One of the six times when the halakha follows Abaye’s position and not Rava’s. TB Kidushin 52

The Gemara spends a lot of real estate on the topic whether betrothal that is not given to consummation (קִידּוּשִׁין שֶׁאֵין מְסוּרִין לְבִיאָה) is a valid betrothal. Abaye holds that is a valid betrothal and  Rava disagrees and holds no betrothal occurred. Today’s daf TB Kidushin 52 resolves the question who is correct.

“Come and hear, as the Sage Tavyumei taught the following baraita: If this man had five sons and that man had five daughters, and the first man said: One of your daughters is betrothed to one of my sons, each and every one of the daughters requires five bills of divorce, one from each of the sons, due to the uncertainty of who is betrothed to whom. If one of the sons died before giving his bill of divorce, each and every one of the daughters requires four bills of divorce, one from each of the surviving brothers, and ḥalitza from one of them, in case she was betrothed to the deceased son. The ḥalitza of one of the brothers suffices to release her from her levirate bond. According to Rava this betrothal should not be valid, as it is not given to consummation. Why, then, do they each require bills of divorce?

“And if you would say that here too it is referring to a case where they were identified and later intermingled, that cannot be. This is as the baraita teaches: One of your daughters to one of my sons, indicating that the betrothal could never have been given to consummation, and yet it is a valid betrothal. The Gemara concludes: The refutation of the opinion of Rava is a conclusive refutation. The Gemara further notes: And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Abaye when he has a dispute with Rava with regard to six halakhot, as represented by the mnemonic yod, ayin, lamed, kuf, gimmel, mem (יַעַ״ל קַגַ״ם): Despair that is not conscious [yeush shelo mida’at], conspiring witnesses [eidim] who are disqualified retroactively, a side post [leḥi] standing alone, betrothal [kiddushin] that is not given to consummation, revealing intent with a bill of divorce [get], and an apostate [mumar] who sins rebelliously. Although the halakha generally is in accordance with the opinion of Rava in his disputes with Abaye, in these six cases the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Abaye.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rava and Abaye argue on almost every daf. The halakha always follows Rava’s position except in six cases. Betrothal that is not given to consummation (קִידּוּשִׁין שֶׁאֵין מְסוּרִין לְבִיאָה) is one of the six times where the halakha follows Abaye. The kiddushin are valid kiddushin. Although the Gemara doesn’t list the other five instances where the halakha follows Abaye, Rashi cites them in his commentary ד"ה בְּיַעַ"ל קַגַ"ם. The Sefaria translation above provides all six cases where the halakha follows Abaye.