Resources for Kesubos 83

1. The big סוגיא here is סילוק and it starts from our משנה. The משנה says that a woman can’t sell her נכסי מלוג unless her husband wrote to her דין ודברים אין לי בנכסיך. The גמרא says that our משנה is talking about a case where the husband wrote or said this to his wife when she was an ארוסה. If he wrote it when they are married it won’t work. תוספות earlier on דף ע"ח ע"ב in ד"ה לא כר"י asked that the גמרא there said that according to ר"ג anything a woman has as an ארוסה can be sold by her even without any special סילוק from her husband. If so, why does our גמרא say the husband needs to be מסלק himself in order for her to be able to sell? תוספות answers that our גמרא is going according to the "אמרו לו חכמים" mentioned in that משנה earlier who disagree with רבן גמליאל. The רמב"ן disagrees with this answer since that "אמרו לו" isn’t a שיטה but rather just asking a question to ר"ג. Therefore, the רמב"ן instead answers that our גמרא is saying that the סילוק of the husband now when his wife is an ארוסה is going to work even on things she will acquire after their marriage. The רא"ש here disagrees with this since the ירושלמי says a person can’t be מסלק themselves from something that isn’t in their רשות and right now it's not in either of their רשות. The אבני מילואים in סימן צ"ב אות ו brings the משנה למלך who asks that according to the רא"ש it’s משמע that although סילוק doesn’t work for items she will acquire once she is married, it does work for items she will buy later in אירוסין. What is the difference? The אבני מילואים answers with an important יסוד: סילוק works similar to the way a קנין works if you hold אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם. Meaning, סילוק works even on a דבר שלא בא לעולם as long as you don’t own it yet. Therefore, a man can be מסלק himself from things she doesn’t own yet since at the time she acquires it he can still use סילוק. However, once she gets married סילוק can't work because she already owns it so you would need a real קנין. 

Interestingly, the חזון אי"ש in סימן ע"ז אות י disagrees and says that according at least to תוספות the husband could not be מסלק himself from things that fall to his wife later in אירוסין since it isn’t ברשותו at the time of סילוק. He paints this as part of the broader חקירה that the אחרונים discuss in our סוגיא which is as follows: when the husband is מסלק himself, is he being מסלק himself from his rights as a husband or from the actual property? The חזון אי"ש suggests that תוספות holds a person is being מסלק himself from the property itself, so if there is no property yet it can’t work, whereas the רמב"ן holds you are being מסלק yourself from the rights of a husband, so it works completely. You are simply saying אי אפשי בתקנת חכמים so you will never get any rights at any time.

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander

Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya

Rabbi Ari Keilson - Maarei Mekomos