THERE IS A MACHLOKES BETWEEN THE RAMBAM (ISHUS 3:15) AND THE RAVAD REGARDING THE ABOVE TOPIC.
RAMABAM DIFFERENTIATES- MAN DOES NOT NEED WITNESSES DURING THE APPOINTMENT, WOMAN DOES. RAVAD ARGUES AND SAYS BOTH NEED.
1. IS THERE ANY IN DEPTH EXPLANATION OF THIS MACHLOKES? I REVIEWED THE ROSH (PEREK 2 HALACHAH ZAYIN (7) AND THE KESEF MISHNAH ON THE RAMABAM (DH)KOL HOISEH SHLIACH)
HOWEVER THEE SEEM TO BE INCONSISTENCIES
A= THE MAGID MISHNAH SEEMS TO EXPLAIN THE RAMBAM'S REASONING FOR BOTH (MAN AND WOMAN) BECUASE WE COMPARE KIDUSHIN TO GITTIN.
HOWEVER THE RAMBAM ADDS AN ADDITIONAL FACTOR OF NEEMUNIS (THE PURPOSE OF THE WITNESS IS TO FIND THE TRUTH....)
THE MAGID MISHNAH SEEMS TO NEGLECT THAT POINT.
THE RAVAD LISTS 3 POINTS OF CONTENTION
1- NO COMPARISON TO GET
2.TRUMAH DOES NOT NEED WITNESSES.
3.BY KEDUSHIN EVEN IF THEY BOTH AGREE IT IS USELESS (BOTH HUSBAND AND SHLIACH) BECAUSE IF THE HUSBAND AND WIFE AGREED , THERE TOO IT WOULD BEUSELESS,
THE KESEF MISHNAH EXPLAINS THE RAVADS I DONT SEE THIS IN THE WORDING OF THE RAVAD.
I AM LOOKING FOR SOME CLEAR DIRECTION TO UNDERSTAND THIS MACHLOKES, GIVEN THE EXPLANATIONS OF THE ROSH, KESEF MISHNAH AND MAGID MISHNAH.
Usher Reinitz, Brooklyn, N.Y.
Discussing the many facets of this complicated argument between the Rambam, Ravad, and Rosh fully is beyond the scope of this forum. However, let me just mention some of the logic the Chazon Ish mentions in explaining this argument.
The Chazon Ish (Kedushin 47:1, see also 47:2-5) explains the argument in the following manner. The Ra'avad's main point is that in order to create Kedushin, meaning an Eishes Ish, there has to be valid testimony that the woman is indeed an Eishes Ish. What would happen if she would seem to have committed adultery and would claim she was never married? Where are the witnesses who would contradict her? The Eidei Kedushin don't know for certain that this man was Mekadesh her, and if the supposed Mekadesh would turn around and say the Shliach is a liar, how could we call her an Eishes Ish?
However, the Rambam holds that once we see that the accepted Kedushin from a Shaliach on someone's behalf, this should be like the case of Get where we have no reason to assume the Shliach is doing something unlawful or tricky, and therefore rely on the principle of "Eid Echad Neman b'Isurim."
All the best,