Resources for Nedarim 6

1.     The גמרא discusses whether there is a concept of ידות by קידושין or not. Why would we think you could learn קידושין from נדרים? After all, even נדרים  themselves is only learned from נזיר. The ר"ן explains that the גמרא’s question is should we should learn from a מה מצינו from נדרים that ידות work or are we not able to learn from נדרים since קידושין requires a מעשה. And נדרים do not. תוספות here in ד"ה יש disagrees and says that the question of the גמרא is should we learn from נדרים which is a type of הקדש to קידושין which makes the woman אסור on everyone like הקדש. The רא"ש says a similar idea and says the question is that the לשון of קידושין is similar to הקדש and נדרים are also like הקדש since you are being מתפּיס your נדר to a קרבן which is הקדש.

This leads us to an important question: if the whole comparison to נדרים is because the לשון of קידושין is similar to הקדש, then what if you didn’t use the word “קידושין”? What if you said הרי את מאורסת לי? The קרן אורה says that in that case ידות would certainly not work. However, the פּני יהושע in קידושין דף ה ע"ב ד"ה אומר says that it would work no matter what לשון you use since the concept of קידושין is similar to נדרים. It would seem to me that the פּני יהושע fits well with תוספות and the קרן אורה fits well with the רא"ש who focuses on the לשון קידושין. What’s interesting is that we find a similar concept of viewing קידושין as הקדש on קידושין דף ז where the גמרא suggests that if you are מקדש half a lady she should become fully מקודשת as we see by הקדש where if you are מקדיש half an animal the other half automatically becomes קדוש. תוספות there in ד"ה ונפשטו says that the גמרא was only discussing a case where you used the לשון קידושין but if you said אירוסין then it certainly doesn’t work. That fits well with the קרן אורה. The פּני יהושע mentions this as well and admits it is a קשה on what he said.

2.     There is a fundamental question regarding the גמרא’s ספק as to whether "יד" works by קידושין. The concept of whether a יד works or not is relevant to whether something counts as an official "דיבור" which is certainly necessary for נדרים which need "הפלאה" (explicating).  However, by קידושין one does not need an official דיבור at all. In fact, in a case where they are simply talking about marriage (עסוקין באותו ענין) and he then gives her a ring she is מקודשת because we have an אומדן דעת that they wanted to get married. So it would seem by קידושין you just need דעת and not דיבור like by נדרים. Furthermore, if a man and woman get divorced and he is then לן עמה בפּונדקי we assume there was קידושין because אין אדם עושה בעליתו בעילת זנות. Isn’t that also just אומדן דעת with no דיבור? On the flip side, the גמרא says that if the man gives the ring and the woman says "הרי אני מקודשת לך" they are not married. In that case you have the דעת and it still doesn’t work because you have the wrong לשון. The תורת גיטין  in the end of סימן קמ"א says that דיבור  is part of the קידושין and the גמרא that says if they are discussing קידושין and he then gives a ring is a good קידושין  is saying that their speaking about marriage is the דיבור  of קידושין itself. The ברכת שמואל in קידושין סימן א quotes his Rebbe רב חיים מבריסק who says that you cant use אומדנא on a לשון. He explains that to mean that אומדנא and לשון are two different ways to make the קנין קידושין. If you are trying to be מקדש בדיבור like in our גמרא then you can’t use אומדנא to help it but if you are trying to use אומדנא like by the case where they were talking about marriage and he then gave a ring then אומדנא helps. 

New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters

Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder

Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander

Rabbi Ari Keilson - Maarei Mekomos