THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
Previous daf
Kidushin, 44
KIDUSHIN 44 - dedicated by Rav Mordechai Rabin (London/Har Nof), on the day
of the Yahrzeit of his mother (28 Sivan).
|
1) A NA'ARAH'S ABILITY TO RECEIVE HER GET AND KIDUSHIN
QUESTION: The Gemara (43b) quotes the Mishnah in Gitin (64b) in which the
Rabanan state that both a Na'arah Me'urasah and her father may accept her
Get. Rebbi Yehudah there argues and says that only her father may accept her
Get. Rebbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish argue whether the Machlokes between
Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabanan applies also to Kidushin. May a Na'arah accept
her own Kidushin, or may only her father accept it? Reish Lakish says that
the same Machlokes applies to Kidushin, and, therefore, according to the
Rabanan a Na'arah may accept her Kidushin on her own. Rebbi Yochanan argues
and says that with regard to Kidushin, the Rabanan agree with Rebbi Yehudah
that a Na'arah cannot accept Kidushin on her own, but that her father must
accept it for her.
The Gemara here cites our Mishnah (41a) as a challenge to the opinion of
Reish Lakish. The Mishnah says that a father may marry off his daughter when
she is a Na'arah, "either he or his Shali'ach." The Mishnah does not say
that "either *she* or *her* Shali'ach" can accept her own Kidushin. From
this the Gemara infers that a Na'arah *cannot* accept her own Kidushin, in
contrast to the opinion of Reish Lakish. In the conclusion of the Gemara,
Reish Lakish answers that the Mishnah is the view of Rebbi Shimon who holds
like Rebbi Yehudah with regard to Shelichus, and thus the Mishnah could not
say "she or her Shali'ach" can accept Kidushin.
What is the Gemara's question on Reish Lakish from the Mishnah? Perhaps when
the Mishnah says that "he or his Shali'ach" may accept Kidushin for his
daughter, it is not excluding the Na'arah herself from accepting Kidushin,
but rather it is excluding the Na'arah's *Shali'ach* from accepting Kidushin
(as the Gemara concludes with regard to Gitin, that the Rabanan (in the
Mishnah in Gitin) agree that only the Na'arah herself can receive her Get,
but she cannot appoint a Shali'ach to receive it for her). Perhaps the
Na'arah is excluded only from the right to appoint a Shali'ach but not from
the ability to receive the Kidushin herself! Since she may accept Kidushin
for herself, the Mishnah is not a question on the view of Reish Lakish!
ANSWER: The RITVA and RASHBA answer that if that were the case, then the
Mishnah should not have referred to the father's own ability to receive the
Kidushin ("either *he* or his Shali'ach"), but rather it should have
mentioned only that his Shali'ach may accept Kidushin for his daughter.
Since the Mishnah mentions both him and his Shali'ach, we can assume that
the Tana's intention is to exclude a Na'arah from both of these powers --
she cannot make a Shali'ach to receive her Kidushin, and nor may she receive
it herself. (See alternative answer of SHITAH LO NODA L'MI.)
However, according to the Ritva and Rashba who explain the Gemara's proof
from our Mishnah, the inference from the Mishnah is not from the inability
of the Na'arah to appoint a Shali'ach (as on 44b), but rather from the
Na'arah's own inability to receive the Get by herself. According to this
explanation, why does the Gemara refer to our Mishnah as "Shelichus" and say
that with regard to Shelichus our Tana holds like Rebbi Yehudah? According
to these Rishonim, our Sugya is not discussing Shelichus at all, but rather
it is discussing the difference between the father and the Na'arah
themselves!
The MAHARSHA answers that even according to the Rabanan who hold that a
Na'arah may receive a Get or Kidushin herself, when she receives the Get or
Kidushin she is not operating with her own power but rather as an outgrowth
of her father's rights. The Maharsha proves this by pointing out the two
sides of the Gemara's question later (44b): is a Ketanah like the Yad (hand)
of the father (and therefore she may appoint a Shali'ach) or is a Ketanah
like the Chatzer of the father (and therefore she may not appoint a
Shali'ach)? Both sides view the Ketanah as working for her father -- either
as his Yad or as his Chatzer. Neither side views her as having her own
independent power. Therefore, explains the Maharsha, even when discussing
the Na'arah's own ability to receive a Get or Kidushin, we refer to it as
Shelichus, since she is, in effect, the Shali'ach of her father, since her
power to do so is received from him.
The RASHBA in Gitin (64b) cites this Gemara as another proof to the view of
the RIF mentioned earlier (Insights to Kidushin 43b) who holds that
according to the Rabanan, only a Na'arah can receive her Get and not a
Ketanah. Since we see that the Gemara refers to the ability of a Na'arah to
receive her Get or Kidushin as Shelichus, we see that she really has no
power of her own, but she receives her ability from her father. A Ketanah,
therefore, is the same, and she may receive a Get by herself only after her
father dies, because of "Nisroknah." (A. Kronengold)
44b
3) A KETANAH WHO ACCEPTS KIDUSHIN WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF HER FATHER
QUESTION: Shmuel states that a Ketanah who accepted Kidushin from a man
without the knowledge of her father needs a Get and must do Mi'un. The
Gemara explains that both a Get and Mi'un are necessary, because perhaps the
father later consented to the Kidushin, in which case the Kidushin is valid
mid'Oraisa and requires a Get to absolve it. Mi'un is necessary because
perhaps the father did not consent, and the Kidushin is not valid
mid'Oraisa. However, since she receives a Get, people might think that the
Kidushin *was* valid, and when her former "husband" marries her sister, they
will assume that the Kidushin with her sister is not binding (when it really
is binding). Therefore, both a Get and Mi'un are necessary.
Rav Nachman adds that the necessity for a Get is only when the husband of
the Ketanah discussed the marriage with her father before the Kidushin, and
thus when her father's consent becomes known, the Kidushin turns out to be
effective retroactively (l'Mafrei'a), from its start (as Rashi explains in
DH v'Hu sh'Shidchu).
The Gemara assumes that if we can verify the consent of the father, then the
Kidushin that was accepted by the Ketanah will be valid.
There seem to be a number of problems with a Kidushin done in this manner.
First, a Katan or Ketanah does not have Da'as to perform a Kinyan (see 44a),
so how can the Ketanah acquire the Kesef of Kidushin for herself?
Second, from the fact that the Gemara says that the consent of the father is
necessary in order for her act of Kidushin to be effective, it must be that
she is carrying out the father's will and is acting as his Shali'ach. How
can this be reconciled with the previous Sugya that teaches that Shelichus
does not apply to a Katan or Ketanah? (Even though the Gemara says
specifically that a Katan cannot *appoint* a Shali'ach and it does not say
that a Katan cannot *be appointed* as a Shali'ach, nevertheless, since it
learns this from a verse, it should work both ways, and a Katan should not
be able to become a Shali'ach just like he cannot appoint a Shali'ach, as
the Rishonim point out.)
Third, why is clarifying the consent of the father at a later time
sufficient for the Kidushin to take effect? It should be necessary to know
the will of the father at the moment that the daughter accepts the Kidushin
in order for her act to be considered an act of Shelichus on behalf of her
father! How does her father's consent work retroactively to make her a
Shali'ach, when -- at the moment she performed the act -- she was not his
Shali'ach?
ANSWER: The ROSH (1:25) on the Gemara earlier (19a) makes two amendments to
the limitations of the act of a Katan. First, even though a Katan cannot
perform an act of Kinyan, nevertheless, when someone else is Makneh
something to him, he has the power to be Koneh the item. The Da'as of the
Makneh who is putting the object into the possession of the Katan assists
the Katan in his act of making a Kinyan for himself. Since every Kidushin
has a Makneh (the man who is being Mekadesh the woman), a Ketanah therefore
is eligible to participate in the act of the Kinyan of Kidushin.
Second, when discussing Shelichus, we normally mean that Reuven, the
Shali'ach, does something on behalf of Shimon, the Meshale'ach, for the
benefit and interest of Shimon, the Meshale'ach. A Katan is certainly not
qualified to participate in this type of Shelichus. However, when a Ketanah
acts in the capacity of a Shali'ach for her father to be Mekabel her
Kidushin, the situation is different than the normal case of Shelichus. In
this case of Shelichus, the Shali'ach (the daughter) is the beneficiary of
the act, and not the Meshale'ach (the father). Instead of the Shali'ach
doing the act for the benefit of the Meshale'ach, in this case the Shali'ach
is doing the act for her own benefit. A Katan or Ketanah has the power to do
something which results in an outcome for himself.
(b) The RAN says that the Ketanah's ability to accept Kidushin works through
*Zechiyah* and not through regular Shelichus. The will of the father at the
later time is just a sign that this was the father's will all along, and
therefore the Ketanah had the power to act as a Shali'ach even without any
specific appointment, through the law of Zechiyah.
(c) The RITVA explains the Gemara in a different way altogether because of
the above questions. The Ritva maintains that the Kidushin is valid only
"mi'Kan ul'ha'Ba," from the time that the father's consent is clarified, and
onward. (See the Ritva, who explains that this is similar to the Halachah of
Arev, and therefore it is necessary that the money of Kidushin still be
extant in the hands of the girl. Once the will of the father is clarified,
the fact that the Mekadesh does not take back the money shows that he *now*
wants to be Mekadesh the girl, with the consent of her father, and is like
an Arev.)
Next daf
|