Kiddushin, Daf Yod Bet, Part 6

 

Introduction

Another story of a man who uses an object to betroth a woman.

 

ההוא גברא דאקדיש בשוטיתא דאסא בשוקא

שלחה רב אחא בר הונא לקמיה דרב יוסף כה"ג מאי

 

A certain man betrothed [a woman] with a myrtle branch in a market place.

R. Aha b. Huna sent [a question] to R. Joseph: What is the rule in such a case?

 

שלח ליה נגדיה כרב ואצטריך גיטא כשמואל

דרב מנגיד על דמקדש בשוקא ועל דמקדש בביאה ועל דמקדש בלא שידוכי ועל דמבטיל גיטא ועל דמסר מודעא אגיטא ועל דמצער שלוחא דרבנן ועל דחלה שמתא עילויה תלתין יומין ועל חתנא דדייר בי חמוה

 

He sent back: Have him lashed, in accordance with Rav; and require from him a divorce, in accordance with Shmuel.

For Rav lashed any man who betrothed [a woman] in a market place, or by intercourse, or without [previous] shiddukhin, or who annulled a divorce, or who issued a declaration annuling a divorce, or harassed an agent of the Rabbis, or permitted a ban to remain on him thirty days, and a son-in-law who dwells in his mother-in-law’s house thirty days.

 

R. Joseph sends back two laws. We will start with the second the marriage is valid and therefore she requires a divorce, should she want to marry someone else. This is true even though the myrtle branch is probably not worth a perutah, because, as Shmuel taught, we are concerned lest the object is worth a perutah somewhere else.

However, he is also to be lashed for Rav said that it is immodest to betroth a woman in the marketplace. This begins a list of actions that are technically legal but should not be done. Betrothal can, according to the mishnah, be performed through intercourse. But Rav does not allow it and punishes one who does so. Shiddukhin are akin to modern betrothal a non-legal commitment to marry made by the two families. While a man can betroth a woman without arranging it with her parents, Rav would punish one who does so. Annulling a divorce before the get arrives in the woman s hand is possible. But since it creates so many potential problems, namely the woman might think she is divorced when she is not, Rav punishes one who does so.

The next two have to do with respect for rabbinic authority. Harassing a messenger of the rabbis shows lack of respect for the rabbis.

The rabbis have the power to put someone under the ban (to excommunicate him) in order to force him to act in accordance with the law, for instance to pay a debt. Someone who allows this ban to remain for over thirty days is punished additionally by lashes.

The final case is also different. A son-in-law should not live with his mother-in-law for fear of sexual impropriety.

 

דדייר אין חליף לא והא ההוא חתנא דחליף אבבא דבי חמוה ונגדיה רב ששת

ההוא מידם הות דיימא חמתיה מיניה

 

One who dwelt [with his mother-in-law] he would [lash], but not one who merely passed by [his mother-in-law’s house]? But wasn t there a certain son-in-law who passed by his mother-in-law’s door, and R. Sheshet lashed him for it? In that case there was suspicion about him and his mother-in-law.

 

Rav would lash a son-in-law only for living with his mother-in-law, but not for simply passing by her house. R. Sheshet, though, once lashed a son-in-law for merely passing by his mother-in-law s house. But that was because there was already suspicion about them.

We should note that it might not have been uncommon for a mother-in-law to be a similar age to her son-in-law. If men got married about ten years later than women, the mother-in-law might have been closer to him in age than his wife.

 

נהרדעי אמרי בכולהו לא מנגיד רב אלא על דמקדש בביאה בלא שידוכי ואיכא דאמרי ואפילו בשידוכי נמי משום פריצותא

 

The Nehardeans said: Rav would only lash for betrothing [a woman] by intercourse without shiddukin. And there are those who say even with shiddukhin, because of licentiousness.

 

The Nehardeans, a group of rabbis who lived in the city of Nehardea, taught a much shorter list of things Rav (an earlier amora) would beat men for. According the Nehardeans, Rav would lash only those who betrothed through intercourse, according to one version without shiddukhin, and according to the other even with shiddukhin. Betrothing by intercourse is, while a valid form of kiddushin, is considered licentious behavior.