Commentary for Yevamot 216:9

ורמינהי הממאנת באיש ונשאת לאחר וגירשה לאחר ומיאנה בו זה הכלל כל שיצתה ממנו בגט אסורה לחזור לו במיאון מותרת לחזור לו אלמא לא אתי מיאון דחבריה ומבטל גיטא דידיה

had already tried to allure<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra n. 3. ');">¹⁷</span> her but she did not succumb.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'she was not entangled', 'confused'. The fact that she exercised the right of refusal against him after he had married her a second time and presumably made every effort to retain her, may be regarded as proof that she would not be induced to marry him a third time. When the mi'un, however, concerns a second husband. It is quite likely that, as her separation from her first husband was not due to her mi'un but to his divorcing her, she might readily consent to return to him and thus allow him to induce her to exercise her right of mi'un against her second husband. ');">¹⁸</span> If a contradiction, however, [exists it is that between one ruling] concerning his fellow against [another ruling] concerning his fellow: IF, HOWEVER, SHE EXERCISED HER RIGHT OF REFUSAL AGAINST HIM AND HE REMARRIED HER, AND HAVING SUBSEQUENTLY GIVEN HER A LETTER OF DIVORCE SHE MARRIED ANOTHER MAN AND BECAME A WIDOW OR WAS DIVORCED, SHE IS FORBIDDEN TO RETURN TO HIM. The reason [then why she is forbidden to return to him is] because she BECAME A WIDOW OR WAS DIVORCED, but had she exercised her right of refusal<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Against her second husband. ');">¹⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Yevamot 216:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.