Commentary for Yevamot 104:7

אמר רב אשי גט יבמין מדרבנן וקרא אסמכתא בעלמא

IF THE LEVIR SUBMITTED TO <i>HALIZAH</i> AND THEN ADDRESSED TO HER A MA'AMAR. Rab Judah said in the name of Rab: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That no act is valid after halizah. ');">¹⁹</span> is the view of R. Akiba who holds that betrothal with those whose intercourse involves the penalties of a negative precept is of no validity; the Sages, however, maintain that there is some validity in acts after <i>halizah</i>. But how can you ascribe it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The quoted section of our Mishnah, and presumably all our Mishnah. ');">²⁰</span> to R. Akiba? In the first section, surely, it was stated, IF THE LEVIR GAVE HER A LETTER OF DIVORCE AND THEN ADDRESSED TO HER A MA'AMAR, IT IS NECESSARY FOR HER TO OBTAIN [A SECOND] LETTER OF DIVORCE AND TO PERFORM THE <i>HALIZAH</i>, while if [this Mishnah represented the view of] R. Akiba would a ma'amar to her be valid after a letter of divorce had already been given to her? Surely it was taught: R. Akiba said, 'Whence is it deduced that if a man gives a letter of divorce to his sister-in-law she is thereby forbidden to him for ever? Because it was stated Her former husband, who sent her away, may not [take her again to be his wife],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXIV, 4. ');">²¹</span>

Explore commentary for Yevamot 104:7. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.