had to be brought in a timely fashion— as also described in Deuteronomy , though not necessarily after the first night. According to R. Meir within thirty days(B. Ket. 3b, 11b, B. Yeb. 111b). The Mishnah changed the penalty. If adultery had occurred between the erusin and nisuin, then divorce was mandatory(B. Ket. 9a, J. Ket. 25a), and proof of two witnesses was required(B. Ket. 9b). If there were two witnesses to her adultery and this had occurred after erusin, she was to be stoned, but if sexual relations had occurred before erusin, then her ketubah was reduced to a maneh(11b). This meant that there was lack of virginity, but no adultery had occurred, so the death penalty could not be invoked. It then turned the matter in a different direction, in which the husband no longer wished to rid himself of his wife. If the suspicion could not be proved but the presumption was high, then divorce became optional, but the husband could overlook this, remain married, and simply write a new ketubah with a mohar of one hundred zuzim instead of the customary two hundred. If the girl claimed that she was injured by a piece of wood and stated this fact before her marriage, then no claim of lack of virginity could be filed. Otherwise it was considered a deception, as were a variety of physical defects and other matters that had not been disclosed by the bride or her father(Tos. Ket. 7, 8; B. Ket. 72b., 75a, 77a). Under those circumstances, R. Meir insisted that she receive her full ketubah, whereas the hahamim reduced her ketubah to 100 zuzim (B. Ket. 11b).! Later Maimonides asked another question, which may have been posed earlier: Why, in the biblical presentation, was the dissatisfied husband not content with a simple divorce; after all, according to Bet Hillel, he could demand it even if he did not like her cooking. The answer was that he wanted his money back(the ketubah), not only a divorce.
In the Mishnah , we then have numerous complications added that turn what had been an argument between a dissatisfied groom and his father-in-law into a court case with potential witnesses, different stages of engagement, etc. In other words, first of all, a much longer