The Gemara asks on the case of "If somebody wasn't me'kadish her in the 30 day span, and she was CHOZER, what's the din"? The gemara brings the Machlokes between R' Yochanan and Reish Lakish. IN the Gemara's first Girsa it seems that Reish Lakish "changes" his Shita from "Lo asi dibur IMevatal DiBur" to "Lo Asi dibur umevatal maaseh" but Ein Hachi Nami that "Dibur mevatel dibur." Then in the Gemara's 2nd Girsa of their Machlokes brought by Rav Zvid we say "If she sent a Shliach to accept Kiddushin for her and was Chozer, what's the din.. R' Yochanan says ect.
Rashi in D"H ViChazra Bah learns this case that whether the Shliach is present or not.
Tosafos D"H Lo Kidsha learns that if she was MiVatel the Shliach then Vadeh the shliach is Batel, but Reish Lakish lifi Rav Zvid only argues when the shliach was not present because then "Lo asi diubur..."
-Though the Pnei Yehoshua gives a Teretz to show there's no Mochlokes, I'd like to suggest the following.
-Rashi is not the Shver one, Tosafos is. In the first Girsa of the Machlokes, it's Mashma that Reish Lakish changes his Shita to Asi dibur Umevatel dibur. However, in the way that Rav Zvid brings the case, it's obvious that Reish Lakish "Lo Asi" as is shown by the Tyuvta. So memeila, Rashi learns the Gemara KiPshuto, Reish Lakish learns Lo Asi Dibur, no questions asked. Tosafos however does not learns this way. Acc. to Tosafos, it seems here that he learns that Dibur is Mevatel dibur acc. to Reish Lakish to some extent. How is this Pshat?
Ronen Dvash, Staten Island, NY
I think that in your Peshat you have not answered the question of Tosfos 59b DH LO. Tosfos argues that it makes no sense that if a lady made a Shaliach to receive her Kidushin, she cannot retract even before the Shaliach had done anything. Tosfos understood that the opinion "Dibur does not come and Mevatel Dibur" cannot be taken literally because we never find that a verbal commitment (at least outside of Beis Din) has such a tremendous power that one cannot retract.
This is in fact the logic that lies behind why the Gemara, in the first Girsa, said that Reish Lakish really meant that "Lo Asi Dibur u'Mevatel Ma'aseh", because to claim literally that "Lo Asi Dibur u'Mevatel Dibur" is impossible since one cannot claim that if a lady said once, without doing any additional action, that she wants to make a Shaliach to get married, that she cannot retract.
Therefore, since Rashi's Peshat, as it stands at face value, has no Sevara to it, PNEI YEHOSHUA was forced to say that Rashi did not mean it literally. He sugggested 2 possibilities:
(1) She only retracted in front of the Shaliach from the Shalichus, but she still wanted the actual Kidushin.
(2) Even if she retracted in front of the Shaliach, we say that she is not serious about her retraction unless she did the latter in front of Beis Din.
Possibly this is a good example of what Reb Chaim Brisker zt'l used to say that it is more important that a Peshat should fit in with Sevara rather than merely fitting in with the actual words.
KOL TUV
D. Bloom