Kiddushin - Daf 48
- עשה לי שירים נזמים וטבעות: If שכירות becomes owed מתחילה ועד סוף or only בסוף
A Baraisa discusses a woman who handed gold to a craftsman and said: עשה לי שירים נזמים וטבעות – Make for me bracelets, earrings, or rings with this, ואקדש אני לך – and in return, I will become married to you. Rebbe Meir says she is married as soon as he makes them (and gives them to her), but the Chachomim say, as the Gemara explains, that she is only married if he gives her other money, but this jewelry would not effect kiddushin. The Gemara initially assumes that everyone holds ישנה לשכירות מתחלה ועד סוף והוה מלוה –wages become owed from the beginning of the work until the end. Every perutah’s-worth of work becomes owed to the laborer as it is done, rendering each perutah a debt to the craftsman until he gives her the finished product. If so, they argue if kiddushin with a loan is effective. Several alternative interpretations are offered, the first being that all agree kiddushin with a loan is ineffective, and they argue when a laborer earns his wages. Rebbe Meir holds: אינה לשכירות אלא בסוף – wages only become owed at the end, when the work is completed, and he is mekadesh her with the improvements to her item. The Chachomim hold he earns wages as he works, and they accumulate as debts until he is finished.
- מלוה ופרוטה: is it דעתיה אפרוטה or דעתיה אמלוה?
The final interpretation of the above machlokes is: כגון שהוסיף לה נופך משלו – a case where the jeweler added a gemstone of his own to the jewelry he was fashioning. This reflects a machlokes in another Baraisa, in which both Rebbe Nassan and Rebbe Yehudah Hanasi say that a craftsman who says to a woman, “Be married to me בשכר שאעשה עמך – as payment for the work I will do for you,” the kiddushin is invalid because the wages are owed as debts as he works, as explained above. Rebbe Yehudah Hanasi adds: ואם הוסיף לה נופך משלו מקודשת – and if he added a gemstone of his own, she is married. The Gemara explains that Rebbe Nassan holds: מלוה ופרוטה – when one gives both a loan and a perutah for kiddushin, דעתיה אמלוה – [her] mind is on the loan, not the perutah, so the kiddushin is invalid. Rebbe Yehudah Hanasi holds: דעתיה אפרוטה – [her] mind is on the perutah, so the kiddushin is valid.
- התקדשי לי בכוס זה של יין ונמצא של דבש, קפידא vs. מראה מקום
The next Mishnah states that one who says: התקדשי לי בכוס זה של יין – “Be married to me with this cup of wine,” ונמצא של דבש – and it was later found to be honey, not wine, or the reverse, or he offered her a gold dinar and it was discovered to be silver, or the reverse, or he married her on condition he is wealthy and turned out to be poor, or the reverse, the kiddushin is invalid. Rebbe Shimon says: אם הטעה לשבח מקודשת – if he misled her to her benefit, she is married. The Gemara objects that presumably Rebbe Shimon agrees with the Mishnah that if someone sold wine and it was discovered to be vinegar, or the reverse, either side can retract, even where the buyer received something more valuable than he sought!? This proves that some people prefer vinegar to wine (according to their needs), so why is kiddushin valid where she was misled to her benefit? The Gemara ultimately explains that the case is where she told a shaliach, “Go receive kiddushin from Ploni, who told me to marry him with a silver dinar,” and the shaliach accepted a gold dinar. The Tanna Kamma holds: קפידא – her statement is an insistence on accepting silver; anything else is against her instructions. Rebbe Shimon holds: מראה מקום היא לו – she was merely showing the shaliach that she agrees to accept a silver dinar, but she would accept gold as well.
