Nedarim 38B

נפשה וגופה לשמים. אמרו לו: אף הטמאה נפשה לשמים וגופה שלו, שאם ירצה הרי הוא מוכרה לגוים או מאכילה לכלבים.

both its being and its body belong to Heaven, as it is prohibited for its owner to eat its meat. The Rabbis said to him: The non-kosher animal too, its being belongs to Heaven, and its body is the property of its owner, because if the owner chooses, he sells it to non-Jews or feeds it to dogs.

גמ׳ אמר רב יצחק בר חנניה אמר רב הונא: המודר הנאה מחבירו ⁠— מותר להשיא לו בתו. הוי בה רבי זירא: במאי עסקינן? אילימא בשנכסי אבי כלה אסורין על החתן, הרי מוסר לו שפחה לשמשו!

Talmud: Rav Yitzḥak bar Ḥananya said that Rav Huna said: In the case of one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow, he is permitted to marry his daughter to him. R' Zeira discussed it: With what case are we dealing? If we say that it is a case where the property of the father of the bride is forbidden to the groom, this cannot be, as when one marries his daughter to the groom, he provides him a female slave to serve him and thereby benefits him.

אלא בנכסי חתן אסורין על אבי כלה. גדולה מזו אמרו: זן את אשתו ואת בניו, ואף על פי שהוא חייב במזונותן, ואת אמרת מותר להשיא לו בתו?!

Rather, it is a case where the property of the groom is forbidden to the father of the bride, and although the groom supports the bride, her father is not considered to have benefited from the property of the groom. However, it cannot be this case either, as the rabbis stated a halakha with a greater novel element than that in the Mishnah itself: And with regard to one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow, that other person may feed his wife and children, although the one who is bound by the vow is obligated in their support. And you say that it is permitted to marry his daughter to him? Isn’t that obvious?