Study Ketubot folio 58B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
However, according to Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda, the first ruling was due to abrogation and the latter ruling was also due to abrogation. If so, what is the difference between the reasoning of the initial version of the Mishnah and the decision of the court that convened after them?
The Talmud answers: The practical difference between them is with regard to superficial investigation, i.e., the investigation that could have been conducted on his behalf by his female relatives, which could have been only a superficial investigation. One Sage holds that superficial investigation
Mishnah: If one consecrates his wife’s earnings, meaning anything she produces, such as thread that she spins from wool, which, according to the rabbis’ ordinance, belongs to her husband, she may work and sustain herself from her earnings, as the consecration is ineffective. However, there is a di
Talmud: Rav Huna said that Rav said: A woman may say to her husband: I will not be sustained by you and, in turn, I will not work, i.e., you will not keep my earnings. He holds that when the rabbis instituted the various obligations and rights of a husband and wife, the husband’s obligation to pro
The Talmud raises an objection from a baraita: They instituted the husband’s responsibility for her sustenance in exchange for his right to her earnings. This indicates that the primary enactment is the husband’s right to his wife’s earnings, and the ordinance that requires him to provide her with