Responsa for Yevamot 214:15

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> אי זו היא קטנה שצריכה למאן כל שהשיאוה אמה ואחיה לדעתה השיאוה שלא לדעתה אינה צריכה למאן רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אומר כל תינוקת שאינה יכולה לשמור קידושיה אינה צריכה למאן

ruled: [<i>Mi'un</i> is] valid [even if It was declared] before two.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sanh. 2a, supra loc. cit. ');">⁴⁵</span> R. Joseph b. Manyumi reported in the name of R. Nahman that the <i>halachah</i> is in agreement with this pair.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who require a quorum of two only, v. supra loc. cit. ');">⁴⁶</span> BETH SHAMMAI, HOWEVER, ANSWERED&nbsp;… AND SHE DECLARES HER REFUSAL etc. But, surely, she has already made a declaration of refusal!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When she was a minor. Why then does our Mishnah speak of a second declaration of refusal after she has become of age? ');">⁴⁷</span> — Samuel replied: [The meaning is] TILL SHE IS OF AGE and states, 'I am willing to abide by the first declaration of refusal'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the second refusal (cf. supra n. 8) only the confirmation of the first was intended. Without such confirmation it might be possible to assume that she had changed her opinion and withdrawn her first declaration. ');">⁴⁸</span>

Explore responsa for Yevamot 214:15. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.