How do Rabbis deal with meshaloch manos in terms of kedushin? [duplicate]

Question

Since the definition of sivlonos is a man giving a gift of value to a non married woman, the mishloach manos looks like this (S.A. O.C. 695,4 in Haga). So, how do Rabbis deal with this issue in terms of marrying people when presumably someone could have already been married the women by giving her a gift?

Answer 1

See Gemara Nazir 11B (last line) and 12A, Tosfoth Nazir Daf 12A

גמרא ‏:‏

אמר ר' יצחק בר יוסף אמר רבי יוחנן האומר לשלוחו צא וקדש לי אשה סתם אסור בכל הנשים שבעולם חזקה שליח עושה שליחותו וכיון דלא פריש ליה הא לא ידע הי ניהו קדיש ליה ‏.‏

R`Isaac B`Joseph citing R`Johanan said: If a man instructs his representative to go and betroth for him a wife, without specifying any woman, he becomes [in the meanwhile] forbidden [to marry] any woman in the world, since it is presumed that the messenger carries out his commission, and since he did not specify [the woman], he does not know which he betrothed for him.(Soncino's translation)

תוספות ‏:‏
Tosfot

1. אסור בכל הנשים שבעולם. וא''ת וכ''ע יאסרו לישא נשים דשמא זאת היא שנתקדשה ע''י שליח
   Following this statement, all men are prohibited to all women in the world, because for each woman, perhaps she is the woman betrothed by the Shaliach
2. ולר''ת דהנשים נאמנות לומר לא נתקדשתי
   According to Rabenu Tam we can answer that women are believed when they say that they wasn't betrothed
   1. תינח גדולות
      This answer is good for a woman who can know that she wasn't betrothed, a woman who was adult at the time of the Shlichut.
   2. קטנות שאינן יודעות אם אביהם קבל עבורן קדושין מאי איכא למימר וכבר מת אביה
      But a woman who was a child at this time, perhaps her father did receive kiddushin for her, and now he's dead and cannot answer the question
3. ואינו אלא קנסא בעלמא שעשה שליח סתם ולא פירש לו קדש לפלונית ולדידיה קנסו ולאחריני לא קנס
   Tosfot answers that this is not a true Din but a punishment for the man who instructed such a Shaliach, and the punishment is for him only, not for women and other men.
4. ‏[וא''ת] וליהוי איסורא דאורייתא דהויא ליה קבוע וכל קבוע כמחצה על מחצה דמי
   But Tosfot asks that this needs to be prohibited by a true Din, the din of Kavua because women are in their place and the Shaliach did went to her. And so they are not mixed and there is no Din of Rov.
5. וי''ל דלא אמרינן קבוע כמחצה דמי אלא כשהאיסור ניכר לעצמו וההיתר ניכר לעצמו אבל כשאין האיסור ניכר לעצמו לא אמרינן קבוע
   Tosfot answers that Din Kavua is only when the prohibited thing was distinguished and the permitted thing was distinguished

First doubleAA is right, the definition is wrong, see the link showed by scimonster.

But if we believe that some women are safek Kidushin d/t sivlonoth, it is only safek, if one woman it sofek kidushin (I don't want to treat this now).

But if we believe that some women are Vaday kidushin d/t sivlonoth (it is wrong) see the numbers corresponding in the text of tosfoth:

number 2.1 --> an adult women is trustworthy when she says she is not married.

number 2.2 --> a little girl

--> 3--- 5 Bitul berov.^[1]

So, no problem.

---

[1]

1. Bitul berov is explicitely mentionned in the last tosfoth Gitin 64A.
2. The Rif on massecheth Kidushin (21B in Dapey Harif) cited this Gemara.
3. Ran Gitin (30A dapey harif), citing Ramban says that The Chezkath pnuya is strongest than the presumption that the messenger carries out his commission. (to return to our topic Kal vachomer that it is strongest than Chashash safek kidushin by Mishloach manoth).