Study Ketubot folio 47B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The reason is that he wrote that she would be entitled to the additional amount only on the condition that he would marry her, and since he did not marry her, she is not entitled to the extra amount. The Talmud compares the respective opinions: The one who says that the husband does not have the ri
The Talmud refutes this suggestion: No, everyone agrees that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Elazar ben Azarya, and the explanation is as follows: The one who said that he does not have the right to the dowry clearly holds in accordance with the opinion of R' Elazar ben Azarya,
However, with regard to that which is given from her father to him, i.e., the dowry, even R' Elazar ben Azarya concedes that the husband is entitled to this money, as the gift of a father is due to marriage, i.e., he wants the families to be joined in matrimony, and they have already become linke
§ The Mishnah teaches that a husband is obligated to provide his wife with sustenance, redemption from captivity, and burial. A baraita states: The Rabbis instituted that a husband must provide his wife with her sustenance in exchange for his rights to her earnings, and similarly they decreed that
The Talmud expresses surprise at this last statement: Produce, who mentioned anything about that? The baraita did not previously mention produce at all, so how did it arrive at a halakhic conclusion with regard to produce? The Talmud explains that the baraita is incomplete, and this is what it is t