will you lead the life of a widow of a living man, living alone while your husband is in another place? She said to him: If he would listen to me, he would sit and study for another twelve years. When Rabbi Akiva heard this he said: I have permission to do this. He went back and sat for another twelve years in the study hall. When he came back he brought twenty-four thousand students with him. His wife heard and went out toward him to greet him. Her neighbors said: Borrow some clothes and wear them, as your current apparel is not appropriate to meet an important person. She said to them: “A righteous man understands the life of his beast” (Proverbs 12:10). When she came to him she fell on her face and kissed his feet. His attendants pushed her away as they did not know who she was, and he said to them: Leave her alone, as my Torah knowledge and yours is actually hers.

In the meantime her father heard that a great man came to the town. He said: I will go to him. Maybe he will nullify my vow and I will be able to support my daughter. He came to him to ask about nullifying his vow, and Rabbi Akiva said to him: Did you vow thinking that this Akiva would become a great man? He said to him: If I had believed he would know even one chapter or even one halakha I would not have been so harsh. He said to him: I am he. Ben Kalba Savua fell on his face and kissed his feet and gave him half of his money. The Gemara relates: Rabbi Akiva’s daughter did the same thing for ben Azzai, who was also a simple person, and she caused him to learn Torah in a similar way, by betrothing herself to him and sending him off to study. This explains the folk saying that people say: The ewe follows the ewe; the daughter’s actions are the same as her mother’s.

On the same subject it is related: Rav Yosef, son of Rava, was sent by his father to the study hall to learn before the great Sage Rav Yosef. They agreed that he should sit for six years in the study hall. When three years had passed, the eve of Yom Kippur arrived and he said: I will go and see the members of my household, meaning his wife. His father heard and took a weapon, as if he were going to war, and went to meet him. According to one version he said to him: Did you remember your mistress, as you are abandoning your studies to see a woman? There are those who say that he said to him: Did you remember your dove? Since both father and son were involved in an argument, they were preoccupied and this Master did not eat the cessation meal before Yom Kippur and that Master also did not eat the cessation meal that day.

MISHNA: A woman who rebels against her husband is fined; her marriage contract is reduced by seven dinars each week. Rabbi Yehuda says: Seven half-dinars [terapa’ikin] each week. Until when does he reduce her marriage contract? Until the reductions are equivalent to her marriage contract, i.e., until he no longer owes her any money, at which point he divorces her without any payment. Rabbi Yosei says: He can always continue to deduct from the sum, even beyond that which is owed to her due to her marriage contract, so that if she will receive an inheritance from another source, he can collect the extra amount from her. And similarly, if a man rebels against his wife, he is fined and an extra three dinars a week are added to her marriage contract. Rabbi Yehuda says: Three terapa’ikin.

GEMARA: The Gemara asks: Against what does she rebel; what is the nature of the rebellion discussed in the mishna? Rav Huna said: Against engaging in marital relations. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Against the tasks she is obligated to perform for her husband. The Gemara clarifies this dispute. The mishna states: Similarly, if a man rebels against his wife. Granted, according to the one who says that the rebellion is against marital relations, it is well, as this type of rebellion can apply equally to a husband. However, according to the one who says that she rebels against performing tasks, is he subjugated to her to perform tasks? The Gemara answers: Yes, he is, as the mishna is discussing someone who says: I will not sustain and I will not support my wife.

The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rav say: One who says: I will not sustain and I will not support my wife must immediately divorce her and give her the payment for her marriage contract? What relevance is there to a discussion of a weekly fine? The Gemara answers: Shouldn’t he be consulted to investigate whether he will retract his decision? In the interim, while the court discusses the issue with him and explains that he must divorce his wife if he does not retract his decision, he is fined by the addition of three dinars per week to her marriage contract.

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita with regard to a rebellious woman: It is the same to me, i.e., the same halakha applies, if the woman who rebelled is a betrothed woman, or a married woman, or even a menstruating woman, or even if she is ill, or even if she is a widow waiting for her yavam to perform levirate marriage.

The Gemara discusses the baraita. Granted, according to the one who says that her rebelliousness is referring to performing tasks, it is well. However, according to the one who says that she rebels against engaging in marital relations, is a menstruating woman fit to engage in marital relations? She is not, and therefore there would be no significance to her refusal. The Gemara answers: The one who advocates that opinion could have said to you: One who has bread in his basket, i.e., one who has engaged in marital relations with his wife in the past, is not comparable to one who does not have bread in his basket. Since she declares her refusal to engage in marital relations, he suffers from this refusal even when she is menstruating or ill.

There are those who say that the objection was phrased differently. Granted, according to the one who says that the rebellion discussed in the mishna is referring to engaging in marital relations, this explanation is consistent with that which is taught with regard to an ill woman, that she be fined as a rebellious woman, as even if she is not capable of working, she can still be rebellious with regard to marital relations.