Mesorat%20hashas for Yevamot 235:6

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> האשה שהלכה היא ובעלה למדינת הים ובאה ואמרה מת בעלי תנשא ותטול כתובתה וצרתה אסורה היתה בת ישראל לכהן תאכל בתרומה דברי רבי טרפון

since in the case of testimony relating to a woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [In connection with the death of her husband in regard to which the laws of evidence have been considerably relaxed. Var. lec. 'the testimony of a rival']. ');">¹⁹</span> the evidence [of the nature of] 'He is not dead' is not [regarded as a valid] contradiction,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But as a mere outburst of malice, intended to injure her rival. The first evidence is, therefore, accepted. ');">²⁰</span> We learned: IF ONE WITNESS STATED, HE IS DEAD' AND ANOTHER WITNESS STATED, HE IS NOT DEAD', OR IF ONE WOMAN STATED, 'HE IS DEAD AND ANOTHER WOMAN STATED, HE IS NOT DEAD', SHE MAY NOT MARRY AGAIN. Now according to R. Eleazar<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who explained that the first clause represents the view of those who differ from R. Meir, while R. Meir maintains that the first wife also is forbidden to marry again, because a rival's contradiction is admitted, v. p. 831, n. 21. ');">²¹</span> it may well be explained that the anonymous statement [in the final clause]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which forbids remarriage, even where the contradictory evidence was given by the rival (v. supra p. 831. n. 7.) ');">²²</span>

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Yevamot 235:6. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.