Kiddushin, Daf Nun, Part 3

 

Introduction

Today s section begins with a new mishnah.

 

מתני׳ האומר לשלוחו צא וקדש לי אשה פלונית במקום פלוני והלך וקדשה במקום אחר אינה מקודשת

הרי היא במקום פלוני וקדשה במקום אחר הרי זו מקודשת

 

1)    If he says to his agent, Go out and betroth to me so-and-so in such and such a place, and he goes and betroths her elsewhere, she is not betrothed.

2)    She is in such and such a place, and he betroths her elsewhere, she is betrothed.

 

In both sections, a husband appoints an agent to betroth his wife and gives the agent instructions as to where to betroth the woman. If the husband tells the agent to betroth the woman in a certain place, she is not betrothed if the agent betroths her in another place. In such a case we can assume that the husband wanted the betrothal to be performed in that specific place.

However, if the husband merely tells the agent where to find the woman, the husband does not necessarily care if she is really somewhere else. He was only helping the agent locate her. Therefore the betrothal is valid no matter where the agent eventually finds her.

 

גמ׳ ותנן נמי גבי גיטין האומר תנו גט זה לאשתי במקום פלוני ונתנו לה במקום אחר פסול הרי היא במקום פלוני ונתנו לה במקום אחר כשר

 

GEMARA. Now, the same was taught about divorce: If he says: Give my wife a get in such and such a place, and he gives it to her elsewhere, it is invalid.

She is in such and such a place, and he gives it to her elsewhere, it is valid.

 

Virtually the same mishnah is taught in Gittin with regard to an agent who gives a get.

 

וצריכא דאי אשמעינן גבי קידושין במקום דלקורבה קאתי בהאי אתרא רחמו לי ולא ממלי מילי עלוי בהאי אתרא סנו לי ממלי מילי עלוי

אבל גבי גיטין דלרחוקה קאתי אימר לא איכפת ליה

 

And both are necessary. For if it taught us this of kiddushin, where he comes to draw her near to himself, [he may have thought:] In this place they love me and they will not say anything against me, but in that place I am hated and they will they say things against me.

But in respect to divorce, where he comes to distance her, I might argue that he does not care.

 

The Talmud now explains why we need both mishnayot. Had we only the mishnah about kiddushin, I might have thought that a man cares about where he betroths a woman because in some places people like him and in others people do not. He does not want the agent to betroth her in a place where people might say bad things about him.

But when it comes to divorce, he would not care if people like him or not, therefore he might not care where the agent delivers the get. Thus we needed a mishnah to teach us that even with regard to gittin, if he says give my wife a divorce in such and such a place the get must be given in that particular place.

 

ואי אשמועינן גבי גירושין בהאי אתרא ניחא ליה דניבזי בהאי אתרא לא ניחא ליה אבל גבי קידושין אימא לא איכפת ליה צריכא

 

And if it taught us this of divorce, [I might argue] in this place he is willing to be disgraced, but not in the other; [whereas] in respect to betrothal, I might argue that he does not care. Thus [both are] necessary.

 

On the other hand, divorce is somewhat disgraceful (perhaps too strong a word, but that does seem to be the correct translation). Therefore, he might not want to divorce her in certain places. But betrothal is not disgraceful and therefore he might not care.

Thus we need both mishnayot to teach us that the same rule applies in both cases.