Study Yevamot folio 52B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
But if he wrote a bill of divorce for a regular woman who has no connection to him, even if he later married her, it is not a valid bill of divorce. This is because at the time of the writing of the bill of divorce, it is not in his power to divorce her, and therefore the bill of divorce is of no
Rav Ḥananya inquires: If he wrote a bill of divorce for his levirate bond, by specifying in the bill of divorce that he is thereby severing the levirate bond between them, but not for his levirate betrothal, or if he wrote a bill of divorce for his levirate betrothal and stated that it is not for
The Talmud asks: And why do you not resolve the dilemma from a teaching of Rava? For Rava said: If a yavam gave a bill of divorce for his levirate betrothal, her rival wife is permitted. The levirate betrothal he had previously performed is thereby canceled, which leaves the bond intact, and the r
§ It was taught in the Mishnah: If the yavam performed ḥalitza and then performed levirate betrothal, nothing is effective after ḥalitza and this levirate betrothal is not valid. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: This is the statement of R' Akiva, who says that betrothal does not take effect on those
The Talmud asks: And can you establish that the Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva? But doesn’t the first clause of the Mishnah teach: If he gave a bill of divorce and performed levirate betrothal, she requires a bill of divorce and ḥalitza. Now if this is in accordance with R' A