Yevamot

the Rabbis having made the provision  in the case of a minor  as a precaution against one who is of age.  But is provision made in the case of a minor as a precaution against one who is of age? Surely we learnt, IF THEY WERE MINORS INCAPABLE OF BEARING CHILDREN THEY MAY BE RESTORED AT ONCE! — R. Giddal replied: This  was a special ruling.  Does this imply that such a case had actually occurred!  — Rather [this is the meaning:] It  was like a special ruling, since the exchange of brides is an unusual occurrence. [Others adopt] a different reading: Samuel said: All these women,  with the exception of a proselyte and an emancipated slave who were of age, must wait three months.  An Israelitish minor, however, need not wait three months. But how [was she separated]? If by a declaration of refusal,  Surely Samuel has already stated this  one! And if by a letter of divorce, Samuel surely stated that she  must wait!  For Samuel said: If she exercise her right of refusal against him, she need not wait three months; if he gave her a letter of divorce she must wait three months! [It was] rather in respect of harlotry, and harlotry with a minor  an unusual occurrence. Let, however, a preventive measure  be made in respect of a proselyte and an emancipated slave with whom harlotry is not unusual! — He holds the same view as R. Jose. For it was taught: Proselytes,  captives  or slaves  who were redeemed, or embraced the Jewish faith or were emancipated, must wait three months; so R. Judah. R. Jose permits immediate betrothal and marriage.  Rabbah said: What is R. Jose's reason? He is of the opinion that a woman who plays the harlot makes use of an absorbent in order to prevent conception. Said Abaye to him: This  is intelligible in the case of a proselyte; as her intention is to embrace the Jewish faith she is careful  in order to know the distinction between the seed that was sown in holiness and the seed that was sown in unholiness. It  is also [intelligible In the case of] a captive and a slave; since on hearing from their masters  they exercise care.  How is this  to be applied. however, in the case of one who is liberated through the loss of a tooth or an eye?  And were you to suggest that wherever something unexpected happens  R. Jose admits,  surely it was taught:  A woman who had been outraged or seduced must wait three months; so R. Judah. R. Jose permits immediate betrothal and marriage!  — Rather, said Abaye,  a woman playing the harlot turns over In order to prevent conception.  And the other?  -There is the apprehension that she might not have turned over properly. IF THEY WERE PRIESTLY WOMEN etc. Only  priestly women but not an Israelitish woman?  -Read, 'If they were the wives of priests'.  Only' 'priests' wives,'  but not Israelites' wives?  Surely R. Amram said, 'The following statement was made to us by R. Shesheth who threw light on the subject  from our Mishnah:  An Israelite's wife  who was outraged, though she is permitted to her husband, is disqualified from the priesthood.  — Raba replied: It is this that was meant:  IF THEY WERE PRIESTLY WOMEN  married to Israelites THEY ARE DISQUALIFIED from eating terumah at their parents' home.