(Mishnah): One who went overseas...

(Rav): We allot food to a woman whose husband is away.

(Shmuel): We do not allot food to a woman whose husband is away.

Shmuel: Rav agrees that we do not allot food in the first three months, since a man does not leave his house empty.

If we heard that the husband died, all agree that we allot food. They argue about when we did not hear that he died;

Rav says that we allot food, since he is obligated to feed his wife.

Question: Why does Shmuel disagree?

Answer #1 (Rav Zevid): We are concerned lest he left money for her food.

Answer #2 (Rav Papa): We are concerned lest she accepted to feed herself from her earnings.

These opinions argue about an adult wife whose earnings do not suffice to feed herself. (Rav Papa holds that Shmuel agrees that we feed her. She would not consent to feed herself.)

They also argue about a minor whose earnings suffice for her food (Rav Zevid holds that Shmuel agrees that we feed her. A man would not leave money with a minor.) (The following seven questions are against Shmuel.)

Question #1 (Mishnah - Chanan): If a man went overseas and his wife requests food, she swears only at the end;

The sons of Kohanim Gedolim say that she swears also at the beginning.

Inference: They only argue about the oath, but all agree that she is fed!

Answer (Shmuel): The case is, we heard that he died.

Question #2 (Beraisa): If a man went overseas and his wife requests food, the sons of Kohanim Gedolim say that she swears;

Chanan says, she does not swear;

If he came and said that he left her money for food, he is believed.

Answer (Shmuel): Here also, we heard that he died.

Objection: It says 'if he came... ' This shows that he did not die!

Answer: We heard that he died. It was a false report.

Question #3 (Beraisa): If a man went overseas and his wife requests food, if he comes, he may say that she should pay for her for food with her earnings;

If Beis Din allotted food for her, this stands.

Answer (Shmuel): Here also, we heard that he died.

Question #4 (Beraisa): If a man went overseas and his wife requests food, Beis Din takes from his property to feed his wife, but not his sons and daughters, and not another matter (this will be explained).

Answer #1 (Rav Sheshes): The case is, he appointed someone to feed his wife.

Question: If so, his children should also be fed!

Answer: He appointed someone to feed his wife, but not his children.

Objection: The Tana did not specify. Why should we assume that this is the case?

Answer #2 (Rav Papa): The case is, one witness said that he died;

Since she may remarry based on one witness, she also receives food;

Since his children do not inherit his property based on one witness, they are not fed.

Question: What is the 'other matter'?

Answer #1 (Rav Chisda): It is Cosmetics.

Answer #2 (Rav Yosef): It is Tzedakah.

Rav Chisda says that we do not give to her for cosmetics. All the more so, we do not give Tzedakah from his money!

Rav Yosef says that we do not give Tzedakah from his money, but we do give to her for cosmetics, for he does not want his wife to become repulsive.

Question #5 (Mishnah): The first three months after a woman falls to Yibum, she is fed from her husband. After this, she is not fed from her husband, and not from the Yavam;

If Beis Din told him to do Yibum or Chalitzah and he fled, she is fed from the Yavam.

Answer: This does not oppose Shmuel. According to either explanation, there is no concern here!

A Yavam does not care for the Yevamah so much that he would leave money for her food;

A Yavam is not entitled to her earnings.

Question #6 (Beraisa): If a woman went with her husband overseas and returned and said that he died, she chooses to receive food or her Kesuvah;

If she says that he divorced her, she is fed, up to the value of her Kesuvah.

Answer: Here also, we heard that he died.

Question: If so, why does she receive only up to the value of her Kesuvah?

Answer: Since she said that she was divorced, she admitted that she does not deserve more than this.

Question #7 (Beraisa) Question: In what case was it taught that a Mema'enes does not receive food?

It cannot be when she is still married, for then he must feed her!

Answer: Rather, her husband went overseas. She borrowed money for food, and then did Mi'un.

Inference: Had she not done Mi'un, he would have to pay!

Answer: This does not oppose Shmuel. According to either explanation, there is no concern here!

A man does not leave money (for food) with a minor.

A minor would not consent to feed herself from her earnings. (Normally, she does not earn enough.)

Question: What was the final ruling?

Answer #1 (Rav Dimi): Cases arose, and Rebbi ruled that she is fed, and R. Yishmael ruled that she is not fed.

Objection (R. Yochanan): How could R. Yishmael say that she is not fed?!

The sons of Kohanim Gedolim argue with Chanan only about the oath, but all agree that she is fed!

Answer (Rav Shemen bar Aba): Shmuel already answered this. The case is, we heard that he died.

R. Yochanan did not accept the answer.

Answer #2 (Ravin): Cases arose, and Rebbi ruled that she is not fed, and R. Yishmael ruled that she is fed.

R. Yochanan challenged Rebbi's opinion like above. Rav Shemen bar Aba gave Shmuel's answer, but R. Yochanan did not accept it.

Answer #3: The Halachah follows Rav. She is fed.

The Halachah follows Rav Huna;

(Rav Huna citing Rav): A woman may tell her husband 'do not feed me, and I will keep my earnings.'

The Halachah follows Rav Zevid regarding glazed pottery:

(Rav Zevid): If Glazed pottery is white or black, it does not become forbidden due to absorptions. If it is green, it becomes forbidden;

If they have cracks, even black and white Kelim become forbidden.

(Mishnah - Chanan): If David went overseas and Reuven fed David's wife, he is not reimbursed;

The sons of Kohanim Gedolim say that he swears how much he spent, and he is reimbursed.

R. Dosa ben Harkinas agrees with the sons of Kohanim Gedolim;

R. Yochanan ben Zakai holds like Chanan. Reuven threw away his money.