Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer Siman 117

Siman 117

Presented here for study, not as a practical ruling. The Shulchan Aruch rules by Sephardi custom, the Rema's glosses by Ashkenazi custom, and the Kitzur follows Ashkenazi custom. For a practical question, ask your rabbi.

א הַנּוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה, וּבָדְקָה עַצְמָהּ וְנִבְעֲלָה, וּבְעֵת שֶׁקִנְּחָה עַצְמָהּ הִיא וְהוּא נִמְצָא דָּם עַל עֵד (פֵּרוּשׁ, הַסְמַרְטוּט אוֹ מַטְלִית שֶׁבּוֹדֶקֶת עַצְמָהּ בָּהֶן) שֶׁלָּהּ אוֹ עַל עֵד שֶׁלּוֹ, אִם אֵרַע זֶה פַּעַם אַחַר פַּעַם שָׁלשׁ פְּעָמִים סְמוּכוֹת זוֹ לָזוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ אֲסוּרָה לֵישֵׁב עִם בַּעֲלָהּ, וְתֵצֵא בְּלֹא כְּתֻבָּה, לֹא עִקָּר וְלֹא תּוֹסֶפֶת, וְלֹא תְּנַאי מִתְּנָאֵי הַכְּתֻבָּה, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לְתַשְׁמִישׁ; וְיוֹצִיא, וְלֹא יַחֲזִיר לְעוֹלָם. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, כְּשֶׁהָיְתָה כָּךְ מִתְּחִלַּת נִשּׂוּאֶיהָ, וּמִבְּעִילָה רִאשׁוֹנָה רָאֲתָה דָּם. אֲבָל אִם אֵרַע לָהּ חֹלִי זֶה אַחַר שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת, נִסְתַּחֲפָה (פֵּרוּשׁ, מִן "מַדּוּעַ נִסְחַף אַבִּירֶי ךְ" (יִרְמְיָהוּ מו, טו), כְּלוֹמַר נִפְסְדָה וְנֶאֶבְדָה לְמַזָּלְ ךְ) שָׂדֵהוּ. לְפִיכָךְ, אִם בָּעַל פַּעַם אַחַת וְלֹא מָצָא דָּם, וְאַחַר כָּךְ חָזְרָה לִהְיוֹת רוֹאָה דָּם בְּכָל עֵת תַּשְׁמִישׁ, יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּה כֻּלָּהּ, וְלֹא יַחֲזִיר עוֹלָמִית. הַגָּה: יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּאִם אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לִשָּׂא אַחֶרֶת, וְרוֹצֶה לִשְׁרוֹת (עִם) זוֹ עַל יְדֵי שָׁלִישׁ בְּשָׁנָה אַחַת, וְלֹא יֵלֵךְ אֶצְלָהּ אֶלָּא בְּעֵדִים, אֵין צָרִיךְ לְגָרְשָׁהּ (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם תְּשׁוּבַת הָר"ם, וְכֵן הוּא בִּתְשׁוּבַת הָרַשְׁבָּ"א סִימָן תת"ס). וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן אִם זִנְּתָה תַּחְתָּיו, דִּמְאִיסָה לֵהּ, דְּשָׁרֵי בִּכְהַאי גַּוְנָא (שָׁם):

1 If a man marries a woman, she checked herself, and then had sexual relations, and afterward when she wiped herself and he [wiped himself] blood was found on the witness Rema: meaning the rag or cloth with which she checks herself of hers or on his witness, and this occurred three consecutive times, she is forbidden to remain with her husband, and she is divorced without receiving ketuba monies, not the basic money nor the additional money, nor conditioned [moneys] from the conditions of the ketuba, for she is not capable of sexual relations. He divorces her and may never remarry her. What are the circumstances? When this occurs from the beginning of her marriage, and she saw blood with the first intercourse. But if this occurred afterward, then his field has been washed away (Note: meaning, from the verse, "why have your brave men been washed away," (Jeremiah 46:15), in other words, she has been damaged and lost by his bad luck). Therefore, if they had relations one time and did not find blood, and afterward she returned to seeing blood with every intercourse, he divorces her but must pay the entire ketuba, and may never remarry her. Note: Some authorities say that if he does not wish to marry another, and desires to stay with this woman at the hands (in the company) of a chaperone for one year, and he will not go to her except with witnesses, he is not required to divorce her (Beit Yosef in the name of Response Ram, and likewise in Responsa Rashba chapter 860). And certainly if she committed adultery, such that she becomes disgusting to him, it is permitted (to stay with her) in this manner (ibid.).

ב אִשָּׁה שֶׁנִּבְדְּקָה עַל יְדֵי נָשִׁים, וְאָמְרוּ שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לְאִישׁ, אֵין לָהּ כְּתֻבָּה וְלֹא תְּנָאֵי כְּתֻבָּה. וְאִם הַבַּעַל טוֹעֵן עָלֶיהָ כָּךְ, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא נִבְדְּקָה אֵינוֹ חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ:

2 A woman who was checked by other women, and they said that she is not fit for [relations with] a man, she has no ketubah nor the conditions of the ketubah. And if the husband argues this against her, he is not obligated in her sustenance all the time that she has not been checked.

ג הַנּוֹשֵׂא אִשָּׁה, סְתָם, וְנִמְצְאוּ עָלֶיהָ נְדָרִים שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֲרוּ בְּסִימָן ל"ט, תֵּצֵא בְּלֹא כְּתֻבָּה, לֹא עִקָּר וְלֹא תּוֹסֶפֶת:

3 One who marries a woman stamp (without an explicit understanding) and finds that she is held to vows that are explained in siman 39 she leaves (the marriage) without (receiving payment) for her kesuba. Neither the mandated nor the extra (payment).

ד וְכֵן הַכּוֹנֵס אִשָּׁה, סְתָם, וְנִמְצְאוּ בָּהּ מוּם מִמּוּמֵי הַנָּשִׁים שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֲרוּ בְּסִימָן ל"ט, וְלֹא יָדַע הַבַּעַל בְּמוּם זֶה, תֵּצֵא בְּלֹא כְּתֻבָּה, לֹא עִקָּר וְלֹא תּוֹסֶפֶת:

4 Similarly, a woman who enters (marriage) stam (without an explicit understanding) and is found with a deformity that's considered a blemish for women that are explained in siman 39 and the husband was not aware of this deformity she leaves (the marriage) without (receiving payment) for her kesuba. Neither the mandated nor the extra (payment).

ה אִם יֶשׁ מֶרְחָץ בָּעִיר וְהָיוּ לוֹ קְרוֹבִים שָׁם, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לוֹמַר: לֹא יָדַעְתִּי מוּמִין אֵלּוּ, וַאֲפִלּוּ מוּמִין שֶׁבַּסֵתֶר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא בּוֹדְקָה עַל יְדֵי קְרוֹבוֹתָיו וְחֶזְקָתוֹ שֶׁשָּׁמַע וְנִתְרַצָּה. וְאִם אֵין שָׁם מֶרְחָץ, אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא הָיוּ לוֹ שָׁם קְרוֹבִים, טוֹעֵן בְּמוּמִין שֶׁבַּסֵתֶר. וְנִכְפֵּית לְעִתִּים יְדוּעִים, הֲרֵי הוּא כְּמוּמֵי סֵתֶר. אֲבָל בְּמוּמִין שֶׁבְּגָלוּי אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִטְעֹן, שֶׁחֶזְקָתוֹ שֶׁשָּׁמַע וְנִתְפַּיֵּס. הַמַּשְׁתֶּנֶת בַּמִּטָּה תָּמִיד, יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּלָא הָוֵי מוּם (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם הָרַשְׁבָּ"א). וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּהָוֵי מוּם (בֵּית יוֹסֵף), וְכֵן נִרְאֶה לִי עִקָּר. טָעַן עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁהִיא מְצֹרַעַת, הָוֵי מוּם (בֵּית יוֹסֵף):

5 If there is a bathhouse in the city and he has relatives there, he cannot say, "I did not know about these deformities [of my wife]," including even deformities in private areas, because he checked her through his relatives, and we may assume that he heard [about the deformities] and she found favor. If there is no bathhouse, or he did not have relatives there, he may make a claim regarding deformities in private areas. [Deformities] that appear at given times are considered as hidden deformities. However, he may not claim about revealed deformities, as we may assume that he heard [about them] and was appeased. One who frequently urinates in bed--there are those who say it is not a deformity (Beit Yosef citing the Rashb"a). There are those who say that it is a blemish (Beit Yosef), and it seems to me that this is correct. If he claimed that his wife is a leper, this is a deformity (Beit Yosef).

ו בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁמִּנְהַג הַנָּשִׁים לְהַלֵּךְ בַּשּׁוּק וּפְנֵיהֶן גְּלוּיוֹת, אֲבָל בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין דֶּרֶךְ הַבָּנוֹת לָצֵאת לַשּׁוּק כְּלָל, וְאִם תֵּצֵא לַמֶּרְחָץ תֵּצֵא מִתְנַכֶּרֶת, הֲרֵי זֶה טוֹעֵן אֲפִלּוּ מוּמִין שֶׁבְּגָלוּי. וְאִם יֵשׁ שָׁם מֶרְחָץ, אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ קְרוֹבָה אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִטְעֹן, שֶׁבְּוַדַּאי הַכֹּל רוֹאִין אוֹתָהּ עֲרֻמָּה בַּמֶּרְחָץ. וְאִם דַּרְכָּן לְהִתְחַבֵּא בַּמֶּרְחָץ, יָכוֹל לִטְעֹן אַף מוּמִין שֶׁבְּגָלוּי. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דַּאֲפִלּוּ אֵין לוֹ קְרוֹבִים בָּעִיר, יֵשׁ לוֹ רֵעִים וּבוֹדֵק עַל יְדֵי נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶם (טוּר בְּשֵׁם הַגְּאוֹנִים):

6 When do these words apply? In place where the practice of the women is to walk in the marketplace with their faces uncovered. But in a place where it is not the way of the girls to go to the marketplace at all, and if she were to go the bathhouse she would be ignored, he may even claim against her revealed deformities. If there is is a bathhouse there and he has a female relative, he cannot claim, for it is certain that everyone sees her naked in the bathhouse. If their practice is to hide themselves in the bathhouse, he may claim against her revealed deformities. There are those who say that even if he does not have relatives in the city, he has friends who can check via their wives (Tur citing the Geonim).

ז כֵּיצַד הִיא טַעֲנַת הַמּוּמִין, אִם הָיוּ הַמּוּמִין שֶׁנִּמְצְאוּ בָּהּ מוּמִין שֶׁוַּדַּאי הָיָה בָּהּ קֹדֶם שֶׁתִּתְאָרֵס, כְּגוֹן אֶצְבַּע יְתֵרָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ, עַל הָאָב לְהָבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁיָּדַע הַבַּעַל וְנִתְרַצָּה אוֹ שֶׁחֶזְקָתוֹ שֶׁיָּדַע. וְאִם לֹא הֵבִיא רְאָיָה, תֵּצֵא בְּלֹא כְּתֻבָּה כְּלָל:

7 How does the claim against deformities work? If the deformities found upon her were certainly there before she was betrothed, such as an extra finger and the like, the burden is on the father [of the wife] to prove that the husband knew [about the deformity] and found favor in her or that we can assume that he knew. If he does not bring proof, she may be divorced without payment of the marriage contract.

ח הָיוּ בָּהּ מוּמִין שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר שֶׁנּוֹלְדוּ בָּהּ אַחַר הָאֵרוּסִין, אִם נִמְצְאוּ בָּהּ אַחַר שֶׁכְּנָּסָה לְבֵית הַבַּעַל, עַל הַבַּעַל לְהָבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁעַד שֶׁלֹּא נִתְאָרְסָה הָיוּ בָּהּ וְהָיָה מִקָּחוֹ מִקַּח טָעוּת. וְאִם נִמְצְאוּ בָּהּ וְהִיא בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ, עַל הָאָב לְהָבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁאַחַר הָאֵרוּסִין נוֹלְדוּ וְנִסְתַּחֲפָה שָׂדֵהוּ. הַגָּה: וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּאִם הָאָב טוֹעֵן וַדַּאי, עַל הַבַּעַל לְהָבִיא רְאָיָה (הַמַּגִּיד מִשְׁנֶה פֶּרֶק כ"ה בְּשֵׁם הָרַשְׁבָּ"א). וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּאִם הִגִּיעַ זְמַן לִכְנֹס, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא כְּנָסָהּ, הָוֵי כְּאִלּוּ הָיְתָה בִּרְשׁוּת הַבַּעַל (רַבֵּנוּ יְרוּחָם נָתִיב כ"ג ח"ה):

8 If she had deformities that could have come into being after the betrothal, if they were found after she was brought into the husband's house, the burden is on the husband to prove that they existed before the betrothal and that his transaction [the marriage] was a mistaken transaction. If they were found on her while she was in her father's house, the burden is on the father to prove that they came into being after the betrothal, and it is [considered as though] the husband's field was swept away [after purchase]. Rema: There are those who say that if father makes a claim of certainty, the burden of proof is on the husband (Magid Mishneh 25 citing the Rashb"a). There are those who say that if the time had come for [the husband] to bring in [his wife to his house], even if he had not brought her it, it is considered as though she were in the domain of the husband (Rabbeinu Yerucham 23:5).

ט הֵבִיא הַבַּעַל רְאָיָה שֶׁעַד שֶׁלֹּא תִּתְאָרֵס הָיוּ בָּהּ, אוֹ שֶׁהוֹדֵית לוֹ בְּכָךְ, וְהֵבִיא הָאָב רְאָיָה שֶׁרָאָה וְשָׁתַק וְנִתְפַּיֵּס אוֹ שֶׁחֶזְקָתוֹ שֶׁיָּדַע בָּהֶן וְנִתְפַּיֵּס, הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב בִּכְתֻבָּתָה:

9 If the husband brought proof that the deformities existed in her since before the betrothal, or that she had admitted as such, and the father brought proof that [the husband] saw and was quiet and was appeased or that it can be assumed that he knew and was quiet, he [the husband] is obligated to pay her marriage contract.

י בָּא עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְשָׁהָה כַּמָּה יָמִים, וְטָעַן שֶׁמּוּם זֶה לֹא נִרְאֶה לוֹ עַד עַתָּה, אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּמָטִים (פֵּרוּשׁ, כְּגוֹן תַּחַת בֵּית הַשֶּׁחִי וְתַחַת הַדַּדִּים וְכַדּוֹמֶה) אוֹ בְּכַף הָרֶגֶל, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ, חֲזָקָה אֵין אָדָם שׁוֹתֶה בְּכוֹס אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן בּוֹדְקוֹ וְיָדַע וְנִתְפַּיֵּס. הַגָּה: וְאִם שָׁהָה עִמָּהּ שְׁלֹשִים יוֹם, אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן לוֹמַר שֶׁלֹּא בָּעַל (מַהֲרִי"ק שֹׁרֶשׁ ק"ה):

10 If he had sex with his wife, waited a few days, and claimed that only just now did he notice a certain deformity, even if it were within the folds (meaning, for example, under the armpit or under the breasts and the like) or on the sole, we do not listen to him, for it is assumed that one does not drink from a cup unless he has checked it and knows and is appeased. Rema: If he waited with her for 30 days, he is not believed to say that he did not have sex with her (Mahari"k 105).

יא מִי שֶׁנּוֹדַע לוֹ שֶׁאִשְׁתּוֹ נִכְפֵּית, וְרוֹצֶה לְגָרְשָׁהּ וְאֵינוֹ מַשִּׂיג כְּדֵי כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, כּוֹפִין אוֹתָהּ לְקַבֵּל גֵּט וְאֵין בָּזֶה מִשּׁוּם תַּקָּנַת רַבֵּנוּ גֵּרְשֹׁם, וְיִתֵּן הַנִּמְצָא בְּיָדוֹ לִכְתֻבָּתָהּ, וְהַמּוֹתָר כְּשֶׁתַּשִּׂיג יָדוֹ, וְאִם תְּמָאֵן לְקַבֵּל גֵּט, יִמְנַע מִמֶּנָּה שְׁאֵר כְּסוּת וְעוֹנָה. הַגָּה: וְדַוְקָא בְּמּוּם גָּדוֹל כָּזֶה שֶׁאִלּוּ הָיָה בְּאִישׁ הָיוּ כּוֹפִין לְגָרֵשׁ מִדִּין הַתַּלְמוּד, וְלֹא תִּקֵּן רַבֵּנוּ גֵּרְשֹׁם שֶׁתְּהֵא הָאִשָּׁה עֲדִיפָא מֵאִישׁ (תְּשׁוּבַת הָרֹא"שׁ כְּלָל מ"ב), אֲבָל מִשּׁוּם שְׁאָר מוּמִין אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְגָרְשָׁהּ בְּעַל כָּרְחָהּ, אֲבָל מִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין כּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ לִהְיוֹת עִמָּהּ, מֵאַחַר דִּמְאִיסָה עָלָיו וְרוֹצֶה לְגָרְשָׁהּ וְלָתֵת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ (מהרי"ק שֹׁרֶשׁ ק"ז):

11 One who is informed that his wife is epileptic and wants to divorce her, but does not have the money to pay her marriage contract, we force her to accept a bill of divorce (and the decree of Rabbeinu Gershom is not applied here), and he gives that which he has as her marriage contract, and the remainder when he acquires it, and if she refuses to accept a bill of divorce, he withholds from her food, clothing, and sex. Rema: This only applies regarding a blemish as serious as this, for if it existed in a man he would be forced to divorce by Rabbinic law, and Rabbeinu Gershom did not decree that a woman would be preferable to a man (Responsa of the Ro"sh #42), but he cannot divorce her against her will because of other deformities, but nonetheless we do not force him to be with her, after she has become repugnant to him and he wants to divorce her and give her her marriage contract (Mahari"k 107).

Previous Chapter Next Chapter