Ketubot

make a declaration of refusal  [against her husband] and go away. Our Rabbis taught: If she  went to a Sage [after her betrothal] and he disallowed her vow her betrothal is valid. [If one  went] to a physician who cured her, her betrothal is invalid. What is the difference between the act of the Sage and that of the physician?  — A Sage annuls  the vow retrospectively  while a physician effects the cure only from that moment onwards.  But was it not, however, taught, [that if she  went] to a Sage and he disallowed her vow or to a physician and he cured her, her betrothal is invalid?  — Rabbah  replied: There is no contradiction. The former  represents the view of R. Meir; the latter  represents that of R. Eleazar. 'The former represents the view of R. Meir', who holds that a man does not mind  his wife's being exposed to the publicity  of a court of law.  'The latter represents that of R. Eleazar' who holds that no man wants his wife to be exposed to the publicity  of a court of law.  What is the source  [of these statements]?  — [The following] where we learned: If a man divorced his wife on account of a vow [she had made] he may not remarry her,  nor may he remarry his wife [if he divorced her] on account of a had name.  R. Judah ruled: In the case of a vow that was made in the presence of many people  he may not remarry her,  but if it was not made in the presence of many people he may remarry her.  R. Meir ruled: In the case of a vow [the disallowance of which] necessitates the investigation of a Sage  her husband may not remarry her,  but if it does not require the investigation of a Sage  he may remarry her.  R. Eleazar said:  The prohibition against [remarriage where the disallowance of the vow] required [the investigation of a Sage]  was ordained only on account [of a vow] which requires [no such investigation].  (What is R. Judah's reason?  Because it is written in Scripture,