Mesorat%20hashas for Yevamot 217:8

האי מאי למימרא פשיטא אלא לאו הא קמ"ל טעמא דר' אלעזר דגזר הנך משום האי שמע מינה

may also be logically supported; for in the final clause it was stated, IF A MINOR WAS GIVEN IN MARRIAGE BY HER FATHER AND SHE WAS DIVORCED [SO THAT SHE IS REGARDED] AS AN 'ORPHAN' IN HER FATHER'S LIFETIME, AND THEN REMARRIED HER HUSBAND, ALL AGREE THAT SHE IS FORBIDDEN TO MARRY THE LEVIR. Now what [need was there] to state [this when it is so] obvious!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As her father has no legal authority to give her in marriage, and as the remarriage that has been contracted by herself (a minor) has no validity, it is obvious that her previous legal status of divorcee remains in force and that she is, therefore, forbidden to the levir as 'his brother's divorcee'. ');">²⁴</span> Consequently it must be<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit. 'but not'? ');">²⁵</span> this that was taught: R. Eleazar's reason<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. supra p. 757, n. 3. ');">²⁰</span> is because he forbade [the levirate marriages of] those as a preventive measure against [the levirate marriage of] this one. Thus our case has been proved.

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Yevamot 217:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.