[Avodah] Kiddushin and Bigamy

[Zev Sero]

On 6/12/2010 6:29 PM, Hankman wrote:

> The question still makes sense without regard to R. Gershom's Intent or the original breadth of the Takanah. Now, given that the Takanah of R. Gershom has indeed spread far and wide and accepted by the large majority of Kelal Yisroel, would this be considered "kedas Mosheh veYisrael" or not with the appropriate consequence as to whether the kedushin is chal?

Let's get back to basics.  Where do we get the idea that kidushin depend
on the rabbanan?  Because the gemara says "kol dimekadesh ada`ta derebanan
mekadesh", and therefore that if the rabbanan don't agree to the kidushin,
even retroactively, it's not chal.  But for that to work the rabanan have
to say that they don't agree, that they want the kidushin to be batel.
I don't think we have any basis for saying that kidushin are automatically
batel just because some takana wasn't followed.  That would make the
rabbanan's takanos even greater than the Torah's laws!  After all, we
know that kidushin which are forbidden by the Torah, and for which the
parties will get malkos, are still chal.

-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
zev at sero.name                 eventually run out of other people’s money
                                                      - Margaret Thatcher