The husband can’t run away from providing substance to his wife TB Ketubot 107

Today’s daf TB Ketubot 107 returns to the topic of the Mishnah. When a husband goes abroad and is AWOL, may the court seize some this property in order to give his wife the contractual sustenance (מְזוֹנוֹת) the ketubah stipulates? Rav and Shmuel disagreed and the entire daf litigates who is correct.

“The Gemara returns to the mishna, which deals with the case of one who went overseas and his wife is demanding sustenance. It was stated that amora’im debated the following issue. Rav said: The court apportions sustenance for a married woman, i.e., if a husband went overseas and left behind nothing with which his wife could provide for her sustenance, the court withdraws money from his estate for this purpose. And Shmuel said: The court does not apportion sustenance for a married woman. Shmuel further said: Abba, i.e., Rav, concedes to me that the court does not touch the husband’s estate for the first three months. This is because a person does not leave his house empty, and therefore it is certain that he left something with which his wife can sustain herself at least in the short term.

“The Gemara comments: In a case where they heard that the husband died, everyone agrees that the court sustains his wife from his estate. When they disagree it is in a case where they did not hear that he had died abroad. Rav said that the court apportions sustenance for the wife, as his estate is legally mortgaged to her and must provide her with sustenance, and Shmuel said that in this case the court does not apportion sustenance for her.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rav’s position is intuitive. The husband is obligated to sustain his wife whether he is present or not. The Gemara provides two alternative reasons underpinning Shmuel’s position. “The Gemara asks: What is the reason for Shmuel’s ruling? Rav Zevid said: One can say that he gave her a bundle of money before he departed. Rav Pappa said: We are concerned that perhaps he said to her before his departure: Spend your earnings to sustain yourself, i.e., he renounced his rights to her earnings and in exchange he is no longer required to provide her with support.” (Sefaria.org translation)

After a long litigation the Gemara comes to a conclusion. “And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav, and therefore one apportions sustenance for a married woman whose husband went overseas.” (Sefaria.org translation)