Get every episode summarized
Each time 4 Min Rambam publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.
Email me new episodesFree for 3 shows. No card needed.
About this episode
“In Huchuz-Ishus' Parachov, Gimul Dharama discusses various agreements that the husband and wife might come to regarding the monetary obligations that they have to each other.”From the transcript
No show notes were published with this episode.
Get every episode summarized
Each time 4 Min Rambam publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.
Email me new episodesFree for 3 shows. No card needed.
Hosts & guests
Transcript ready
65 searchable segments. Every word is indexed and playable.
Full transcript
4 Min Rambam — 9 Tishrei - Ishus Perek 23. Machine-transcribed; use the interactive transcript above to jump the player to any line.
In Huchuz-Ishus' Parachov, Gimul Dharama discusses various agreements that the husband and wife might come to regarding the monetary obligations that they have to each other. Dharama begins by saying that if a woman made a condition with her husband that he would not get one or many or all of this Khusim that he would be Zaykhah, the things that he would get from her when they get married, if he wrote it to her and she was still engaged before getting married, then they doesn't need to be a kinyan. If however it happened after marriage, then there has to be a kinyan. Dharama continues to explain some examples of what might happen for a person made a condition with his wife that she would be allowed to buy and sell her property and that her gifts would be valid. Then that condition is valid and the husband only eats the fruits of it as long as it's in her property. But when she sells it, he stops receiving the fruits from the property. Dharama continues and says that if he made a condition with her that he won't eat the fruits of her property, he doesn't eat the fruits but they might sell the fruits in order to buy with it other property, then he eats the fruits of that property because he only
made the condition for the first generation of profit. Obviously if they made the condition for the second generation as well then that would be valid and then the third generation would be permitted for him unless they made a condition that all generations of profit would not go to him. Dharama continues and says that if they made a condition that the husband would not inherit the wife, this would only work while she's engaged. But once she gets married, that condition would not be valid. Dharama continues and says that if a husband spent money on the nirxima look that came with from his wife, whether he spent a lot of money and he only ate a little bit of the profit or the other way around, he does not get paid back for the amount of expenses that he put into it and whatever he spent, he spent and whatever he gained, he gained. And this will apply in a regular case of divorce but if it was a case where the wife rebelled against her husband based on certain criteria then the halakhas would be different. See halakhai yudh from more details. Dharama continues to talk about nirdunya and nirdunya means property that the wife brings in or something from her estate that she brings into the marriage that the husband takes responsibility
over and needs to return it to her in the event that he divorces her. And Dharama says about this that there's many men in August in different places about what they do there's some places where when it comes to nirdunya, they write an additional third or they write an extra percentage to the real value in order to make it sound bigger and dexuba. And so therefore one has to be aware of these minha game when it comes to this in order to make sure that the right amount is returned. The Ramam continues and says that when it comes to nirdunya it's different than other monetary transactions that need a kinyan. In the case of nirdunya, two people are discussing if the husband and wife are discussing and they say how much are you bringing in and how much are you bringing in, whatever they say and agree to is considered valid and the kinyan is not needed. This also applies to parents who are writing for their children and this is assuming that it's the first marriage of those children. But if it was a brother writing for a sibling or a woman writing for her daughter or other relatives or a father that was doing it for a son or daughter that was previously married and this is a second marriage, then the words themselves are not a kinyan and they need
to have a proper kinyan. The Ramam continues and says that when a father decides to give nirdunya, then nirdunya only goes to the marriage once they actually get married. If however something happens beforehand then this property remains by the father doesn't go to anyone else. The Ramam continues and says that if the father made up to give a certain amount of money as nirdunya and then he traveled to another country and he's unable to be reached, then the wife could tell the husband that there's nothing I could do about it, I wasn't the one who made up to pay the money. The Ramam continues and says that if someone marries a woman and he made up with her that he will feed and sustain and provide the necessary expenses for her daughter for her ex-emount of years, then he has to honor that commitment as if it was a kinyan. And this is assuming that this was done at the time of condition. The Ramam concludes that if this daughter gets married within the amount of years that the father committed to, then her husband is the one who's required to pay for her expenses. And her stepfather also gives her money for food.
More episodes
