Q&A: A Question Regarding Betrothal Not Consummable by Intercourse in Rabbi Shimon Shkop’s View
A Question Regarding Betrothal Not Consummable by Intercourse in Rabbi Shimon Shkop’s View
Question
Hello Rabbi,
Following my analysis of the topic of betrothal not consummable by intercourse, and after listening to your lecture on this topic,
you presented Rabbi Shimon’s view in analyzing the case of betrothing one of two women as a kind of quantum doubt, since the betrothal of both of them is what creates the fact that neither of them is really betrothed. If so—how, according to this analysis, does Abaye allow such a betrothal to take effect at all? After all, in practice, in the end neither of them was actually betrothed, precisely because there is a quantum doubt here.
My second question: why, in the case of someone who betroths two sisters simultaneously, is there no operative category there of ‘betrothal not consummable by intercourse’? After all, according to Tosafot’s analysis, ‘betrothal not consummable by intercourse’ means betrothal whose very act creates the problem with intercourse. And betrothing two women together creates exactly that problem, since beforehand both were permitted to the man betrothing them, and only after the betrothal did they become forbidden. So the question still has not been resolved—how does Abaye explain himself regarding betrothing two sisters at once? The law in the Mishnah is that their betrothal is no betrothal, and if this is a case of ‘betrothal not handed over for intercourse,’ it turns out that Abaye contradicts an explicit Mishnah.
I would be happy for an answer. Thank you very much,
Alon
Answer
I didn’t understand. That is the whole idea of quantum doubt. For Abaye it is like an ordinary doubt, and there is a quantum effect of betrothal on both of them. His assumption is that there is no contradiction here, because if this one is betrothed then the other is not, and vice versa.
Betrothing two sisters together involves two acts of betrothal, and neither one uproots itself. Each one uproots the other. Therefore this is not betrothal not consummable by intercourse. Only when one betroths one of two sisters does that same act uproot itself, and only that is betrothal not consummable by intercourse.
Discussion on Answer
I didn’t understand the question. What does it mean that this is an ordinary doubt? It is not an ordinary doubt.
Everything was explained in the lecture itself. The act of betrothing one of two sisters uproots itself, because she becomes not fit for intercourse due to that very act of betrothal itself. An act of betrothal that makes her not fit for intercourse is not an act of betrothal. But when one betroths two sisters, these are two acts of betrothal, each of which does not uproot itself but rather the other.
Thank you very much for your time, Rabbi. I hope I understood. Have a good week.
Hi Rabbi, thank you very much for the answer, but I still didn’t understand—
If for Abaye this is an ordinary doubt, then it is not clear why in this case, where one betroths one out of two, this is considered betrothal not consummable by intercourse. After all, the whole claim in the end was that an ‘ordinary doubt’ means an existing reality—namely, that one of the women really was betrothed—which would make this betrothal fit for intercourse, since once the doubt is resolved she would be permitted to me. As opposed to a quantum doubt, where the effect of betrothal applies to both equally and forbids both equally. I do not understand how one can still maintain the term ‘ordinary doubt’ within a solution based on ‘quantum doubt.’
I would also appreciate a more detailed explanation of the idea of uprooting that you mentioned in the second part of the answer, and why that explains why betrothing two sisters is not considered betrothal not consummable by intercourse.