the document [recording their mother's] ketubah. If, however, they do not manifest possession of the document, they are not entitled to anything, for it is possible that their mother waived her ketubah [in favor of her husband]. In a locale where it is not customary to record the ketubah in a document, however, the children are entitled to [the benefits stemming from] these provisions.

מִי שֶׁצִּוָּה בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָתוֹ לַעֲקֹר אֶחָד מִתְּנָאֵי כְּתֻבָּה. כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָמַר אֶל יִזּוֹנוּ בְּנוֹתָיו מִנְּכָסָיו אוֹ אַל תִּזּוֹן אַלְמָנָתוֹ מִנְּכָסָיו אוֹ אַל יִירְשׁוּ בָּנָיו כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ. נָתַן כָּל נְכָסָיו בְּמַתָּנָה לַאֲחֵרִים הוֹאִיל וּמַתְּנַת שְׁכִיב מֵרַע אֵינָהּ קוֹנָה אֶלָּא לְאַחַר מִיתָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר הֲרֵי הַמַּתָּנָה וְחִיּוּב הַנְּכָסִים בִּתְנָאִין אֵלּוּ בָּאִין כְּאֶחָד וּלְפִיכָךְ אַלְמָנָתוֹ וּבְנוֹתָיו נִזּוֹנוֹת מִנְּכָסָיו וּבָנָיו יוֹרְשִׁים כְּתֻבַּת אִמָּן שֶׁמֵּתָה בְּחַיֵּי בַּעְלָהּ:

When, shortly before his passing, a man orders that one of the provisions of [his wife's] ketubah be ignored - e.g., he said: "My daughters should not derive their sustenance from my estate," "My widow should not derive her sustenance from my estate," or "My sons should not inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah" - his words are of no consequence. [Although] a person gives his entire estate to others through an oral will [all the provisions of his wife's ketubah must be met]. [The rationale is] that the transfer of property through an oral will does not take effect until after death, as will be explained. Thus, the mandate of the will and the obligations of the estate due to the provisions [of the ketubah] take effect simultaneously. Therefore, the widow and [the deceased's] daughters receive support for their sustenance from the estate, and [the deceased's] sons inherit the money due their mother by virtue of her ketubah if she dies during her husband's lifetime.

בַּת הַמְמָאֶנֶת הֲרֵי הִיא כִּשְׁאָר הַבָּנוֹת וְיֵשׁ לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת. אֲבָל בַּת הַיְבָמָה וּבַת הַשְּׁנִיָּה וּבַת הָאֲרוּסָה וּבַת הָאֲנוּסָה אֵין לָהֶן מְזוֹנוֹת אַחַר מִיתַת אֲבִיהֶן בִּתְנַאי זֶה. אֲבָל בְּחַיֵּי אֲבִיהֶן הוּא חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתָן כְּדִין שְׁאָר הַבָּנִים וְהַבָּנוֹת בְּחַיֵּי אֲבִיהֶן:

A daughter of a girl who nullifies her marriage through mi'un is considered like any other daughter, and she is entitled to support for her sustenance [after her father's death]. Nevertheless, the daughter of a yevamah, the daughter of a sh'niyah, the daughter of one's arusah, and the daughter of a woman who has been raped are not entitled to support for their sustenance after their father's death by virtue of this provision. During their father's lifetime, however, he is obligated to support them like any of his other sons and daughters.

הַמְאָרֵס בַּת הַנִּזּוֹנֶת מִן הָאַחִין חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ מִשְּׁעַת הָאֵרוּסִין שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת מֵאַחֶיהָ (אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁתִּתְאָרֵס אוֹ עַד שֶׁתִּבָּגֵר וְזוֹ) אֵינָהּ בּוֹגֶרֶת כְּדֵי שֶׁתִּזּוֹן עַצְמָהּ אֶלָּא קְטַנָּה אוֹ נַעֲרָה וְאֵין אָדָם רוֹצֶה שֶׁתִּתְבַּזֶּה אֲרוּסָתוֹ וְתֵלֵךְ וְתִשְׁאַל עַל הַפְּתָחִים:

A man who consecrates a girl who is receiving her sustenance from her brothers is obligated to provide her with support from the time of consecration onward. [Although a husband is ordinarily required to support his wife only after nisu'in, an exception is made in this instance, because] the girl is not entitled to support from her brothers after she becomes consecrated. Nor is she past the age of majority, when she is capable of providing for her own sustenance, but rather she is a minor, or a na'arah. [Hence, her husband is obligated to support her, because] a man would not desire that the woman he consecrated be put to shame [by having to] wander and beg [for her support].

נִשֵּׂאת הַבַּת וּמֵאֲנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה אוֹ נִתְאַלְמְנָה אֲפִלּוּ הִיא שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם הוֹאִיל וְחָזְרָה לְבֵית אָבִיהָ וַעֲדַיִן לֹא בָּגְרָה הֲרֵי זוֹ נִזּוֹנֶת מִנִּכְסֵי אָבִיהָ עַד שֶׁתִּבָּגֵר אוֹ עַד שֶׁתִּתְאָרֵס:

Should a daughter marry and then leave her husband through the rite of mi'un, or be divorced, or be widowed - even if she is obligated to marry a yavam - since she returns to her father's home and has not reached the age of bagrut, she is entitled to support from her father's estate until she reaches the age of bagrut or until she becomes consecrated.

מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת יִירְשׁוּ הַבָּנִים כָּל הַנְּכָסִים וְהֵם זָנִין אֶת אַחְיוֹתֵיהֶם עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ אוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְאָרְסוּ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהִנִּיחַ נְכָסִים שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר שֶׁיִּזּוֹנוּ מֵהֶם הַבָּנִים וְהַבָּנוֹת כְּאַחַת עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ הַבָּנוֹת וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַנִּקְרָאִין נְכָסִים מְרֻבִּין. אֲבָל אִם אֵין בַּנְּכָסִים שֶׁהִנִּיחַ אֶלָּא פָּחוֹת מִזֶּה מוֹצִיאִין מֵהֶם מְזוֹנוֹת לַבָּנוֹת עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ וְנוֹתְנִין הַשְּׁאָר לַבָּנִים. וְאִם אֵין שָׁם אֶלָּא כְּדֵי מְזוֹן הַבָּנוֹת בִּלְבַד הַבָּנוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת מֵהֶן עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ אוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְאָרְסוּ וְהַבָּנִים יִשְׁאֲלוּ עַל הַפְּתָחִים:

When a man dies leaving both sons and daughters, the sons inherit his estate, and it is their responsibility to provide their sisters with support until they reach the age of bagrut, or until they become consecrated. When does this apply? When the estate is large enough to provide both the sons and the daughters with their sustenance until the daughters reach the age of bagrut. This is called an ample estate. If, however, the estate contains only a lesser amount, the funds necessary to support the daughters until they reach the age of bagrut are set aside, and the remainder is given to the sons. If the estate contains only enough to provide for the support of the daughters, the daughters are entitled to their sustenance until they reach bagrut or until they become consecrated, and the sons should beg for their support.

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהִנִּיחַ קַרְקַע אֲבָל אִם לֹא הִנִּיחַ אֶלָּא מִטַּלְטְלִין הוֹאִיל וּבְתַקָּנַת הַגְּאוֹנִים הוּא שֶׁיִּזּוֹנוּ הַבָּנוֹת מִן הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין הֲרֵי הַבָּנִים וְהַבָּנוֹת נִזּוֹנוֹת כְּאֶחָד מִן הַנְּכָסִים הָאֵלּוּ הַמּוּעָטִין. שֶׁלֹּא תִּקְּנוּ לָהֶם בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין אֶלָּא שֶׁיִּהְיוּ כְּבָנִים וְכָזֶה הוֹרוּ הַגְּאוֹנִים:

When does the above apply? When the estate contains landed property. If, however, the estate contains movable property, since it is only by virtue of the ordinance of the geonim that the daughters are entitled to derive their support from the movable property, the sons and the daughters should receive their support equally from this meager estate. For with regard to movable property, [the daughters] were given the right to be considered like the sons, but not superior to them. The geonim have ruled in this manner.

הִנִּיחַ קַרְקַע וְהָיוּ הַנְּכָסִים מְרֻבִּין וְנִתְמַעֲטוּ אַחַר כֵּן כְּבָר זָכוּ בָּהֶן יוֹרְשִׁים. הָיוּ מוּעָטִין בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָה וְנִתְרַבּוּ אַחַר כָּךְ הַבָּנִים יוֹרְשִׁין אוֹתָן. וַאֲפִלּוּ לֹא נִתְרַבּוּ אִם קָדְמוּ הַבָּנִים וּמָכְרוּ נְכָסִים מוּעָטִין מִכְרָן קַיָּם:

If [a man] left an ample estate of landed property, and afterwards [the value of the estate decreased until] it became meager, the heirs have already acquired [the property]. If [the estate was deemed] meager [in value] at the time of the man's death, and [the value increased afterwards] to the point that it is considered ample, the heirs are given the right to inherit it. Even if the value did not increase, if the sons sold an estate that was considered meager, the sale is binding.

הָיוּ הַנְּכָסִים מְרֻבִּין וְיֵשׁ עָלָיו חוֹב אוֹ שֶׁהִתְנָה עִם אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁיָּזוּן אֶת בִּתָּהּ אֵין הַחוֹב וְלֹא מְזוֹנוֹת בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ מְמַעֲטִין בַּנְּכָסִים אֶלָּא יִירְשׁוּ הַבָּנִים הַכּל וְיִתְּנוּ לְבַעַל חוֹב חוֹבוֹ וְיָזוּנוּ בַּת אֵשֶׁת אֲבִיהֶן עַד זְמַן שֶׁפָּסַק וְיָזוּנוּ אַחְיוֹתֵיהֶן עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ אוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתְאָרְסוּ וְיֵצְאוּ מִתַּחַת יְדֵיהֶם:

If the estate was ample but a debt was owed, or [the man] had made a provision with his wife, [promising] to support her daughter [from a previous marriage], the debt or [the obligation to] support the widow's daughter does not prevent the estate from being considered ample. Instead, the sons inherit the entire estate. [It is their responsibility] to pay the creditor his debt, to support the widow's daughter for the time stipulated and to support their sisters until they reach majority, or until they become consecrated and leave their domain.

הִנִּיחַ אַלְמָנָה וּבַת מִמֶּנָּה אוֹ מֵאִשָּׁה אַחֶרֶת וְאֵין בַּנְּכָסִים כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּזּוֹנוּ שְׁתֵּיהֶן הָאַלְמָנָה נִזּוֹנֶת וְהַבַּת תִּשְׁאַל עַל הַפְּתָחִים. וְכֵן אֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁמְּזוֹנוֹת הַבַּת קוֹדְמִין לִירֻשַּׁת הַבֵּן אֶת כְּתֻבַּת אִמּוֹ שֶׁמֵּתָה בְּחַיֵּי אָבִיו וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם מִתְּנָאֵי הַכְּתֻבָּה. וְקַל וָחֹמֶר הַדְּבָרִים אִם נִדְחֵית יְרֻשָּׁה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה מִפְּנֵי מְזוֹנוֹת הַבַּת לֹא תִּדָּחֶה יְרֻשַּׁת הַכְּתֻבָּה שֶׁהִיא תְּנַאי בֵּית דִּין מִפְּנֵי מְזוֹנוֹת הַבַּת:

[The following rules apply when a man] left a widow and a daughter, either from her or from another wife, and his estate is not large enough to provide support for both of them. The widow should derive her support from the estate, and the daughter should beg [for alms]. Similarly, I maintain that support for [a man's] daughter takes precedence over [his] sons' inheritance of their mother's ketubah if she died in her husband's lifetime, although both [rights] are provisions of the ketubah. [This can be derived by making] an inference from a more serious responsibility to a less serious one: If the inheritance [of a man's estate to which the sons are entitled] by virtue of Scriptural law is superseded by [the obligation to provide] the daughter with her support, how much more so should [the sons'] inheritance of [their mother's] ketubah, which is only a Rabbinic ordinance, be superseded by [the obligation to provide] the daughter with her support.

מִי שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ בָּנוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת וּקְטַנּוֹת וְלֹא הִנִּיחַ בֵּן אֵין אוֹמְרִים יִזּוֹנוּ הַקְּטַנּוֹת עַד שֶׁיִּבְגְּרוּ וְיַחְלְקוּ שְׁאָר הַנְּכָסִים בְּשָׁוֶה אֶלָּא כֻּלָּן חוֹלְקוֹת בְּשָׁוֶה:

When a man dies and leaves older daughters and younger daughters, without leaving a son, we do not say that the younger daughters should be granted their sustenance until they reach the age of bagrut, and then the entire estate should be divided equally. Instead, the entire estate should be divided equally [immediately].