Commentary for Kiddushin 102:7
הא בוגרות קתני מאי בוגרות בוגרות דעלמא אי הכי מאי למימרא
is taught! - By bogeroth, bogeroth in general are meant.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in general when a man betroths his daughter without naming her, an adult is not meant.');"><sup>8</sup></span> If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he has only one adult and one minor daughter.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
The Talmud raises a difficulty—how can we say there was only one adult daughter when the mishnah uses the plural?
The answer is that the mishnah refers to laws concerning adult daughters in general, not this specific case. The plural is a category not a detail of the case.
But now the mishnah is overly simple—clearly the father meant to betroth the younger daughter, the only daughter he has the power to betroth?
To resolve this, the Talmud says that the actual case is where the adult daughter appointed the father to betroth her. In this case, the father does have the power to betroth her. Nevertheless, we assume he betrothed the minor daughter because he has the benefit there of receiving the kiddushin money.
The answer is that the mishnah refers to laws concerning adult daughters in general, not this specific case. The plural is a category not a detail of the case.
But now the mishnah is overly simple—clearly the father meant to betroth the younger daughter, the only daughter he has the power to betroth?
To resolve this, the Talmud says that the actual case is where the adult daughter appointed the father to betroth her. In this case, the father does have the power to betroth her. Nevertheless, we assume he betrothed the minor daughter because he has the benefit there of receiving the kiddushin money.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy