Ketubot

he also taught. THE FIRST WIFE TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE SECOND. IF A MAN MARRIED A FIRST WIFE. Three rulings may be inferred from this statement. It may be inferred that if one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death, [the sons of the former] are entitled to the kethubah of 'male children'  and we do not apprehend any quarrelling.  Whence is this inferred? Since it was stated, THE SECOND WIFE AND HER HEIRS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER THE HEIRS OF THE FIRST WIFE [it follows that] they are only entitled to precedence but that if there is [a balance, the others also] take [their share]. It may also be inferred that the kethubah [of the second wife]  may be regarded as the surplus  over the other.  Whence is this inferred? Since it was not stated [that payment  is made only] if a surplus of a denar remained there. Furthermore It may be inferred that a kethubah [claimed by virtue] of the 'male children' [clause] may not be distrained on mortgaged property;  for if it could be imagined that it may be distrained on mortgaged property, the sons of the first wife  should [be entitled to] come and distrain on [the property] of the sons of the second. To this R. Ashi demurred: Whence [these conclusions]? Might I not in fact maintain that if one [wife died] while her husband was alive, and the other after his death, [the sons of the former] are not entitled to the kethubah [that they claim by virtue] of the 'male children' clause, whilst the expression of  TAKE PRECEDENCE  might refer  to the inheritance?  And were you to retort: What was the object  [of the description] THE HEIRS OF THE FIRST WIFE?  [I might reply that] as the Tanna used the expression, THE SECOND WIFE AND HER HEIRS  he also spoke of THE HEIRS OF THE FIRST WIFE!  And with reference to your conclusion that 'the kethubah [of the second wife] may be regarded as a surplus over the other', might I not in fact still maintain that no kethubah may be regarded as a surplus over the other, but here  it is a case where there was a surplus of a denar!  [As to the case where] one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death, this is [a matter in dispute  between] Tannaim. For it was taught: [If a man's wives] died, one during his lifetime and the other after his death, the sons of the first wife, Ben Nannus ruled, can say to the sons of the second,  'You are the sons of a creditor;  take your mother's kethubah  and go'.  R. Akiba said: The inheritance  has already been transferred  from [the sole right of inheritance by] the sons of the first wife  [the joint right of inheritance by these and] the sons of the second.  Do they  not differ on the following principle: One Master  holds the Opinion that where one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death [the sons of the former] are entitled to the kethubah [of their mother by Virtue of the] 'male children' clause, and the other Master holds that where one [wife died] during a husband's lifetime and the other after his death [the sons of the former] are not entitled to the 'male children' kethubah?  Said Rabbah: I found the young scholars of the academy while they were sitting [at their studies] and arguing: All  [may hold the view that where] one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death [the sons of the former] are entitled to [their mother's] 'male children' kethubah, but here they  differ [on the principle whether the second wife's]  kethubah may be regarded  as a surplus over the other; and the same dispute applies to [the debt] of a creditor.  One Master  holds that the [second wife's]  kethubah is regarded as a surplus over the other,  and the same law applies to [the debt] of a creditor, and the other Master holds that no one kethubah may be regarded as a surplus over the other, and the same law applies to [the debt] of a creditor. Thereupon I said to them: In respect of [a claim of] a creditor no ones disputes [the view] that [the debt] is regarded as a surplus;  they  only differ in respect of a kethubah. To this R. Joseph demurred: If so  [instead of saying.] 'R. Akiba said: The inheritance has already been transferred' it should [have said.] 'If there is a surplus of a denar [the sons of the first wife receive their mother's kethubah].'  [The fact]. however, is, said R. Joseph. that they  differ [on the question whether the 'male children' kethubah is payable where] one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death. These Tannaim  [differ on the same principle] as the following Tannaim. For it was taught: If a man married his first wife and she died and then he married his second wife and he himself died, the sons of this wife  may come after [her]  death and exact their mother's kethubah.  R. Simeon ruled: If there is a surplus of one denar  both  receive the kethubahs of their mothers but if no [such surplus remains] they  divide [the residue]  in equal portions. Do they  not differ on this principle: Whereas one Master  holds that where one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death [the sons of the former] are entitled to the 'male children' kethubah, the other Master holds that where one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death [the children of the former] are not entitled to the 'male children' kethubah?  No; all  may agree that where one [wife died] during her husband's lifetime and the other after his death [the sons of the former] are to receive the 'male children' kethubah,