Kiddushin - Daf 8
- Giving goods worth less than five selaim for פדיון הבן
Rav Yosef offers a proof that goods must be appraised before using them for kiddushin from a Baraisa: One who says to a Kohen, עגל זה לפדיון בני – Accept this calf (or another item) for the redemption of my firstborn son, his son is not redeemed. But if he said, עגל זה בחמש סלעים לפדיון בני – Accept this calf as five selaim for the redemption of my firstborn son, he is redeemed. Rav Yosef assumes that the calf must be worth five selaim, for otherwise the pidyon could not be valid. Still, the pidyon is not valid in the first case because the item was not appraised (and the second case means that the item was already appraised as five selaim). The Gemara answers that the calf is actually worth less than five selaim. Still, the redemption is valid in the second case: וכגון דקביל כהן עילויה – it is where [the Kohen] accepted it on himself as if it were worth five selaim. Rav Kahana once accepted a סודרא (cloth head covering) as פדיון הבן, saying: לדידי חזי לי חמש סלעים – To me it is worth five selaim and I accept it as that amount. Rav Ashi added that this only applies to someone like Rav Kahana, דגברא רבה הוא ומבעי ליה סודרא ארישיה – who is a great man and needs a kerchief on his head (and can overvalue the item).
- התקדשי לי במנה ונתן לה דינר
Rebbe Elazar said: If one says, התקדשי לי במנה ונתן לה דינר – “Be married to me with a maneh,” and he only gave her a dinar, הרי זו מקודשת וישלים – she is married immediately, and he must complete the payment later. Since he offered a maneh and gave only a dinar, כמאן דאמר לה על מנת דמי – it is like he said to her she should be married immediately on condition he gives her a maneh. Rebbe Elazar is challenged from a Baraisa: One who says, “Be married to me with a maneh,” והיה מונה והולך – and he was counting out the money to her, ורצה אחד מהן לחזור – and one of them wished to retract from the kiddushin, אפילו בדינר האחרון הרשות בידו – even before the last dinar, the ability to retract is in their hands. Clearly, the kiddushin is not effective immediately!? The Gemara interprets this Baraisa where he said he is marrying her "במנה זו" – with this specific maneh, and so she is expecting the full maneh before consenting to kiddushin. Rav Ashi answers: מונה והולך שאני – a case where he is counting out the money is different, דדעתה אכוליה – because her mind is on all of it.
- מנה אין כאן משכון אין כאן
Rava quoted Rav Nachman: If someone says, “Be married to me with a maneh,” and he gave her a משכון – collateral, for it, she is not married” מנה אין כאן משכון אין כאן – there is no maneh here given to her, and there is no collateral here given to her to keep. Rava challenged Rav Nachman from a Baraisa which says that if someone marries a woman with a collateral, she is married!? The Gemara answers: התם במשכון דאחרים – there, he married her with the collateral of another person for money owed to him and transfers this loan to her by giving her the collateral. The collateral belongs to the creditor, as Rebbe Yitzchok proved from the passuk about a creditor who returns a collateral to the debtor for his nightly use: "ולך תהיה צדקה" – and it will be a merit for you. אם אינו קונה צדקה מנין – If he does not acquire the collateral, where is the merit in returning it? מכאן לבעל חוב שקונה משכון – From here it can be proven that a creditor acquires a collateral.
