daf bit: Ketuvot 103

[cellio]

The mishna teaches: should a widow say "I have no desire to move from my husband's house", the heirs cannot tell her to go back to her father's house, even if they promise to pay her maintenance. Rather, they must maintain her in her husband's house. The gemara adds that she may use not only her husband's house but also his bondsmen, the silver and gold utensils, and the furnishings, just as during his lifetime. (103a)

Comments

Widowhood, not that I know anything of law

[anniemal.livejournal.com]

If a woman binds herself to her mate, she inherits his life, which was hers, prior to his death. His responsibilities are hers. A good wife knows them. Her children or his other heirs owe her support. It is what is proper and true to the Golden Rule. They will inherit in time. Greed is always ugly.

Not that I know what is really right, Judeaistically (is that a word? probably not.)

As an atheist, I have an extra measure of confusion as to how to live rightly. I draw from those observances that seem right to me, think about them hard, and tend to use the Golden Rule to mediate my everyday life.

The thought that a man's heirs other than his wife could send his widow back to her father's house (if he's still living, and how does his second wife feel about it?) is abhorrent. They would have to be very nasty people, if she was a good wife.

As a secular ignoramus, that's my take on it.

I've always regarded Jews as more or less eccentic but sensible. I regard anyone with a religion at all as tetched. Just so you know where I'm coming from.

How to live rightly, carefully, is something I am concerned about.