Kiddushin - Daf 45
- A קטנה who fell to yibum after accepting kiddushin
The Gemara continues discussing a קטנה who accepted kiddushin without her father’s knowledge: מת ונפלה לפני אחיו ליבום – if [her husband] died and she fell to his brothers for yibum, Rav says: ממאנת למאמרו – if a brother performed maamer, she must perform miun to void his maamer, ואינה ממאנת לזיקתו – but if he did not perform maamer, she need not perform miun to sever the zikah (bond to the yavam). He explains that if a yavam did maamer, she requires a get, chalitzah, and miun to remarry. She needs a get, since the father may have agreed to the second husband’s kiddushin. She requires chalitzah, since he may have agreed to the first husband’s kiddushin, rendering her a yevamah upon his death. She requires miun, since the father may not have agreed to either kiddushin, and she is not married to the second husband. As on Daf 44, there is a concern that people seeing her receive a get will conclude the marriage was legitimate, and mistakenly assume his subsequent marriage to her sister is invalid.
If the yavam did not perform maamer, she only requires chalitzah. Here, everyone will recognize that his subsequent marriage with her sister is valid, because הכל יודעים אחות חלוצה דרבנן – everyone knows that a chalutzah’s sister is only prohibited Rabbinically, and kiddushin with her is effective.
- A קטנה who accepted kiddushin contrary to her father’s commitment
An incident is related in which a man said he wanted his daughter to marry one of his relatives, and his wife wanted her to marry one of her relatives. Eventually, she compelled him to agree to her terms. They made a celebratory feast, and while everyone was eating and drinking, a relative of his was secretly mekadesh the girl without her father’s knowledge. Abaye said that we assume the father did not agree to this marriage, because he had committed to give his daughter to one of his wife’s relatives, and the Torah says: שארית ישראל לא יעשו עולה – the remnant of Yisroel will not do wrong, ולא ידברו כזב – and will not speak falsehood. Rava ruled the same way, but for a different reason: חזקה אין אדם טורח בסעודה ומפסידה – There is an assumption that a person will not bother to prepare a feast, only to later ruin it. Since a feast was prepared for marriage to his wife’s relative, he would not agree to other kiddushin. A practical difference would emerge where the father did not prepare a feast for the agreed-upon marriage.
- A קטנה, married with her father’s knowledge, had nisuin while he was away
The Gemara discusses a קטנה who accepted kiddushin with her father’s knowledge, והלך אביה למדינת הים – and her father went to a foreign country, ועמדה ונישאת – and she went and had nisuin with her husband in her father’s absence. Rav says: אוכלת בתרומה עד שיבא אביה וימחה – she may eat terumah if she married a Kohen until her father returns and protests the nisuin. Since he agreed to the kiddushin, we assume he is agreeable to nisuin until he protests. Rav Assi says: אינה אוכלת – she cannot eat [terumah], שמא יבוא אביה וימחה – for perhaps her father will return and protest the nisuin, ונמצאת זרה אוכלת בתרומה למפרע – and it will emerge, retroactively, that she was a non-Kohen eating terumah. Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchok adds: ומודה רב שאם מתה אינו יורשה – Rav concedes that if she dies, [the husband] does not inherit her. Although she may eat terumah, אוקי ממונא בחזקת מריה – contested money remains in the owner’s possession, since the nisuin’s validity is not certain.
The Gemara then cites two disputes about how to interpret the father’s silence when his daughter had nisuin without his knowledge (when he was local), or when she accepted kiddushin and nisuin without his knowledge.
