Kiddushin - Daf 50
- דברים שבלב אינם דברים – ex. Man sold his possessions with the intention of moving to Eretz Yisroel
A man sold his possessions with the intention of moving to Eretz Yisroel but did not mention this at the time of sale. He was ultimately prevented from going and wanted to retract the sales. Rava said: הוי דברים שבלב – [His thoughts] are intentions in his heart, ודברים שבלב אינם דברים – and unexpressed intentions in the heart are not considered binding intentions. The Gemara seeks a source for this principle. Although a person can be forced to agree to bring a korban he vowed to bring, this does not prove that his unstated wish not to bring it is not recognized. Rather, we are certain that in truth, the person wants to obtain the atonement afforded from his korban, and his final agreement reflects his true state of mind. Similarly, when one is forced to divorce his wife (when he is required to), the get is valid, even if he initially refused to divorce her. This, too, does not prove that his opposition to divorcing is immaterial, because we are certain that he truly wishes to do what the Rabbis instruct him to. Ultimately, a proof is brought from a Mishnah discussing someone who sent a shaliach to fetch coins and spend them for him, and the money turned out to be hekdesh. Although the owner says he intended for different money to be used, the owner is liable for me’ilah, because his unexpressed intentions are immaterial.
- חוששין לסבלונות
The Mishnah teaches that if someone was mekadesh for less than a perutah, and afterwards sent bridal gifts to her, she is still not married, שמחמת קידושין הראשונים שלח – because he sent them based on the original ineffective marriage and did not intend them as new kiddushin money. When someone sends bridals gifts before having attempted kiddushin, Rav Huna says: חוששין לסבלונות – we are concerned that the bridal gifts were intended as kiddushin. This is different from the Mishnah, where kiddushin was previously attempted (albeit unsuccessfully), and we assume that he erroneously relied on his first kiddushin. Rav Pappa said that where people customarily are mekadesh before sending gifts, we are concerned that gifts sent before kiddushin are actually intended as kiddushin (the Gemara adds that this is so even if a minority of people do the reverse). If they usually send gifts before kiddushin, we are not concerned that gifts were sent for kiddushin.
- כל שאינו בזה אחר זה אפילו בבת אחת אינו – ex. one who is mekadesh two sisters at same time
The next Mishnah states: המקדש אשה ובתה – One who is mekadesh a woman and her daughter simultaneously, או אשה ואחותה כאחת – or a woman and her sister simultaneously, אינן מקודשות – neither woman is married. Rami bar Chama initially explains this based on a passuk: אשה אל אחותה לא תקח לצרור – do not take a woman in addition to her sister, making them rival wives, which teaches that if he attempts to marry both at once, no kiddushin takes place at all. Rava rejects this derashah, because the Torah teaches that relations with the second sister are punishable by kares, which would not be the case if kiddushin was ineffective with either. Rather, the passuk discusses marrying one sister after the other (so the first marriage took effect), and our Mishnah’s ruling is based on Rabbah’s principle: כל שאינו בזה אחר זה – Whatever cannot take effect one after the other, אפילו בבת אחת אינו – even when done simultaneously, it cannot take effect. Since marrying one woman makes subsequent kiddushin with a sister ineffective, so marrying both simultaneously does not effect any kiddushin.
