Study Ketubot folio 83B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
in the case of one who immediately objects when the other comes to claim the portion he was promised, saying that he wrote what he did only in order to avoid a quarrel. However, in the case of one who waits while the other takes possession of the land before regretting his decision and requesting it
Ameimar said: The halakha is that one acquired from him the land itself. Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: Do you mean to teach this halakha with regard to one who immediately objects or with regard to one who waits? The Talmud comments: With regard to what opinion is there a practical difference? There
§ The Mishnah taught that if a husband says: I have no claim to your property, then he has not relinquished his right to benefit from the produce of the property or to inherit from his wife. The Mishnah asks: If this is so, and he still retains his rights, why would he write for her: I have no leg
The Talmud asks: And if this is so, why not say that the husband has merely withdrawn his rights from the produce? A gift or sale of the entire land is a significant matter, certainly in relation to the minor value of its produce. Why, then, is his statement not understood as a renunciation of his
The Talmud continues to inquire: And why not say that the husband has withdrawn his rights from the inheritance? This is the least important right of the husband, as he might die before her. Abaye said: Death is common, whereas a sale is not common, as one does not usually sell one’s ancestors’ i