Ketubot

Come and hear what was taught in the following. R. Judah stated: They argued before R. Gamaliel, 'Since the one woman  is his wife and the other  is his wife, just as a sale by the former  is invalid so also should a sale by the latter  be invalid'. He replied, 'We are in an embarrassed condition with regard to [the problem of] her new possessions and you wish to involve us [in the problem of] her old ones also?'  Thus  it may be inferred that he referred to a case of ex post facto also. This is conclusive. It was taught: R. Hanina b. Akabia said, It was not such a reply  that R. Gamaliel gave to the Sages,  but it was this that he replied, '[There is] no [comparison]; if you say [the ruling]  is to apply to a married woman whose husband is entitled to her finds, to her handiwork and to the annulment of her vows, will you say it also applies to a betrothed woman whose husband is not entitled either to her finds or to her handiwork or to the annulment of her vows?'  'Master', they said to him, '[this is quite feasible if] she effected a sale before she married;  what, [however, will be your ruling where] she was married and effected the sale  subsequently?' — 'This woman also', he replied, 'may sell or give away, and her act is valid'. 'Since, however', they argued, 'he  gained possession of the woman  should he not also gain possession of her property?'  — 'We are quite embarrassed', he replied, 'about [the problem of] her new possessions and you wish to involve us [in the problem of] her old ones  also!' But, surely, we learned, [IF SHE CAME INTO POSSESSION] BEFORE SHE MARRIED, AND SUBSEQUENTLY MARRIED, R. GAMALIEL SAID: IF SHE HAD SOLD IT OR GAVE IT AWAY  HER ACT IS LEGALLY VALID!  — R. Zebid replied, Read: She may sell or give away, and her act is valid.  R. Papa replied: There is no difficulty,  for one  is the view of R. Judah on R. Gamaliel's opinion  whilst the other  is the view of R. Hanina b. Akabia on R. Gamaliel's opinion. Is R. Hanina b. Akabia then in agreement with Beth Shammai?  — It is this that he meant: Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel did not differ at all on this point. Both Rab and Samuel stated: Whether a woman came into the possession of property before she was betrothed or whether she came into possession after she was betrothed her husband may, [if she sold it] after she married, take it away from the buyers. In agreement with whose view [is this ruling], which is neither in agreement with that of R. Judah nor with that of R. Hanina b. Akabia? — They adopted the ruling of our Masters; for it was taught: Our Masters took a recount [of votes, and decided that] whether a woman came into the possession [of property] before she was betrothed or whether she came into its possession after she was betrothed, her husband may, [if she sold it] after she married, take it away from the buyers. AFTER SHE WAS MARRIED, BOTH AGREE. May it be suggested that here we are learning Of the enactment of Usha,  for R. Jose the son of R. Hanina stated: It was enacted at Usha that if a woman sold during the lifetime of her husband melog  property,  and died, the husband  may seize it from the buyers!  — Our Mishnah [deals with the seizure] during the woman's lifetime for the purposes of usufruct [only];  the enactment of Usha [refers to the seizure] of the capital after her death. R. SIMEON DRAWS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN ONE KIND OF PROPERTY [etc.]. Which kind is regarded as KNOWN, and which as UNKNOWN? — R. Jose the son of R. Hanina replied: KNOWN means landed property;  UNKNOWN, movable property. But R. Johanan said: Both are regarded as KNOWN, but the following is classed as UNKNOWN. Whenever a woman lives in a certain place and comes into the possession of property in a country beyond the sea. So it was also taught elsewhere: The following is classed as unknown. Wherever a woman lives in a certain place and comes into the possession of property in a country beyond the sea. A certain woman  wishing to deprive her [intended] husband of her estate assigned it in writing to her daughter.  After she married and was divorced