Study Ketubot folio 44A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Here too, this is the reasoning for the ruling that she does not collect the additional 100 dinars from the second stipulated time, as he did not write to her in the second marriage contract: I added 100 dinars to your original marriage contract of 200 dinars. Evidently, he did not add to the existi
§ After clarifying Rav Huna’s opinion, the Talmud turns its attention to a more general issue, connected to his last statement. The Master, i.e., Rav Huna, said, as indicated in the above discussion, that if she wishes she can collect the sum specified in this marriage contract, and if she wishes
The Talmud refutes this suggestion: Was it not stated with regard to this halakha of Rav Naḥman that Rav Pappa said: And Rav Naḥman concedes that if he added so much as a palm tree in the second document, this shows that he wrote it as an addition, and therefore the second document does not cancel
§ Since the Talmud has mentioned the statement of Rav Naḥman, it discusses this matter itself: Rav Naḥman said: With regard to two documents that are produced one after the other, the second nullifies the first. Rav Pappa said: And Rav Naḥman concedes that if he added a palm tree to it, he wrote i
And all the more so, this is the halakha if he wrote the first document as a gift and the second in the form of a sale, as we say it was due to the halakha of a creditor that he wrote it in this way. Out of concern that his creditor might come and snatch the field from the recipient and leave him