Yerushalmi Gittin 9:11 ירושלמי גיטין ט׳:י״א

MISHNAH: The House of Shammai say, a person should not divorce his wife unless he found her immoral, as it was said¹⁷¹Deut. 24:1.: “For he found with her a matter of nakedness¹⁷²If the husband had proof of her infidelity, he would by law be obligated to divorce her (cf. Soṭah 1:1, Notes 13,14). In the absence of proof, the House of Shammai counsel him to divorce her. This probably is also the interpretation to be given to Matth. 19:9 and is the basis of the disapproval of marrying a divorcee expressed in Sifry Deut. 270..” But the House of Hillel say, even if she spoiled his dish, as it was said: “For he found with her a bad thing¹⁷³The Houses of Shammai and Hillel explain the same verse. The House of Shammai read עֶרְוַת דָּבָר as if it were (in rabbinic Hebrew) דְּבַר עֶרְוָה “a matter of nakedness (immorality)”. The House of Hillel read the construct state עֶרְוַת as a modifier of דָּבָר “thing”: an undesirable thing; e.g., being a bad cook..” Rebbi Aqiba said, even if he found another more beautiful than her, as it was said: “It will be if she does not appear pleasing in his eyes^171,Deut. 24:1.¹⁷⁴Even if she is beautiful in an objective way, but not beautiful in his eyes, he may divorce her. In his opinion (adopted in practice), a divorcee may be completely blameless., etc.”

HALAKHAH: ¹⁸⁰Soṭah 1:1, Notes 13,14. Was it not stated in the name of the House of Shammai: Not only that the woman must leave because of incest; from where that she must leave if her head’s [hair] is loose, if the side seams of her dress are open, or her arms stripped bare? The verse says, “for he found in her a matter of nakedness.” How can the House of Shammai confirm this¹⁸¹In the Mishnah, the House of Shammai admit only adultery as cause of divorce. In the baraita, they admit all kinds of lewd behavior.? Lest you say that one divorced because of immorality is forbidden, for anothercause she would be permitted¹⁸²Could be remarried by her first husband after having had a second husband.. Rebbi Shila from Kefar-Tamarta said: The verse is difficult for the House of Shammai: “Her first husband, who had sent her away, cannot afterwards retake her.¹⁸³Deut. 24:4.” Where do we hold? If to forbid her to him, is she not already forbidden to him¹⁸⁴If she committed adultery, she is automatically forbidden to her husband, even if she does not remarry. The prohibition to remarry the first husband after a remarriage seems to be unnecessary for the House of Shammai.? But we must hold, to burden him with a prohibition¹⁸⁵In remarrying her, the first husband would commit two sins in one act (cf. Tosaphot 90a, s.v. מה)..

It is written¹⁸⁶Lev. 15:33. The same argument in the Babli, Šabbat 64b, Sifra Meṣoraʻ Pereq 9(12).: “And the unwell in her menstruation and the sufferer from gonorrhea in his flow.” The earlier Elders used to say, “she shall be in her menstruation¹⁸⁷Lev. 15:19.”, she shall not use kohl nor any make-up until she comes into water. Rebbi Aqiba said to them: Is that a reason? If you say so, she makes herself ugly and he starts thinking to divorce her. It turns out that the Elders follow the House of Shammai¹⁸⁸Since she cannot be divorced, it does not matter how she looks. and Rebbi Aqiba the House of Hillel¹⁸⁹In the Mishnah, R. Aqiba does not disagree with the House of Hillel; he simply takes their argument to its logical conclusion..