Talmud zu Ketubot 1:5

הָאוֹכֵל אֵצֶל חָמִיו בִּיהוּדָה שֶׁלֹּא בְעֵדִים, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִטְעֹן טַעֲנַת בְּתוּלִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמִּתְיַחֵד עִמָּהּ. אַחַת אַלְמְנַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאַחַת אַלְמְנַת כֹּהֵן, כְּתֻבָּתָן מָנֶה. בֵּית דִּין שֶׁל כֹּהֲנִים הָיוּ גוֹבִין לַבְּתוּלָה אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת זוּז, וְלֹא מִחוּ בְיָדָם חֲכָמִים:

Wenn man bei seinen Schwiegereltern ohne Zeugen in Juda gegessen hat, unterliegt sie keinem Anspruch auf Jungfräulichkeit, denn er wird mit ihr allein gelassen. [Als sie das Verlobungsfest im Haus des Vaters der Braut in Juda feierten, war es üblich, dass der Bräutigam mit ihr allein gelassen wurde, um sich mit ihr vertraut zu machen. Als er sie später heiratete, hatte er daher keinen Anspruch auf Jungfräulichkeit.] Sowohl die Kethuba der Witwe eines Israeliten als auch die der Witwe eines Cohein sind eine Manah. Ein Beth-Din von Cohanim würde vierhundert Zuz für (die Kethuba) einer Jungfrau (die die Tochter eines Cohein war) beanspruchen, und die Weisen protestierten nicht.

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

HALAKHAH: “There was no law of siqariqon in Judea” etc. ¹⁷⁹This sentence and part of the next is also in Ketubot 1:5 (Notes 196–199). Variants are given by כ. In earlier times they decided on a persecution in Judea because they had a tradition from their forefathers that Jehudah had killed Esaw, as it is written: “Your hand is on your enemies’ neck.” They went and enslaved them, took their fields and sold them to third parties. The original owners could come and repossess¹⁸⁰After the Jewish court system was reestablished under R. Jehudah.; therefore the land was left absolutely in the hand of the siqariqon since they refrained from buying¹⁸¹As long as the court held that a forced sale was invalid.. “They decreed that the law of siqariqon should not apply in Jehudah¹⁸²Nobody had the right to reclaim from third parties land he had given away to save his life.. When was this said? About war killings before the war¹⁸³In the anarchy between the begin of the revolt and the occupation of the Land by Roman forces.. But about anybody killed in and after the war, the notion of siqariqon does not apply¹⁸⁴In Tosephta 3:10: “But about anybody killed in and after the war, the notion of siqariqon applies.” The Yerushalmi text should not be corrected based on Tosephta or Babli. Since one refers to the war of Bar Kokhba and the Hadrianic decrees in its aftermath, it is clear that the situation during and after the war was worse than before the war. One does not speak of a forced sale but of the rights of the heirs of a person who was killed and his land taken by Roman soldiers or civilians. It is clear that there was no sale. Since the greater part of the Jewish population of Judea was either killed in the war or deported as slaves, it made no sense for the organizers of the survivors to take notice of prior ownership. One has to assume that “Judea” means the Judean hills, to exclude the settlements in the plain centered around Lydda..” But are those killed before the war not like those killed after the war? Explain it that a siqariqon came and robbed and suppressed; there was no time left to write the sales contract before murder engulfed the entire world, that practice should not be partial¹⁸⁵Robberies during the anarchy before the Roman invasion cannot be separated from what happened during the war; in both cases no documentation can be recovered..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Vorheriger Vers Ganzes Kapitel Nächster Vers