Kiddushin 48b — the Talmud in English

One master

Rabbi Meir

held: ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location") "

the rental is only at the end"

when the husband returned the jewelry to the woman, and since, for the sake of kiddushin, he waives the payment owed to him by her, she is betrothed.

And one master

the Sages

held: "

the rental exists from the beginning until the end."

b.

And if you wish, say

to explain the dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Sages:

Everyone

holds:

the rental exists

from the beginning until the end, and

everyone also holds:

one who betroths with a loan is not betrothed—

And here

we are dealing with a contractor who accepted upon himself to make the earrings, whose payment for his work is not according to the time that he works on them, but is a fixed payment for making the earrings, and

with regard to a craftsman [

contractor]

he acquires through the enhancement of the vessel

is what they

dispute, that is to say: whether a contractor who receives gold to make jewelry from it owns the enhancement that he enhances it by making the earrings, or not:

о том, кому принадлежит улучшение, которое ремесленник создаёт, изготовляя из полученного золота украшения: ему или нет.

One master

Rabbi Meir

held: a craftsman acquires through the enhancement of the vessel,

and therefore, when the jewelry reached her hand, the woman was acquired to him through the enhancement of the vessel, which was his, and he gave it to her for the sake of kiddushin.

And one master

the Sages

held: a craftsman does not acquire through the enhancement of the vessel,

and he has nothing with which to betroth her except the payment for the work, which is a loan, and one who betroths with a loan is not betrothed.

c.

And if you wish, say

to explain the dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Sages:

Everyone: "

a craftsman does not acquire through the enhancement of the vessel,"

and the law of the craftsman is like the law of a hired laborer,

and

also "

the rental exists from the beginning until the end,"

and

also "

one who betroths with a loan is not betrothed,"

and here, what are we dealing with:

For example, where he added a precious stone [

a precious stone]

from his own.

For

Rabbi Meir

held: a loan and a peruta

that were given for kiddushin

her intention

his intention

of the woman

is on the peruta,

and this woman too, whom he betrothed with the payment for the work, which is a loan, and with the precious stone, which is a peruta, intends to become betrothed through the peruta.

And one master

the Sages

held:

her intention

his intention

also

is on the loan,

and this woman too wishes to become betrothed also through the payment for the work, and one who betroths with a loan is not betrothed.

And

this dispute in which Rabbi Meir and the Sages disputed

is dependent on the dispute of these tanna'im [

Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi]

as it was taught:

One who says to a woman: "Become betrothed to me

with the payment for what I did with you" [

for you], any work whatsoever, she

is not betrothed,

for it is a loan, and one who betroths with a loan is not betrothed.

But if he betrothed her

with the payment for what I will do with you," she

she is

is betrothed

once he finishes and gives it to her, because the first tanna holds: "The rental is only at the end."

Rabbi Natan says:

even if he said to her: "

with the payment for what I will do with you," she

is not betrothed,

because "the rental exists from the beginning until the end,"

and all the more so "

with the payment for what I did with you,"

for she is not betrothed.

Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: Indeed they said: whether

he said to her: "

with the payment for what I did,"

and

whether

he said to her: "

with the payment for what I will do with you," she

is not betrothed—

And

however,

if he added a precious stone of his own, she

she is

is betrothed

but according to Rabbi Natan, even if he added a precious stone of his own, she is not betrothed.

And the Gemara explains their reasons, and in what they disputed:

Between the first tanna and Rabbi Natan—

who disputed whether she is betrothed when he said to her: "With the payment for what I will do with you"—

the difference between them is: rental,

whether it exists from the beginning until the end, or is only at the end:

The first tanna holds: the rental is only at the end; therefore, when he said to her, "With the payment for what I will do with you," she is betrothed.

Whereas Rabbi Natan holds: "The rental exists from the beginning until the end"; and when he said to her, "With the payment for what I will do with you," it is a loan, and therefore she is not betrothed.

Between Rabbi Natan and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi—

who disputed, regarding the addition of a precious stone of his own, whether she is betrothed—

the difference between them is: a loan and a peruta

that were given for kiddushin, whether the woman's intention is also on the loan.

One master—

Rabbi Natan—

held: a loan and a peruta

her intention

his intention

is on the loan,

and this woman too, who became betrothed through the rental, which is a loan, and through the precious stone, which is worth a peruta, has her intention on the precious stone, and she is betrothed.

And one master held:

her intention

his intention

is on the peruta,

and this woman too has her intention on the precious stone and becomes betrothed through it.

Mishna:

One who says to a woman: "

Become betrothed to me with this cup of wine,"

and it is found to be honey,

which is more valuable than wine; and all the more so if he said to her: "Become betrothed to me with this cup

of honey,"

and it is found to be wine,

which is less valuable than honey—

or if he said to her: "Become betrothed to me

with this silver dinar,"

and it is found to be gold,

which is more valuable than silver; and all the more so if he said to her: "Become betrothed to me with this dinar

of gold,"

and it is found to be silver,

which is less valuable than gold—

or if he said to her: "Become betrothed to me

on the condition that I am wealthy,"

and he is found to be poor;

and even if he said to her: "Become betrothed to me on the condition that I am

poor,"

and he is found to be wealthy—

in all these cases she

is not betrothed.

Rabbi Shimon says:

If he misled her to her advantage—

Rabbi Shimon says:

If he misled her to her advantage—

for example, he misled her and gave her a gold dinar instead of a silver one—she

is betrothed.

Gemara:

The Sages taught:

One who says to a woman: "

Become betrothed to me with this cup" [

and he did not say what is in it]—

one beraita teaches

that she acquired

it [

the cup itself]

and what is inside it,

and they combine to make a peruta.

And another beraita was taught,

that she acquired only

it, and not what is inside it,

and it does not combine to make a peruta.

And another beraita was taught: she acquired

what is inside it and not it, and she must return the cup to the betrother.

And this is not difficult,

the contradiction between the beraitot, for:

This—

that we learned, "it and not what is inside it"—

is

for example, the cup was full of

water [

water], which is not valuable, and she did not intend to become betrothed through it.

This

that we learned, "what is inside it and not it,"

is

for example, the filling was

wine [

in wine], which is customarily given to be drunk on the condition that the cup be returned.

This

that we learned, "it and what is inside it,"

is

for example, it was full of

fish brine [

fish brine],

for she needs the cup in order to preserve the brine in it, for one dips food in it for a long time.

We learned in the Mishna: Rabbi Shimon says:

if he misled her to her advantage, she is betrothed:

And we ask:

And

does Rabbi Shimon not have,

what we learned in the Mishna in Bava Batra:

One who sells to another

wine and it is found to be vinegar,

which is inferior to wine, or he sold him

vinegar and it is found to be wine, both—

the seller and the buyer—

can retract.

Apparently,

it is proven that although wine is more valuable than vinegar, we say:

there is one who prefers vinegar, and there is one who prefers wine [

there is one who specifically wants vinegar, and there is one who specifically wants wine]—

and if so,

here too,

why is she betrothed when he gave her a gold dinar instead of a silver one? For we should say:

there is one

who

prefers silver and does not prefer gold [

there is one who wants a silver dinar, and there is one who wants a gold dinar]!?

Rav Shimi bar Ashi said: I found Abaye sitting and explaining the reasoning of Rabbi Shimon to his son

Rav Shimi bar Ashi said: I found Abaye sitting and explaining to his son [

I found Abaye sitting and explaining to his son the reason of Rabbi Shimon]:

Forever, if she was misled, even to her advantage, she is not betrothed, and

here

in our Mishna,

what are we dealing with: for example, where he said to his agent: "

Lend me a silver dinar, and go and betroth a certain woman for me,"

and he went

and lent a gold one

and betrothed her with it.

One master—

the first tanna—

held: it is insistence,

the sender insists that he give her only a silver dinar; and since he gave her a gold dinar, she is not betrothed, for he is not his agent for this matter.

And one master—

Rabbi Shimon—

held: when the sender said to him, "A silver dinar,"

"A silver dinar"

is an indication of the place

for him, that is to say: he does not insist that he give her a gold dinar, for, on the contrary, its greater value is preferable to him; rather, this is what he intended to say to him: If you cannot lend me a gold dinar, lend me a silver dinar.

If so,

If so, when you explained that the kiddushin was through an agent, and he was the one who misled the householder, then what we learned in the words of the first tanna, over which Rabbi Shimon disputed, should be difficult: "

Become betrothed to me,"

which implies that the husband is the betrother!? But he should have needed to say

"Become betrothed to him"

rather than

say so, for this is what the agent says when he betroths her to another!?

And also what we learned should be difficult: "If he

misled her to her advantage"!? For if he

misled him [

the agent the sender]

to his advantage,"

he should have needed

the tanna to say!? And also what we learned in the words of the first tanna should be difficult: "

and

it is found

to be gold"! For

from the outset too it was gold, for there is no discovery here, but rather the agent changed from the outset what the householder had said and gave something else!?

Rather, he said

Rabban

Rava: I and

the

lion of the group interpreted it [

explained our Mishna],

and who is he

the lion of the group?

Rabbi Hiyya bar Avin:

Here, what are we dealing with: for example, where she said to her agent: "

Go and receive my kiddushin from so-and-so, who said to me: Become betrothed to me with a silver dinar,"

and he went

the agent

and he gave him

the betrother

a gold dinar.

One master—

the first tanna—

held: it is insistence,

the woman insists that she become betrothed only with a silver dinar, for there is one who is comfortable with silver, and there is one who is comfortable only with gold, while she is comfortable only with silver.

And one master—

Rabbi Shimon—

held: it is an indication of the place for her,

and she does not insist if the husband ultimately gives a gold dinar.

And

what is difficult:

what "

is found," for from the beginning the man betrothed her with a different dinar than the one she wanted!?

since from the outset the man betrothed her with a dinar different from the one she wanted!?

This is not difficult, for here, what are we dealing with? For example,

that

the dinar, when the husband handed it to the agent,

was tied in a cloth bundle [

wrapped in a rag], and when they opened it, it became known that the dinar was not as had been spoken.

Abaye said:

Abaye said: Rabbi Shimon, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and Rabbi Elazar—all of them hold:

when one tells his agent to do some matter in an easy manner, and the agent goes and does it for him in a difficult manner, this is not a change, for the sender did not insist that he do it in the easy manner; rather,

it is an indication of the place for him,

to make it easier for him in his agency if it is difficult for him to do it in another manner!

Rabbi Shimon,

who holds this, is

that which we said

in our Mishna: that the woman is betrothed when she sent the agent to receive a silver dinar for kiddushin, and he received a gold dinar.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

since he holds, “It is merely indicating the place for him,” this is from

as we learned

in tractate Bava Batra: