Question: What do they argue about?

Answer (Rav Papa): R. Shimon holds that a person claims a fixed payment rather than a payment that must be assessed;

Chachamim say that a person claims something that must be paid in all cases, and not a fine from which the defendant is exempt when he admits.

Question (R. Avina): Who receives her earnings of a girl who is fed by her brothers (after the father died)?

Perhaps the brothers are in place of the father. Just like her earnings went to her father, they go to the brothers;

Or, perhaps this is different. The father chose to feed her, but a stipulation of her mother's Kesuvah obligates the brothers to feed her.

Answer (Rav Sheshes - Mishnah): A widow is fed from the orphans' estate. They receive her earnings.

Question #1: A widow is different. A man is concerned for the prosperity of his daughter, but not of his widow!

Question: A man is not more concerned for his daughter than for his widow!

(R. Aba): If a man died leaving a widow and a daughter, this is like a daughter and sons when the estate is too small (to feed everyone until the girls mature);

There, the daughter is fed and the sons beg for food. Also here, the widow is fed and the daughter begs!

Answer: A man is more concerned for the disgrace of his widow than his daughter, but he is more concerned for the prosperity of his daughter than of his widow.

Question #2 (Rav Yosef - Mishnah): The sons receive the earnings and Metzi'os of a daughter, even if the father died before collecting them.

This is because she earned or found them in the father's life. After his death, she keeps them!

Suggestion: The case is, she is being fed by the brothers.

Answer: No, it is when she is not being fed.

Question: If so, the Halachah is obvious!

Even the opinion that allows one to force his slave to work for him without feeding him says so only about a Kena'ani slave!

Regarding a Yisrael slave it says "with you (he eats like you)." All the more so, one may not receive a daughter's earnings without feeding her!

Answer (Rabah bar Ula): The Mishnah teaches about her earnings above what the cost of her food (after her father dies, if she is not being fed she keeps them).

Question (Rava): Surely, a Chacham like Rav Yosef should have anticipated this answer!

Answer (and Rejection of Answer (g) - Rava): Rather, he found a difficulty in the Mishnah itself;

It says that the sons receive her earnings and Metzi'os, even if the father died before collecting them. One does not collect Metzi'os!

Rather, the Mishnah equates her earnings to her Metzi'os. Metzi'os she found in the father's lifetime go to him; what she finds after his death is hers. The same applies to her earnings.

(Rav): A daughter who is fed by the brothers keeps her earnings.

(Rav Kahana): We learn from "You will bequeath them to your sons" - you bequeath Kena'ani slaves to your sons, but rights to your daughter's revenue do not go to your sons.

Question (Rabah): Perhaps the verse discusses only payments for seduction, fines and payments of injuries!

Support (Rav Chanina - Beraisa): The verse discusses payments for seduction, fines and payments of injuries.

Question: She should receive payments for injuries, since they are due to her pain!

Answer (R. Yosi bar Chanina): The case is, someone bruised her face. (The father receives the payment, for it decreases the money people will pay for her.)

(R. Zeira citing Rav): A daughter who is fed by the brothers keeps her earnings - "You will bequeath them to your sons", but not rights to your daughter's revenue.

Avimi bar Papa: Shekod (Shmuel) said this.

Question: But Rav said this!

Correction: Rather, also Shekod said this.

(Mar bar Ameimar): Chachamim of Nehardai say that the Halachah follows Rav Sheshes.

(Rav Ashi): The Halachah follows Rav.

The Halachah follows Rav.

(Mishnah): If a man was Mekadesh his daughter [to a man, and the man] divorced her, and [her father] was Mekadesh her [again] and she was widowed (before Bagrus) her Kesuvah belongs to [her father];

I If he married her off (Nisu'in, and her husband) divorced her, he married her off [again], and she was widowed, [her Kesuvah] belongs to her;

R. Yehudah says, he receives the first Kesuvah.

Chachamim: Once she does Nisu'in, he has no jurisdiction over her.

(Gemara) Inference: The Tana discusses when she was divorced and widowed, but not when she been widowed twice, (for this is severe,) for then she could not remarry!

The Mishnah is like Rebbi, who says that after she is widowed twice (she may not remarry, for) the Chazakah is that her husbands will die.

(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): The first Kesuvah goes to the father.

Question: What is his reason?

Answer (Rabah and Rav Yosef): The father acquired the Kesuvah from the time of Kidushin.

Objection (Rava - Beraisa): R. Yehudah admits that if she was Mekudeshes, became a Bogeres and had Nisu'in, her father has no jurisdiction over her.

We do not say that the father acquired the Kesuvah from the time of Kidushin!

Correction: Rather, Rabah and Rav Yosef taught that he receives it because it was written when she was in his jurisdiction.

Question: From when does she collect? (I.e. if her husband sold property, from when did her lien begin, which allows her to collect from land sold afterwards?)

Answer #1 (Rav Huna): She collects 100 or 200 (the basic Kesuvah for a non-virgin or virgin) from the time of Kidushin. She collects Tosefes (any addition to this) from the time of Nisu'in.

Answer #2 (Rav Asi): She collects the entire amount from the Nisu'in.

Question: Rav Huna contradicts himself!

(Rav Huna): If a (divorced or widowed) woman is holding two Kesuvos, one for 200 and one (with a later date) for 300, she may collect 200 from the earlier date or 300 from the later date.

According to Rav Huna's answer above, she should collect 200 from the earlier date and 100 from the later date!

Counter-question: Why doesn't she collect 500, i.e. 200 from the earlier date and 300 from the later date?

Answer: You must say that since he did not write 'I am adding 300 to your 200', he intends that she may collect 200 from the earlier date, or 300 from the later date.

Answer: Likewise, since he did not write that he is adding 100 to the first 200, she pardoned the lien from the earlier date. (When a man adds Tosefes Kesuvah, he writes 'I added to what Chachamim enacted'; she does not pardon anything.)