Ketubot 108: Jugs, Pitchers, Oil: Returning What We've Borrowed

Yesterday's daf ended with a new Mishna.  The Mishna discussed what should be done if someone sustains a woman while her husband is overseas.  Should that person be repaid?  The Gemara begins today with a discussion about similar circumstances.  When a person is unable to pay their half-shekel to the Temple, another is permitted to pay on his/her behalf.  And when a person returns a lost object, they do not need to be paid, for it is a mitzva to return a lost item.  The unspoken connection here seems to be that when someone sustains a woman - does something generous without the expectation of reward - it should be permitted.  However, repayment is not necessary.

Another short Mishna is introduced at the beginning of amud (b).  It states that in large estates, sons inherit the land and daughters are provided with sustenance from the produce of that land.  In small estates, where there is not enough land/produce to support all children, the daughters receive sustenance from the produce of the land and the sons must beg door to door if they have not enough land to sustain themselves, as well.  Admon is astonished: because we are men (and fit to study Torah; and given this inheritance by Torah law), why should we not benefit from our inheritance?

Another Mishna describes the opinions of Admon as differing from those of the rabbis.  They all discuss what should be done if one accuses another of owing him a number of jugs of oil and the borrower admits to owing the jugs or pictures but not the oil.  Is that partial admission accepted?  The rabbis elaborate on this example to try to understand when the pitchers or jugs are counted separately from their contents.  

The amazing breadth of argument in Masechet Ketubot is stunning.  Marriage contracts cover so many different areas of law; each of those is mentioned in some depth over the course of the 108 dapim so far.