Yevamot

He,  [on hearing the last reply] said to him:  It was my intention to raise objections against your view  from [the Rabbinical laws which relate to] the uncircumcised,  sprinkling,  the knife [of circumcision],  the linen cloak with zizith,  the lambs of Pentecost,  the shofar  and the lulab;  now, however, that you taught us that abstention from the performance of an act  is not regarded as an abrogation [of the law, I have nothing to say since] all these are also cases of abstention. Come and hear: Unto him ye shall hearken,  even if he tells you. 'Transgress any of all the commandments of the Torah' as in the case, for instance, of Elijah on Mount Carmel,  obey him in every respect in accordance with the needs of the hour!  — There it is different,  for it is written, 'Unto him shall ye hearken'. Then let [Rabbinic law] be deduced from it! — The safeguarding  of a cause is different. Come and hear: If he  annulled [his letter of divorce]  it is annulled: so Rabbi. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, however, said: He may neither annul it nor add a single condition to it,  since, otherwise,  of what avail is the authority  of the Beth din.  Now, though here, the letter of divorce may be annulled  in accordance with Pentateuchal law, we allow a married woman,  owing to the power  of Beth din,  to marry anyone in the world!  — Anyone who betroths [a woman] does so in implicit compliance with the ordinances  of the Rabbis,  and the Rabbis have [in this case]  cancelled the [original] betrothal. Said Rabina to R. Ashi: This  is a quite satisfactory explanation where betrothal was effected by means of money;  what, however. can be said [in a case where betrothal was effected] by cohabitation! — The Rabbis  have assigned  to such a cohabitation the character of mere prostitution. Come and hear: R. Eleazar b. Jacob stated, 'I heard that even without any Pentateuchal [authority for their rulings]. Beth din may administer flogging and [death] penalties; not, however, for the purpose of transgressing the words of the Torah but in order to make a fence for the Torah. And it once happened that a man rode on horseback on the Sabbath in the days of the Greeks,  and he was brought before Beth din and was stoned; not because he deserved this penalty, but because the exigencies of the hour demanded it. And another incident occurred with a man who had intercourse with  his wife under a fig tree, and he was brought before Beth din and flogged; not because he deserved such a penalty, but because the exigencies of the hour demanded it!  To safeguard a cause is different. NEITHER OF THEM MAY DEFILE HIMSELF FOR HER. Whence is this derived? — From what is written in Scripture. Except for his kin that is near unto him,  and a Master stated that 'his kin' means his wife;  while it was also written, The husband shall not defile himself, among his people, to prof- ane himself;  [implying that] there is a husband, then, who may, and there is a husband who may not defile himself; how, then [are these contradictory laws to be reconciled]? He may defile himself for his lawful wife but he may not defile himself for his unlawful wife. NEITHER OF THEM HAS A CLAIM UPON ANYTHING SHE MAY FIND etc. [because] what is the reason why the Rabbis ruled that a wife's finds belong to her husband? In order that he may bear no hatred against her; but, here, let him bear against her ever so much hatred! OR MAKE WITH HER HANDS, [because] for what reason did the Rabbis rule that the work of her hands belonged to her husband? Because she receives from him her maintenance;  but here, since she receives no maintenance, her handiwork does not belong to him. OR TO THE RIGHT OF INVALIDATING HER VOWS, [since] what is the reason why the All Merciful said that a husband may annul [his wife's vows]? In order that she may not become repulsive; here, however, let her become ever so repulsive! IF SHE WAS THE DAUGHTER OF AN ISRAELITE, SHE BECOMES DISQUALIFIED FROM MARRYING A PRIEST etc.