Halakhah zu Schemot 21:10

And after it has been explained that His saying, "Do not eat any of it raw or boiled" is [only] one commandment; and likewise all of the negative commandments that arise from the prohibition for the nazirite of all that comes out from the vine are one commandment, since they are all details, as is explained in the Gemara; and they likewise said that, "any leaven and any honey," is one commandment - we should also count, "No Ammonite or Moabite shall be admitted" (Deuteronomy 23:4), as one commandment. And likewise, His saying, "You shall not ill-treat any widow or orphan" (Exodus 22:21). And likewise, His saying, "You shall not subvert the rights of the stranger or the orphan" (Deuteronomy 24:17). And likewise, His saying, "he may not diminish her food, her clothing or her conjugal rights" (Exodus 21:10). Each of these negative commandments is one commandment. This means to say that each of these is exactly like, "Do not eat any of it raw or boiled in any way," and like, "for no leaven or honey may be turned into smoke as an offering." There is no difference between them. And likewise, His saying, "You shall not bring the fee of a prostitute or the sale revenue of a dog" (Deuteronomy 23:19), is one commandment. And likewise, His saying, "Drink no wine or other intoxicant, etc. And to differentiate [...] And to instruct" (Leviticus 9-11). That is to say, with one negative commandment did He prohibit [a priest] to enter the Sanctuary or to give instruction while drunk. And that is one of the divisions of the second type of general negative commandments. And the second division is [made up of cases with] words exactly like those of the previous division. However [in such cases], it is the traditionally received explanation that we give separate lashes for each and every one of those connected matters. And that is that when he does them all - even at one time - he is given lashes for each and every one as a distinct prohibition. Of this type is His saying, "You may not eat within your gates of the tithes of your new grain or your wine or your oil" (Deuteronomy 12:17). They said in Keritot (Keritot 4b), "[If one] ate the tithe of grain, wine, and oil (outside Jerusalem), he is liable [separately] for each and every one." And they raised a difficulty and said, "But is one given lashes for a general negative commandment?" And the answer was, "The verse is written superfluously. How is this? It is written, 'And you shall eat before the Lord your God, in the place where He shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, the tithe of your grain, etc.' (Deuteronomy 14:23); why did He need to come back and write, 'You may not eat within your gates?' And if you shall say that it is to [make it into a full-fledged] negative commandment - if so, let the verse say, 'You may not eat them within your gates.' Why did the verse need to go back and write all of them ('your new grain or your wine or your oil')? We hear from this, that it is to separate [it into three distinct commandments]." And there, after give and take, it is clarified that it was not necessary for Him to say, "and parched grain" (Leviticus 23:14), such that it was truly mentioned to separate - that one would be liable for parched grain on its own. And in the Talmud, they asked by way of rejection, "Maybe one is separately liable to receive lashes for parched grain" - for it is truly mentioned for this - "whereas for bread and fresh stalks, one is [only] liable for one [set of] lashes?" So they answered, "For what law did the Merciful One write, 'parched grain,' in between [the others]? To tell you that one who eats bread, parched grain and fresh stalks is liable for each and every one [individually]."

The Rambam (Hilchot Ishut 12:1-4) presents ten obligations Halachah demands from a husband, three of which are of biblical origin and seven of which are rabbinic enactments. The three Torah obligations are to provide food, clothes, and intimate relations for his wife (see Shemot 21:10 and Rashi ad. loc.). The seven rabbinic obligations are paying her ketubah money in case of death or divorce, paying her medical bills if she is sick, redeeming her if she is taken captive (a phenomenon not unheard of in the time of the Gemara and in certain countries even today), burying her if she dies, supporting her from his estate and allowing her to live in his house if he predeceases her,²She does not, though, inherit him. For ways of allowing a wife to inherit, see our later section about setting up halachically valid wills. supporting their daughters from his estate until they marry, and allowing the male children from their marriage to inherit her ketubah (ketubat banin dichrin). Halachah entitles a man to four items from his wife: her earnings (ma’aseih yadayim), whatever lost items she finds (metzi’ah), the income generated by the property that she brings into the marriage during her lifetime (nichsei melog), and the priority to inherit her if she predeceases him.

It is forbidden for a man to withhold conjugal duties from his wife. If he did so with the intent of causing her pain he has transgressed the prohibition of "Do not reduce her conjugal obligation" (Ex. 21:10) . If he is ill or weakened and he is unable to have intercourse, he waits six months until he becomes healthy, for this is longest period of conjugal duties. After that period he must either get her permission or divorce her and pay the Ketubah.

A man who rebels against his wife and says, "I will feed and support her, but will not have sexual relations with her because I hate her," we add the value of 36 barleycorns of silver to her ketuba (marriage contract) each week, and he remains without relations as long as she is willing to wait. Even though her ketuba amount continues to grow, he is still transgressing a negative commandment, as it says, "...he shall not withhold" (Exodus 21:10). If she so desires, court can force him to divorce her immediately and to give her the ketuba money. Note: Some authorities say that if he wants to divorce her immediately and give her ketuba, we do not add on to the ketuba (so it appears in Rambam Hilchot Ishut chapter 14). It seems to me that in such a case he also does not transgress the negative commandment of "...he shall not withhold" (Exodus 21:10).