אבן העזר י״זEven HaEzer 17

Se’if 1א׳

אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ בִּכְלַל עֲרָיוֹת הִיא וְאֵין קִדּוּשִׁין תּוֹפְסִין בָּהּ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, בְּוַדַּאי אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ. אֲבָל אִם הִיא סָפֵק מְקֻדֶּשֶׁת, אוֹ סָפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת, קִדּוּשִׁין תּוֹפְסִין בָּהּ מִסָפֵק וּצְרִיכָה גֵּט מִשְּׁנֵיהֶם. וְהוּא הַדִּין לִפְסוּלֵי גִּטִּין מִדְּרַבָּנָן, שֶׁאִם בָּא אַחֵר וְקִדְּשָׁהּ שֶׁצְּרִיכָה גֵּט מִשְּׁנֵיהֶם, מֵהָרִאשׁוֹן דְּרַבָּנָן וּמֵהַשֵּׁנִי דְּאוֹרָיְתָא:

A married woman is included in the category of sexual proscriptions, and kiddushin (the acquisition aspect of marriage) to her is void. In what case are we dealing? With a woman who is definitely married. However, is she is doubtfully married, or doubtfully divorced, then kiddushin is valid by doubt, and she needs a writ of divorce from both men. The same law applies to writs of divorce which are invalid by Rabbinic decree, that if another man came and gave her kiddushin, she needs a writ of divorce from both, from the first (original husband) by Rabbinic decree, and from the second by Biblical law.

Se’if 2ב׳

אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ שֶׁפָּשְׁטָה יָדָהּ וְקִבְּלָה קִדּוּשִׁין בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ, הֲרֵי זוֹ מְקֻדֶּשֶׁת לַשֵּׁנִי. שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה לְבַעְלָהּ בְּפָנָיו: גֵּרַשְׁתַּנִי, נֶאֱמֶנֶת; חֲזָקָה, אֵין אִשָּׁה מְעִזָּה פָּנֶיהָ בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ. הַגָּה: יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דַּוְקָא לְעִנְיַן שֶׁקִּדּוּשִׁין תּוֹפְסִין בָּהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת וּצְרִיכָה גֵּט, אֲבָל אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת לְהִנָּשֵׂא לְאַחֵר (הָרַ"ן פ"ב דִּכְתֻבּוֹת בְּשֵׁם יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים) אוֹ לִטֹּל כְּתֻבָּתָהּ (הַגָּהוֹת מַיְמוֹנִי פ"ב דְּגֵרוּשִׁין). וְיֵשׁ חוֹלְקִים וּסְבִירָא לְהוּ דִּלְכָל דָּבָר נֶאֱמֶנֶת (רַמְבַּ"ם). וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים עוֹד, דְּבַזְּמַן הַזֶּה דִּנְפִישִׁי חֻצְפָּא וּפְרִיצוּתָא, אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת אֶלָּא לְחֻמְרָא, דְּאִתְּרַע חֲזָקָה דְּאֵינָהּ מְעִזָּה (ב"י בְּשֵׁם א"ח). אֲבָל אִם קִדְּשָׁהּ אַחֵר שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ, אֵין קִדּוּשִׁין תּוֹפְסִין בָּהּ עַד שֶׁתָּבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה קֹדֶם שֶׁתְּקַבֵּל הַקִּדּוּשִׁין, שֶׁכָּל שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו, מְעִזָּה. וְכָתַב הָרֹא"שׁ, דְּכָל שֶׁהוּא בָּעִיר כְּשֶׁנִּתְקַדְּשָׁה לְאַחֵר, מִקְּרֵי בְּפָנָיו. וְיֵשׁ חוֹלְקִין וּסְבִירֵי לְהוּ דְּבָעִינַן בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ מַמָּשׁ (מַהֲרִי"ק שֹׁרֶשׁ ע"ב וְרִיבָ"שׁ סִימָן קכ"ז). וְהָא דְּאָמְרִינַן דְּאֵין אִשָּׁה מְעִזָּה פָּנֶיהָ בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ לוֹמַר: גֵּרַשְׁתַּנִי, הָנֵי מִלֵּי הֵיכָא דְּלֵיכָּא דִמְסַיֵּעַ לָהּ, אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּאִכָּא דִמְסַיֵּעַ לָהּ, מְעִזָּה וּמְעִזָּה. וְאִם נִשֵּׂאת לְאַחֵר שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכְּשֶׁבָּא בַּעְלָהּ אוֹמֶרֶת לוֹ בְּפָנָיו: גֵּרַשְׁתַּנִי, אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת, דְּכֵיוָן שֶׁכְּבָר נִשֵּׂאת מְעִזָּה וּמְעִזָּה, שֶׁלֹּא תַּעֲשֶׂה עַצְמָהּ זוֹנָה. וְיֵשׁ מִי שֶׁאוֹמֵר, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ לֹא נִשֵּׂאת עֲדַיִן לְאַחֵר, אֶלָּא נִתְקַדְּשָׁה לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא בִּפְנֵי בַּעְלָהּ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּא בַּעְלָהּ וְאוֹמֶרֶת לוֹ בְּפָנָיו: גֵּרַשְׁתַּנִי, אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁאִם הָיְתָה קְטָטָה בֵּינֵיהֶם, אוֹ שֶׁתּוֹבַעַת כְּתֻבָּתָהּ, אֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת לוֹמַר: גֵּרַשְׁתַּנִי, אֲפִלּוּ בְּפָנָיו. יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דִּבְמָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמֶנֶת לִנָּשֵׂא גוֹבֵאת גַּם כֵּן כְּתֻבָּתָהּ (מַהֲרִי"ק שֹׁרֶשׁ ע"ב וְרִיבָ"שׁ סִימָן קכ"ז). וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּאֵינָהּ נֶאֱמֶנֶת לְעִנְיַן מָמוֹן כְּלָל. (וְנִתְבָּאֵר לְעֵיל)

A married woman who put out her hand and accepted betrothal money in front of her husband is married to the second one, for a woman who says in front of her husband: You divorced me, is believed, for there is a presumption that a woman would not be so brazen [as to lie] in front of her husband. Hagah: There are those who say that this is specifically with regard to the fact that betrothal avails and she is believed and she requires a get, but she is not believed to marry someone else (Ran, ch. 2 of Ketubot in the name of "there are those who say") or to receive her ketubah (Hagahot Maimoniyot, ch. 2 of Divorce Laws). But there are those who disagree and hold that she is believed for all matters (Rambam). And there are those who further say that in our time when brazenness and licentiousness are rampant, she is not believed except when the result is a stringency, for the presumption that she would not be brazen has been weakened (Bet Yosef in the name of Orah Hayyim). But if another betrothed her not in front of her husband, the betrothal is not valid until she brings proof that she was divorced from her husband before she accepted her betrothal. For any woman not in front of her husband will act brazenly. And the Rosh wrote that in any case when the husband is in the city when the other betrothed her, this is considered "in his presence." But there are those who disagree and hold that she must actually be in his presence (Maharik, root 72 and Ribash siman 127). And that which we say: A woman would not be so brazen as to say in front of her husband, "You divorced me" is only in a case where there is no one to support her, but if there is someone to support her, she will certainly be brazen. And if she is married to another when she is not in her husband's presence, even if she says to her husband when he arrives, "You divorced me," she is not believed for since she has already been married [to the second] one, she will certainly be brazen, so that she doesn't make herself into a prostitute. And there is one who says that even if she had not yet been married to another but had been betrothed to him while not in her husband's presence, and then her husband comes and she says to him, "You divorced me," she is not believed. And there are those who say that if there was some strife between them, or if she has asked for her ketubah, she is not believed to say: "You divorced me," even in his presence. There are those who say that if she is believed to remarry, she also collects her ketubah (Maharik, root 72 and Ribash, siman 127). And there are those who say that she is not believed at all vis a vis monetary matters.

Se’if 3ג׳

אִשָּׁה שֶׁהָלַךְ בַּעְלָהּ לִמְדִינַת הַיָּם, וְהֵעִידוּ עָלָיו שֶׁמֵּת, אֲפִלּוּ עֵד אֶחָד, אֲפִלּוּ הָעֵד עֶבֶד אוֹ שִׁפְחָה אוֹ אִשָּׁה אוֹ קָרוֹב, מֻתֶּרֶת. וַאֲפִלּוּ עֵד מִפִּי עֵד, אוֹ אִשָּׁה מִפִּי אִשָּׁה אוֹ עֶבֶד אוֹ שִׁפְחָה אוֹ קָרוֹב, כְּשֵׁרִים לְעֵדוּת זוֹ. וּפְסוּלֵי עֵדוּת, אִם פְּסוּלִים מִדְּרַבָּנָן, כְּשֵׁרִים לְעֵדוּת זוֹ. אֲבָל פְּסוּלֵי עֵדוּת דְּאוֹרָיְתָא, פְּסוּלִים. וְאִם מְסִיחִים לְפִי תֻּמָּם, כְּשֵׁרִים. וְכֵן כּוּתִי אוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל מוּמָר לַעֲבוֹדַת אֱלִילִים וּלְכָל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ, אִם הוּא מֵסִיחַ לְפִי תֻּמּוֹ, נֶאֱמָן. הַגָּה: לֹא בָּא עֵד בַּדְּרָכִים הַנִּזְכָּרִים, רַק יוֹצֵא קוֹל הֲבָרָה בָּעִיר, שֶׁמֵּת, אֵין מַשִּׂיאִין אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ (ת"ה סִי' רכ"ב וּבִתְשׁוּבַת הָרַמְבַּ"ן סִי' פ'):

A woman whose husband went overseas, and has been testified to be dead, even by one witness, even the witness being a slave or a maidservant or a woman or a relative, is free. and even a witness from the words of a witness, or a woman from the words of a woman, or a slave or a maidservant or a relative, are worthy of this testimony. and testimony invalids, if by Rabbis, are fit for this testimony. but testimony invalids by Torah, are invalid. and if [they are] innocently speaking, [they are] fit. and so a Cuthean or an Israelite converted to idolatry and for the whole torah, if he's innocently speaking, [he is] trustworthy. ???: no witness came in the above manners, only a rumour is going out in town, that [he's] dead, his wife is not wedded.