Ketubot

for the man wrote [the additional jointure] for her with the sole object of marrying her.  [Must it then be assumed] that he who ruled that 'her husband does not acquire' [upholds the same principle] as R. Eleazar b. Azariah  while he  who ruled that 'the husband does acquire' [upholds the same principle] as the Rabbis?  — No; all  [may, in fact, hold the same view] as R. Eleazar b. Azariah.  [For] he who ruled, 'her husband does not acquire', [is obviously] in agreement with R. Eleazar b. Azariah.  And as to him  who ruled, 'the husband does acquire' [it may be explained that] only [in respect of undertakings] from him  towards her  did R. Eleazar b. Azariah maintain his view,  [for the reason that] 'the man wrote [the additional jointure] for her with the sole object of marrying her',  but [in respect of undertakings] from her  towards him  even R. Eleazar b. Azariah may admit [that betrothal has the same force as marriage] since [undertakings of such a nature]  are due to [a desire for] matrimonial association, and such association, surely, had taken place. HE IS ALSO UNDER THE OBLIGATION OF MAINTAINING HER etc. Our Rabbis taught: Maintenance was provided for a wife in return for her handiwork, and her burial  in return for her kethubah.  A husband is, therefore, entitled to usufruct. 'Usufruct'! Who mentioned it?  — A clause is missing, and this is the proper reading: Maintenance was provided for a wife in return for her handiwork, her ransom In return for usufruct,  and her burial in return for her kethubah;  a husband, therefore, is entitled to usufruct. What [was the need for] 'therefore'?  — It might have been presumed [that a husband] must not consume the fruits  but should rather leave them,  since, otherwise,  he might refrain from ransoming her, hence we were informed that that [course]  was preferable, for sometimes [the proceeds of the fruit] might not suffice  and he  would have to ransom her at his own expense. Might I not transpose [the sequence]?  — Abaye replied: They  ordained the common for the common  and the uncommon for the uncommon. Said Raba: The following Tanna is of the opinion that maintenance  is a Pentateuchal duty. For it was taught: She'erah  refers to  maintenance, for so it is said in Scripture, Who also eat the she'er  of my peaple;  Her raiment  [is to be understood] according to its ordinary meaning; 'Onatha  refers to the time for conjugal duty  prescribed in the Torah,  for so it is said in Scripture, If than shalt afflict  my daughters.  R. Eleazar said: 'She'erah' refers to the prescribed time for conjugal duty,  for so it is said in Scripture, None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin  to him to uncover their nakedness;  'Her raiment' [is to be taken] according to its literal meaning; 'Onatha refers to maintenance, for so it is said in Scripture, And he afflicted thee,  and suffered thee to hunger.