Talmud zu Yevamot 3:3
הָיְתָה אַחַת מֵהֶן אֲסוּרָה עַל זֶה אִסּוּר עֶרְוָה, וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה אֲסוּרָה עַל זֶה אִסּוּר עֶרְוָה, הָאֲסוּרָה לָזֶה מֻתֶּרֶת לָזֶה, וְהָאֲסוּרָה לָזֶה מֻתֶּרֶת לָזֶה. וְזוֹ הִיא שֶׁאָמְרוּ, אֲחוֹתָהּ כְּשֶׁהִיא יְבִמְתָּהּ, אוֹ חוֹלֶצֶת אוֹ מִתְיַבֶּמֶת:
Wenn einer von ihnen einem Bruder als issur ervah und der andere dem issur ervah verboten wurde, ist die Frau, die dem ersten verboten ist, dem zweiten und die eine, die dem zweiten verboten ist, dem ersten erlaubt. Und dies ist die Absicht von (2: 3): "Wenn ihre Schwester ihre Yevamah wäre, erhält sie entweder Chalitzah oder wird in Yibum aufgenommen." [Denn sie ist nicht "die Schwester seiner Verbundenen", eine Erva, die nicht wegen Yibum vor ihn fällt.]
Jerusalem Talmud Ketubot
MISHNAH: If a woman inherited property before she became preliminarily married, the Houses of Shammai and Hillel agree that if she sells or gives it away it is valid1If she is an unmarried adult, she is fully capable of acting and does not need any male guardian or representative. “Properties” without further qualifications are real estate.. If she inherited after she became preliminarily married, the House of Shammai say she may sell2Up to the time of the definitive marriage. At the definitive marriage the husband becomes the administrator of the properties and receives their yield; he has no say in the matter before that date. Everybody agrees that after the definitive marriage the wife can sell only through her husband (unless a separation of property was stipulated before the definitive marriage. Since these are money matters, they are all subject to modification by the contracting parties.), the House of Hillel say she should not sell, but both of them agree that if she sold or gave it away it is valid. Rebbi Jehudah said: They said before Rabban Gamliel: If he obtained the right to the woman3Since the preliminary marriage makes the bride a married woman in all aspects of criminal law, should the husband not also have acquired a say in her properties., should he not also acquire the right to the property? He said to them, are we not ashamed about the new [properties]4Properties she inherits after the final wedding ceremony, of which Mishnah 2 decrees that the husband can veto her sale. It seems not reasonable that the secondary interest of the husband in the yield of the properties should override the primary property rights of the wife in her inheritance. and you want to burden us with the old ones5The properties inherited before the final wedding date?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy