Gittin 90A

והלכתא: מותרת לשניהם.

And the halakha is that she is permitted to both of them.

מתני׳ בית שמאי אומרים: לא יגרש אדם את אשתו, אלא אם כן מצא בה דבר ערוה ⁠– שנאמר: ״כי מצא בה ערות דבר״.

Mishnah: Beit Shammai say: A man may not divorce his wife unless he finds out about her having engaged in a matter of forbidden sex [devar erva], i.e., she committed adultery or is suspected of doing so, as it is stated: “Because he has found some unseemly matter [ervat davar] in her, and he writes her a scroll of severance” (Deuteronomy 24:1).

ובית הלל אומרים: אפילו הקדיחה תבשילו ⁠– שנאמר: ״כי מצא בה ערות דבר״.

And Beit Hillel say: He may divorce her even due to a minor issue, e.g., because she burned or over-salted his dish, as it is stated: “Because he has found some unseemly matter in her,” meaning that he found any type of shortcoming in her.

רבי עקיבא אומר: אפילו מצא אחרת נאה הימנה ⁠– שנאמר: ״והיה אם לא תמצא חן בעיניו״.

R' Akiva says: He may divorce her even if he found another woman who is better looking than her and wishes to marry her, as it is stated in that verse: “And it comes to pass, if she finds no favor in his eyes” (Deuteronomy 24:1).

גמ׳ תניא, אמרו בית הלל לבית שמאי: והלא כבר נאמר ״דבר״! אמרו להם בית שמאי: והלא כבר נאמר ״ערות״!

Talmud: It is taught in a baraita that Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: But isn’t the word “matter” already stated in the verse, indicating that any disadvantageous matter is a legitimate reason for divorce? Beit Shammai said to them: But isn’t the word “unseemly [ervat]” already stated?