Yerushalmi Ketubot 8:1 ירושלמי כתובות ח׳:א׳

MISHNAH: If a woman inherited property before she became preliminarily married, the Houses of Shammai and Hillel agree that if she sells or gives it away it is valid¹If she is an unmarried adult, she is fully capable of acting and does not need any male guardian or representative. “Properties” without further qualifications are real estate.. If she inherited after she became preliminarily married, the House of Shammai say she may sell²Up to the time of the definitive marriage. At the definitive marriage the husband becomes the administrator of the properties and receives their yield; he has no say in the matter before that date. Everybody agrees that after the definitive marriage the wife can sell only through her husband (unless a separation of property was stipulated before the definitive marriage. Since these are money matters, they are all subject to modification by the contracting parties.), the House of Hillel say she should not sell, but both of them agree that if she sold or gave it away it is valid. Rebbi Jehudah said: They said before Rabban Gamliel: If he obtained the right to the woman³Since the preliminary marriage makes the bride a married woman in all aspects of criminal law, should the husband not also have acquired a say in her properties., should he not also acquire the right to the property? He said to them, are we not ashamed about the new [properties]⁴Properties she inherits after the final wedding ceremony, of which Mishnah 2 decrees that the husband can veto her sale. It seems not reasonable that the secondary interest of the husband in the yield of the properties should override the primary property rights of the wife in her inheritance. and you want to burden us with the old ones⁵The properties inherited before the final wedding date?

HALAKHAH: “If a woman inherited property,” etc. So is the Mishnah: Before she was preliminarily married⁶There seems to be no difference in meaning between t-reflexive hit pa‘el and n-reflexive niph‘al. J. N. Epstein (loc. cit. Chapter 5, Note 33, p. 474) sees in this sentence only the introduction to the following question since in all quotes of the Mishnah in other parts of the Yerushalmi the formulation of the Mishnah is used.. What is the difference between before she was preliminarily married and after she was preliminarily married? Before she was preliminarily married, it fell to her; after she was preliminarily married it fell to her and him⁷The Babli, 78a, has a slightly more careful formulation, that after the preliminary marriage the husband might have an interest..

⁸From here to the end of the Halakhah, the text is from Peak 6:2, explained there in Notes 45–55 (variants פ). Rebbi Phineas asked before Rebbi Yose, why did we not state it with the leniencies of the House of Shammai and the stringencies of the House of Hillel? He said to him, the Mishnaiot apply only to circumstances that are either stringent on both sides or lenient on both sides. But here it is a stringency on one side and a leniency on the other side. But did we not state: “The House of Shammai say, property abandoned to the poor [is abandoned]?” Is this not lenient for the poor and stringent for the householder, and it was stated! He said to him, it is lenient for the poor and not stringent for the householder, since he intentionally abandoned it. He said to him, did we not state: “If the sheaf that was near a closure, a stack, cattle, or vessels was forgotten,” is this not lenient for the householder and stringent for the poor, and it was stated! He said to him, it is lenient for the householder but not stringent for the poor, because they did not acquire it yet. You may also say here, it is lenient for the woman and not stringent for the husband since he did not yet acquire property rights to it. He said to him, since he became betrothed to her, the inheritance fell to both of them.

Rebbi Jehudah said, they argued before Rabban Gamliel: Because preliminarily married she is his wife and definitively married she is his wife; just as the sale by the latter is void, the sale by the former also should be void. He said to them, we are ashamed of the new ones, now you want to roll the new on over the old ones! The new ones, after the definitive marriage; the old ones before the definitive marriage, when she was married in the second ceremony.