Gittin 77B

אי אפשי בתקנת חכמים כגון זו ⁠– שומעין לו.

I do not want to avail myself of the ordinance of the rabbis that was instituted on my behalf, such as in this scenario, we listen to him.

מאי ״כגון זו״? כדרב הונא אמר רב ⁠– דאמר רב הונא אמר רב: יכולה אשה שתאמר לבעלה: ״איני ניזונית ואיני עושה״.

The Talmud asks: What is referred to by the words: Such as in this scenario? What case did Rava refer to that he indicated that in similar situations the halakha is the same? The Talmud explains that Rava was referring to that which Rav Huna says that Rav says. As Rav Huna says that Rav says: A woman can say to her husband: I do not wish to be sustained by you, and I will not do work for you. Although the rabbis instituted on her behalf that she would be sustained in exchange for her work, she has the choice of waiving that right if she prefers to retain her earnings. Rava adds that in any similar case where the rabbis instituted an ordinance for one’s benefit, he can say that he does not wish to accept this rabbinic ordinance if it does not assist him.

רבא אמר: אטו ידה מי לא קניא ליה לבעל?! אלא גיטה וידה באין כאחד; הכא נמי ⁠– גיטה וחצרה באין כאחד.

Rava said that one can resolve the question about the wife’s ability to acquire a bill of divorce in a courtyard in a more direct way: Is that to say that her hand is not acquired by her husband? Yet despite the fact that he owns her hand, she is divorced once she receives a bill of divorce in her hand. Rather, one must say that her bill of divorce and her hand, i.e., her complete ownership over her hand, enter her possession simultaneously. Since the bill of divorce releases her from her obligations to her husband, at that moment she acquires full rights to her hand. Here too, in the case of her courtyard, one can say that her bill of divorce and her courtyard enter her possession simultaneously, as her husband’s rights to her property are terminated at the time of divorce.