Kiddushin, Daf Nun Aleph, Part 3

 

Introduction

Today s sugya continues to discuss the topic disputed in yesterday s sugya whether kiddushin that cannot be followed by intercourse are valid kiddushin.

To recall Abaye holds that these kiddushin are valid, whereas Rava holds that they are not.

 

לרבא קשיא רישא לאביי קשיא סיפא

אביי מתרץ לטעמיה רבא מתרץ לטעמיה

אביי מתרץ לטעמיה המקדש אשה ובתה או אשה ואחותה כאחת אינן מקודשות הא אחת מאשה ובתה מאשה ואחותה מקודשת

ואם אמר הראויה לביאה תתקדש לי אינה מקודשת

ומעשה נמי בחמש נשים ובהן שתי אחיות וליקט אחד כלכלה של תאנים ואמר הראויה לי מכם תתקדש לי ואמרו חכמים אין אחיות מקודשות

 

On Rava s view, the first clause is difficult; on Abaye s, the second.

Abaye resolves it according to his opinion: If he betroths a woman and her daughter or a woman and her sister simultaneously, they are not betrothed; but if [he betrothed] one of a woman and her daughter or of a woman and her sister, she is betrothed.

But if he says: The one of you who is eligible for intercourse, let her be betrothed to me, she is not betrothed.

And thus it once happened to five women, among whom were two sisters, that a man gathered a basket of figs and said, The one of you who is eligible [for intercourse], let her be betrothed to me. The sages then ruled: the sisters are not betrothed.

 

Abaye here solves the entire mishnah such that according to both clauses, kiddushin that cannot be followed by intercourse are valid kiddushin.

Clause 1: If he betroths two women simultaneously that cannot be betrothed consecutively, neither are betrothed. This follows Rabbah s rule.

Deduction, part 1: If he betroths only one of these women, both are doubtfully betrothed. The kiddushin are essentially valid even though they cannot be followed by intercourse.

Deduction, part 2: If he explicitly says that he is betrothing only the one who is allowed to have sex with him, neither is betrothed. Since he does not know which one he is betrothing, neither of them can have sex with him.

Clause 2: This is exactly what the husband said. The sisters are not married not because kiddushin that cannot be followed by intercourse are not valid but because he explicitly stated that he was betrothing only those eligible for intercourse. Thus Abaye has resolved this clause with his opinion.

 

ורבא מתרץ לטעמיה המקדש אחת מאשה ובתה או אחת מאשה ואחותה נעשה כמי שקידש אשה ובתה או אשה ואחותה כאחת ואינן מקודשות

ומעשה נמי בחמש נשים ובהם שתי אחיות וליקט אחד כלכלה של תאנים ואמר הרי כולכם ואחת משתי אחיות מקודשות לי בכלכלה זו ואמרו חכמים אין אחיות מקודשות

 

Rava resolved it with his opinion: If a man betroths one of a woman and her daughter or a woman and her sister, it is as though he betrothed a woman and her daughter or a woman and her sister simultaneously, and they are not betrothed.

And it thus happened to five women, among whom were two sisters, that a man gathered a basket of figs and declared, Behold, all of you, and one of the two sisters, are betrothed to me with this basket and the sages ruled: the sisters are not betrothed.

 

Rava resolves it so the mishnah would not imply that kiddushin that cannot be followed by intercourse are kiddushin.

Clause 1: A man says to two women one of you is betrothed to me. Note that this is not the precise language in the mishnah, but it is like the case directly mentioned in the mishnah. Rava has now resolved the mishnah with his opinion. Kiddushin that cannot be followed by intercourse, like marrying one of two sisters without knowing which he married, are not valid kiddushin. Neither woman needs a get.

Clause 2: This clause essentially describes the same scenario is the first clause. He said one of the two sisters. Since he cannot tell which sister he married, neither are betrothed.