Study Ketubot folio 70A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
It is in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, who says it is a mitzva to fulfill the instructions of the dead, as the Mishnah states that the third party must fulfill the instructions of the deceased, although the daughter is likely to do as she pleases after the third party fulfills his part. I
Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva said: The halakha is that whether he says: Give a shekel or whether he says: Do not give more than a shekel, the court gives the sons enough for all of their needs. The Talmud asks: But how could we disregard the father’s words and give more, when the father said to gi
We learned in a Mishnah there (Gittin 59a): With regard to children, their acquisitions are considered acquisitions and their sales are considered sales. This is the case with respect to movable properties, but not with respect to real estate.
Rafram said: They taught this only if there is no steward [apotropos] overseeing the children’s affairs. However, if there is a steward, the children’s acquisitions are not considered acquisitions and their sales are not considered sales, even for movable property.
From where does he know this? From the fact that it teaches in the Mishnah here that even when there is a third party who functions as a steward, any action of a minor girl is nothing. The Talmud asks: And perhaps where there is a third party the halakha is different? It is possible that the act o