One-Page Learn · The Halachos at a glance
אִישׁוּת
Marriage 25
Sefer Nashim · When a husband may claim that he did not know what he was marrying, why the answer turns on whether his town had a bathhouse and he had a relative in it, and why everything that happens after the wedding is his loss and not a flaw in the agreement
3
Vows that cost a wife her ketubah if she was bound by them unknown to him: against meat, against wine, against the ornaments the women of her place wear
2
Facts about a town that decide whether a husband may claim at all: whether it has a bathhouse, and whether he has a relative living in it
3
Consecutive occasions on which blood is found on the cloths, after which the marriage may not continue and no ketubah is paid
1
Defect a widow may refuse in a yavam although she bore it in his brother, taking chalitzah and her ketubah from the estate
Part 1The claim of false premises
- Vows he never agreed to. A man who married without stipulating anything and finds his wife bound by vows may divorce her without the principal or the additional sum of the ketubah, since the agreement was made on false premises, but he must still divorce her formally because he said nothing explicit at the consecration. (25:1)
- Only three vows count. The vows meant are not to eat meat, not to drink wine, and not to adorn herself with colored garments or the other ornaments the women of her place customarily wear, all of which weigh the soul down and make her poor company; any other vow costs her nothing. (25:1)
- A bathhouse and a relative. Where the city has a bathhouse and the husband has relatives in it, he may not claim ignorance even of hidden blemishes, since we assume he checked with them and married her anyway; where it has neither, he may claim about blemishes that are not ordinarily seen, regular fits of epilepsy among them. (25:2)
- The town decides what counts as seen. Where women walk the market with their faces uncovered and everyone is recognized, no claim lies about an open blemish; where they go out only veiled at evening a claim lies even about open blemishes, unless a bathhouse and a relative were both available; and a woman who covers herself even in the bathhouse, or washes at night or in a private room, leaves him his claim in any case. The Rambam adds that all of this is what reason dictates, not a decree of the Torah. (25:2)
- Relatives, not friends. Against the geonim who ruled that a man can be expected to have a friend's wife or sister inspect her, the Rambam holds that a man will disclose concerns like these only to his own relatives and will rely only on their word. (25:3)
RememberThe test is not what he knew. It is whether the knowledge was available to him, in that town, through the people he would actually have asked.
Part 2Who must prove, and when the claim dies
- A blemish that clearly came first. Where the blemish certainly predates the consecration, such as an extra finger, the father must prove that the husband knew and accepted it or that we may assume he knew, and failing that she is divorced with nothing. (25:4)
- Otherwise the burden follows possession. Where the blemish could have arisen after the consecration, the husband must prove his case if it was found after she entered his home, and the father must prove his while she is still in her father's home, the Rambam describing the husband's loss as a field that has been flooded. (25:4)
- Silence in front of a blemish is acceptance. Even where the husband proves the blemish preceded the consecration, or she admits it, he owes the ketubah in full if the father proves that he saw it and accepted it in silence, or that it may be assumed he knew of it. (25:5)
- After nearness there is no claim. A husband who had relations and waited several days before claiming to have discovered a blemish is not heard, even about a blemish in a fold of skin or on the sole of the foot, because a man does not drink from a cup without first checking it well. (25:6)
- A great blemish that costs her nothing. A wife with no fixed onset who feels nothing until she begins to menstruate may live as a wife using a cloth before and after, her husband checking with his own, and forfeits nothing; only if blood is found three times running is the marriage ended without any ketubah, he may never remarry her lest he treat the divorce as conditional on her healing, and she may marry another man, while if the condition began after the marriage he divorces her and pays in full. (25:7, 25:8, 25:9)
RememberWhoever holds her carries the burden of proof, and once a man has drawn near, the law stops listening to the claim that he did not know.
Part 3What arrives after the wedding
- Her losses are his. A woman who becomes blemished after the marriage, even a leper, is his situation and not a flaw in the agreement: he may remain married if he wishes, and if he divorces her he pays her ketubah. (25:10)
- His losses are not hers to escape with payment. A husband who loses a hand, a foot or the sight of one eye after the marriage is not compelled to divorce and pay; his wife may stay if she wishes, and if she will not she leaves as a rebellious wife, without her ketubah. (25:11)
- Smell and trade are different. A husband who takes on constant bad breath or a smell from his nose, or becomes a gatherer of dog dung, a miner of copper or a tanner, is compelled to divorce his wife and pay her ketubah if she wants to leave, though she may choose to remain. (25:11)
- Leprosy separates even the willing. A husband who becomes a leper is compelled to divorce and pay even if she pleads to stay, because living with her would consume his flesh, and her request is heeded only if she undertakes to live with him before witnesses so that they will not have relations. (25:12)
- Acceptance is not transferable. A widow facing a yavam who carries the same defect her late husband had may say that she accepted it in one man and will not accept it in another; he performs chalitzah and pays her ketubah out of the estate. The printed editions then close the treatise with a verse about seeing one's children's children, which the manuscripts do not have. (25:13)
RememberBefore the marriage the question is what he could have known. After it, the only question left is what two people can live with in one house.