Commentary for Kiddushin 11:14
אמר רב הונא אמר שמואל הלכה כר' יוסי א"ל רב יימר לרב אשי ואלא הא דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כל שאינו יודע בטיב גיטין וקידושין לא יהא לו עסק עמהם אפילו לא שמיע ליה הא דרב הונא אמר שמואל א"ל אין הכי נמי :
But if he was speaking to her about her divorce or kiddushin, then even if he said nothing at all [but gave her money], she is also [betrothed]. For we learnt: If man was speaking to a woman on matters concerning her divorce or betrothal, and gave her her divorce or kiddushin, but made no explicit declaration - R'Jose said: It is sufficient; R'Judah maintained: He must make an explicit declaration.
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Huna rules that the halakhah follows R. Yose—he need not make an explicit declaration about divorce or betrothal for the act to be valid.
R. Ashi then tells R. Yemar, his student, that Shmuel’s warning not to have any official dealings with a judge who does not know how to adjudicate the matters of betrothal and divorce applies even to this case. The consequences of a misjudgment in divorce or betrothal could be that a woman has a child who is a mamzer (offspring of a forbidden union). Therefore, a judge who wishes to take on responsibility in these areas must know all of the relevant halakhot, even that the halakhah follows R. Yose in this issue.
R. Ashi then tells R. Yemar, his student, that Shmuel’s warning not to have any official dealings with a judge who does not know how to adjudicate the matters of betrothal and divorce applies even to this case. The consequences of a misjudgment in divorce or betrothal could be that a woman has a child who is a mamzer (offspring of a forbidden union). Therefore, a judge who wishes to take on responsibility in these areas must know all of the relevant halakhot, even that the halakhah follows R. Yose in this issue.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tosafot on Kiddushin
"He should not have dealings with them." Rashi's explanation: He shouldn't be a judge in this matter, lest he permit a forbidden sexual sin, and this is a bent thing that cannot be repaired (see Kohelet 1:15)." But Rabbenu Azriel's explanation: That he [the prospective husband] shouldn't talk with women about subjects of kiddushin to betroth them, for sometimes she will be betrothed through their speech or their giving and will not understand. Problem [on Rabbenu Azriel]: This is fine for kiddushin, but for divorce [which the Talmud also included in this], why do we care if she thinks that she isn't divorced!? [Her consent is not required for divorce, only for betrothal!]. Solution: There is a problem [if she wants to get married] to a kohen [who can't marry a divorcée]. New problem: The language of "with them (pl.)" doesn't worth for this, for a man can only give a get to his wife [so it should be singular]! Another problem: It says later in our chapter (Kiddushin 13a) that the concern [of having people who don't pay attention to this Rav Yehudah-Shmuel traditional] is [having sex with] a married woman [and not a kohen marrying a divorcée] when it says "[Those people] are worse for the world than the generation of the Flood [and see the prooftext there that mentions adultery specifically]"! Solution: It is possible that we are concerned if she stretched out her hand and received a betrothal from another [and this could lead to adultery and the multiple men she is betrothed to could account for the plural language].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Tosafot on Kiddushin
"Even if he did not learn it." Explanation [of Rav Yemar's question]: A man that is appointed over gittin and kiddushin, do we need to inform him of this Rav Yehudah-Shmuel tradition (sic!, the Talmud says Rav Huna-Shmuel) such that he shouldn't fail in this common matter, or perhaps we are not worried about this since it is not so common? This is implied in Rashi's explanation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy