Study Ketubot folio 82A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
However, this still does not prove conclusively that the baraita is corrupt, as perhaps it is the opinion of R' Natan. As it is taught in a baraita that R' Natan says: From where is it derived that in the case of one who claims 100 dinars of another, and the other claims money of another, that one a
Rather, a different justification exists for rejecting the baraita: We have not found a tanna who is stringent with these two stringencies with regard to a marriage contract. Rather, one rules either in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir that movable property is mortgaged for a marriage contra
Rava said: If so, that is the meaning of that which I heard from Abaye, who said: This is not a Mishnah, and I did not know what it is. Rava initially did not understand why the teaching should be dismissed, but he subsequently realized what Abaye was saying.
The Talmud relates a similar incident: There was a certain man who had a yevama happen before him for levirate marriage in the town of Mata Meḥasya, and his brother wanted to disqualify her from him by means of a bill of divorce. The man said to his brother: What is your opinion? Why are you doin
Mar bar Rav Ashi said that although when Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael he said that R' Yoḥanan said: In the case of one who says to another: Go and pull this cow and it will be acquired for you only after 30 days, after 30 days he has acquired it through the act of pulling, and this is the halakh