Талмуд к Диврей ха-ямим А 2:22
וּשְׂג֖וּב הוֹלִ֣יד אֶת־יָאִ֑יר וַֽיְהִי־ל֗וֹ עֶשְׂרִ֤ים וְשָׁלוֹשׁ֙ עָרִ֔ים בְּאֶ֖רֶץ הַגִּלְעָֽד׃
Сегуб родил Иаира, у которого было три и двадцать городов на земле Галаадской.
Jerusalem Talmud Bava Batra
132This paragraph is R. Ismael’s argument to show that the husband’s inheriting his deceased wife’s properties, if not explicit in the Torah, at least was established practice already in the time of Joshua (Sifry Num. 134.) A different explanation of the verses quoted here is given in the Babli, 113a.“Segub fathered Jair,1331Chr. 2:22. The verse states that Jair, a Calebite, had 23 villages in the land of Gilead (Manasseh).” etc. From where did Jair have cities on Mount Gilead? But he married a woman from the daughters of Manasse who died and he inherited from her. If you would say that the inheritance from a wife was not a word of the Torah it should not say that “Jair had” but that “Segub had.134In v. 21 it is reported that Jair’s grandfather Hezron married a Gileadite wife. If the property came through her, the verse should have attributed ownership to her son Segub, rather than her grandson Jair.” Similarly, “Eleazar ben Aaron died.135Jos. 24:33, “they buried him on his son Phineas’s hill which had been given to him on the Mountain of Ephraim.”” From where did Phineas have property on the Mountain of Ephraim? But he married a woman from the daughters of Ephraim and inherited from her. If you would say that the inheritance from a wife was not a word of the Torah it should say that “Eleazar had” not that “Phineas had.136As Rashi ad. loc. intimates, one cannot say that the tribe of Ephraim gave Phineas property among themselves since the Torah explicitly excluded priests from receiving any land outside the Levitic cities (Deut. 18:1). Therefore, ownership of property outside such cities must be by inheritance from a non-priestly wife. The tribal affiliation of Eleazar’s father-in-law Puṭiel (Ex. 6:25) is not known.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy