Reference for Kiddushin 14:12

איכא דאמרי בכל דהו נמי פליגי רב יוסף אמר שוה כסף הרי הוא ככסף מה כסף דקיץ

Does he mean, 'Thy daughter for half a perutah and thy land for half a perutah'; or perhaps, 'Thy daughter for a perutah, and thy land by hazakah'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. and infra 26a.');">¹⁰</span> The question stands over. A certain man betrothed [a woman] with silk.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with the Mishnah on 2a: 'OR THE WORTH OF A PERUTAH.'');">¹¹</span> Rabbah ruled: No valuation is necessary;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The silk need not be valued beforehand so that the woman might know how much it is worth.');">¹²</span> R'Joseph maintained: It must be valued. Now, if he declared to her, '[Be thou betrothed to me] for whatever it is worth,' all agree that valuation is unnecessary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since they are obviously worth at least a perutah.');">¹³</span> If he declared to her, '[Be thou betrothed to me] for fifty [zuz],' and this [the silk] is not worth fifty: then of course it is not worth it!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the kiddushin is invalid.');">¹⁴</span> They differ only if he stipulated fifty and it was worth fifty. Rabbah maintained: [Prior] valuation is unnecessary, since it is worth fifty: R'Joseph said: [Prior] valuation is required: Since the woman has no expert knowledge of its value, she does not rely thereon.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it is worth so much, unless it is assessed by experts.');">¹⁵</span> Others state: They disagree in the case of 'for whatever it is worth' too. R'Joseph maintained: The equivalent of money must be as money itself: just as the latter is definite,

Explore reference for Kiddushin 14:12. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.