Kiddushin

BOTH MUST GIVE HER A DIVORCE;1 BUT IF THEY WISH, ONE GIVES A DIVORCE, AND THE OTHER MARRIES HER. LIKEWISE, IF A WOMAN AUTHORIZES HER AGENT TO GIVE HER IN BETROTHAL, AND SHE GOES AND BETROTHS HERSELF [TO ANOTHER]: IF HER OWN PRECEDED, HER BETROTHAL IS VALID; IF HER AGENT'S PRECEDED, HIS BETROTHAL IS VALID. AND IF THEY DO NOT KNOW, BOTH MUST GIVE HER A DIVORCE; BUT IF THEY WISH, ONE GIVES A DIVORCE AND THE OTHER MARRIES HER. GEMARA. And [both] are necessary. For if we were told [this] of him [the father], that is because a man is well-informed in matters of genealogy;2 but as for a woman, who is not well-informed in matters of genealogy, I would say that her kiddushin is invalid.3 And if we were told this of her, that is because a woman carefully investigates and [then] marries; but as for him [her father], I might argue that he does not care.4 Thus they are necessary. It was stated: If her father gives her in betrothal on the road, and she betroths herself in the town [to another], and she is now a bogereth,5 Rab said: Behold, she stands6 a bogereth before us!7 Samuel said: We regard8 the kiddushin by both.9 When [did the betrothals take place]? Shall we say, within the six [months],10 — can Rab say in this case, ‘Behold, she stands a bogereth before us’ — surely she has only now become a bogereth!11 But if after six months, — can Samuel say in this case, ‘We regard the kiddushin by both’ — surely Samuel said: Between the states of na'arah and bogereth there is only six months! This arises only if the betrothal took place on the day that completed the six [months]: Rab said: ‘Behold she stands a boger'eth before us’ — since she is now a bogereth, [we assume] she was a bogereth in the morning too. But Samuel maintains, she may have brought the ‘evidences’ [of bogereth]12 only just now. Now, according to Samuel, wherein does it differ from mikweh?13 For we learnt: If a mikweh is measured and found to be deficient:14 all acts of purification which have heretofore been effected through it, whether in private or in public ground, are unclean!15 — There it is different, because we can argue, Let the unclean person [or thing] stand in his presumptive status,16 and say that he did not perform tebillah.17 On the contrary, let the mikweh stand in its presumptive status,18 and say that it was not deficient?19 — But it is deficient before you! Then here too, she stands a bogereth before you! — She has [only] just now matured. Then there too, [let us say, only] just now has it become deficient? — There, there are two unfavourable conditions; 20 here, there is [only] one.21 Again, according to Samuel, wherein does it differ from ‘barrel’? For it was taught: If one was wont to examine a barrel [of wine]22 in order continually to separate [terumah for other barrels] in reliance thereon,23 and then it was found to be acid:24 for full three days it is certain; there after it is doubtful.25 Now, we opposed ‘barrel’ to ‘mikweh’: why is the latter certain and the former doubt — ful?26 And R. Hanina of Sura answered: Who is the authority of [the Baraitha about the] ‘barrel’? R. Simeon, who also in the case of the mikweh makes it doubtful. For it was taught: All acts of purification which have been heretofore effected through it, whether in private or in public ground, are unclean. R. Simeon ruled: In public ground, they are clean; in private ground, they are in suspense.27 But in the view of the Rabbis it is retrospectively tebel!28 — There it is different, because one can say: ‘Let the tebel stand in its presumptive status and say that it was not made fit.’ On the contrary, let the wine stand in its presumptive status and say that it had not turned acid? — But lo! it is acid before you. Then here too, she stands a bogereth before you? — She has [only] just now become a bogereth. Then here too [let us say,] ‘It has [only] just now turned acid’? — There, there are two unfavourable conditions;29 but here there is only one.30 Shall we say: It is a dispute of Tannaim? if her agent betroths her to one of purer descent her own act shall be null. provisionally, in case his agent would not succeed in securing her betrothal. clean, v. Sot. 28b. Here, wherever it is, the objects are unclean. This proves that we do not regard it as a matter of doubt, but assume that since the mikweh is deficient now, it was so before too. Then, by analogy, why not assume that since the woman is a bogereth now, she was one from the beginning of the day? states, she has no presumptive status for either, since it is the day of change. before the present one it was certainly wine, and any separation made then is valid. Afterwards it is doubtful; hence on the one hand, another separation must be made; on the other, what was already separated is forbidden to a lay Israelite, as it may still have been wine, (ii) For three days before this present examination it was certainly acid, and any separation made then is invalid. But before that it is doubtful, as explained in (i); for fuller notes v. B.B. (Sonc. ed.) p. 399. the barrel, as explained in the preceding note.