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:
Se alguém comeu seus sogros sem testemunhas em Judá, ela não está sujeita a uma reivindicação de virgindade, pois ele é deixado sozinho com ela. [Quando eles fizeram o banquete de noivado na casa do pai da noiva em Judá, era costume que o noivo fosse deixado sozinho com ela para se familiarizar com ela. Portanto, depois que ele se casou com ela, ele não teve a pretensão de virgindade.] Tanto o kethubah da viúva de um israelita quanto o da viúva de um Cohein são um manah. Um beth-din de Cohanim reivindicaria quatrocentos zuz por (o kethubah de) uma virgem (que era filha de um Cohein), e os sábios não protestaram.
Jerusalem Talmud Gittin
HALAKHAH: “There was no law of siqariqon in Judea” etc. 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 repossess; therefore the land was left absolutely in the hand of the siqariqon since they refrained from buying. “They decreed that the law of siqariqon should not apply in Jehudah. When was this said? About war killings before the war. But about anybody killed in and after the war, the notion of siqariqon does not apply.” 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 partial.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
