Kiddushin 14

Chapter 14

א ש"מ בעלי חיים נדחים
1 [i] Live animals may be rendered [permanently] rejected;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As here: the animal having been rendered ineligible when dedicated, since half remained secular, it remains so even when the other half too is dedicated. There is an opposing view that only a dead animal can be rendered permanently ineligible, v. Yoma 64a.');"><sup>1</sup></span> [ii] that which is rejected ab initio is rejected;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This animal was not eligible to be dedicated by a single partner from the very outset. There is an opposing view that an animal can be rendered unfit only if it was originally rejected permanently.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב וש"מ דחוי מעיקרא הוי דחוי וש"מ יש דחוי בדמים
2 [iii] rejection applies to monetary sanctity.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This animal was sanctified from the very outset only for its value, i.e., that the money which its sale would furnish should be expended for a sacrifice; nevertheless it becomes permanently ineligible for the altar. This excludes the view that might have been held that only an animal that was fit in the first place to be dedicated to the altar can be rendered permanently ineligible.');"><sup>3</sup></span> Raba propounded: What [if one declares,] 'Thy half [be betrothed to me] for half a perutah, and thy [other] half for half a perutah'?
ג בעי רבא חצייך בחצי פרוטה וחצייך בחצי פרוטה מהו כיון דאמר לה חצי פרוטה פסקה או דילמא מונה והולך הוא
3 Since he says to her, 'for half a perutah,' he divided it;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he betrothed her as two separate halves, and neither is valid.');"><sup>4</sup></span> or perhaps, he was proceeding with his enumeration?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He meant that as he was betrothing her entirely for a perutah, he was thereby betrothing each half for half a perutah.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ד אם תימצי לומר מונה והולך הוא חצייך בפרוטה וחצייך בפרוטה מהו כיון דאמר לה בפרוטה ופרוטה פסקה למילתיה או דילמא כל ביומיה מונה והולך הוא
4 Should you rule, he was proceeding with his enumeration: what [if he declares,] 'Thy half [be betrothed unto me] for a peru!ah, and thy [other] half for a perutah'? Since he said to her, 'for a perutah' 'and a perutah', he divided his proposal;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it is less plausible here to assume that he was proceeding with his enumeration, since he could have betrothed her entirely for the first perutah.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ה את"ל כל ביומיה מונה והולך הוא חצייך בפרוטה היום וחצייך בפרוטה למחר מהו כיון דאמר לה למחר פסקה או דילמא הכי קאמר לה קדושין מתחלו מהאידנא ומגמר לא ניגמרו עד למחר
5 or perhaps, providing it was on the same day, he was proceeding with his enumeration? Should you answer: Providing it was on the same day, he was proceeding with his enumeration: What [if he declares,] 'Thy half [be betrothed to me] for a perutah to-day, and thy [other] half for a perutah tomorrow'?
ו שני חצייך בפרוטה מהו הכא ודאי בחד זימנא קאמר לה או דילמא אין אשה מתקדשת לחצאין כלל תיקו :
6 Since he said to her, 'To-morrow,' he divided it; or perhaps he meant thus: the kiddushin commence immediately, but shall not be completed until to-morrow? [Further,] what [if he says], 'Thy two halves for a perutah': here he certainly proposed to her in once; or perhaps a woman cannot be betrothed at all by halves?
ז בעי רבא שתי בנותיך לשני בני בפרוטה מהו בתר נותן ומקבל אזלינן והאיכא ממונא או דילמא בתר דידהו אזלינן והא ליכא תיקו
7 The questions stand over. Raba propounded: What [if he declares,] 'Thy two daughters [be betrothed] to my two sons for a perutah'?
ח בעי רב פפא בתך ופרתך בפרוטה מהו מי אמרינן בתך בחצי פרוטה ופרתך בחצי פרוטה או דילמא בתך בפרוטה ופרתך במשיכה תיקו
8 Do we consider the giver and the receiver, so that there is money;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A perutah is given and received by one person; less than a perutah is not money.');"><sup>7</sup></span> or perhaps, we consider them [who betroth and are betrothed], and there is not?
ט בעי רב אשי בתך וקרקעך בפרוטה מהו בתך בחצי פרוטה וקרקעך בחצי פרוטה או דילמא בתך בפרוטה וקרקעך בחזקה תיקו
9 The question stands over. R'Papa propounded: What [if he declares,] 'Thy daughter and thy cow [be mine] for a perutah'?
י ההוא גברא דאקדיש בשיראי רבה אמר לא צריכי שומא רב יוסף אמר צריכי שומא אי דאמר לה בכל דהו כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא צריכי שומא
10 Do we say [it means,] thy daughter for half a perutah, and thy cow for half a perutah:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And therefore the kiddushin is invalid.');"><sup>8</sup></span> or perhaps [he meant,] 'Thy daughter by a perutah, and thy cow by meshika'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. and infra 25b.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
יא אי דאמר לה חמשין ולא שוו חמשין הא לא שוו כי פליגי דאמר חמשין ושוו חמשין רבה אמר לא צריכי שומא דהא שוו חמשין רב יוסף אמר צריכי שומא כיון דאיתתא לא בקיאה בשומא לא סמכה דעתה
11 The question stands over. R'Ashi propounded: What [if one declares,] 'Thy daughter and thy land [be mine] for a perutah'?
יב איכא דאמרי בכל דהו נמי פליגי רב יוסף אמר שוה כסף הרי הוא ככסף מה כסף דקיץ
12 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.');"><sup>10</sup></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.'');"><sup>11</sup></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.');"><sup>12</sup></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.');"><sup>13</sup></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.');"><sup>14</sup></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.');"><sup>15</sup></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,