Commentary for Yevamot 243:6

ושוב מעשה בצלמון באחד שאמר אני איש פלוני בן איש פלוני נשכני נחש והרי אני מת והלכו ולא הכירוהו והלכו והשיאו את אשתו:

What does he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Rabbah b. Samuel. ');">²²</span> teach us?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By his statement that according to Beth Hillel, whose ruling is accepted as the established law, a mere voice is sufficient evidence. ');">²³</span> This,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That such evidence is accepted. ');">²⁴</span> surely, is the ruling in our Mishnah!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which, being anonymous, is regarded as the established law. ');">²⁵</span> — It is this that he teaches us: Should an anonymous statement be found that a woman [in such circumstances] is not permitted to marry again, that [statement would represent the view of] Beth Shammai.

Explore commentary for Yevamot 243:6. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.