Commentary for Yevamot 100:9

ומ"ט אמור רבנן ביאה פסולה יש אחריה כלום

it might be argued that since a letter of divorce serves to release a woman and <i>halizah</i> serves to release a woman, as the letter of divorce is of no effect,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. supra n. 4. ');">³¹</span> so is the <i>halizah</i> also of no effect, and thus one would come to consummate marriage after <i>halizah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And thus infringe a Pentateuchal prohibition. ');">³²</span> And why did the Rabbis say that a ma'amar with one sister-in-law is valid?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Forbidding levirate marriage with her rival. Since, according to the Pentateuch, acquisition of the sister-in-law is effected by the consummation of the levirate marriage, that consummation only should have had the force of forbidding marriage with the rival. ');">³³</span> — Because it is valid elsewhere.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The usual betrothal between man and woman, which is as binding as the consummation of marriage. ');">³⁴</span>

Explore commentary for Yevamot 100:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.