- על מנת שאדבר עליך לשלטון
The next Mishnah states that if one says to a woman, “Become married to me על מנת שאדבר עליך לשלטון – on condition that I will speak on your behalf to the ruler,” or ואעשה עמך כפועל – “on condition that I work for you like a laborer for a day,” the kiddushin is effective if he performs these services. Reish Lakish says: והוא שנתן לה שוה פרוטה – It is only true where he also gave her something worth a perutah, but the service itself does not generate kiddushin. This is challenged from two Baraisos: Although kiddushin made as payment for having driven her on a donkey is invalid (because it was already owed as a debt), if he said: בשכר שארכיבך על החמור – “as payment that I will drive you on a donkey,” the kiddushin is valid. Another Baraisa teaches that if she agrees to kiddushin for a service, such as: שחוק לפני – “jest before me,” or רקוד לפני – “dance before me,” kiddushin is valid if it is worth a perutah!?
The Gemara answers that they reflect a machlokes Tannaim if אינה לשכירות אלא לבסוף – wages only become owed at the end (and are not a loan), or they are incrementally owed as work is performed. Rava explains the source for Reish Lakish’s interpretation.
- קדשתי את בתי ואיני יודע למי קידשתיה
A Mishnah an Amud Beis states that if a man says: קדשתי את בתי ואיני יודע למי קידשתיה – “I married off my daughter, but I do not know to whom I married her,” and someone claims he is the husband, נאמן – he is believed. If two people make this claim, one divorces her and the other may marry her. Rav says: נאמן ליתן גט ואין נאמן לכנוס – The one claiming to be the husband is believed to give her a get but is not believed to marry her. He is believed to divorce her, because אין אדם חוטא ולא לו – a person does not sin without benefit for himself, but he is not believed to marry her, because perhaps יצרו תוקפו – his Yetzer Hora is taking hold of him to make this claim. Rav Assi says he is even believed to marry her (but agrees that where a woman says she became married and does not know to whom, a claimant is not believed to marry her, because he may be relying on her going along with his claim). Although our Mishnah teaches that a second claimant can marry her, Rav would explain that with two claimants, an imposter is afraid that the father will recognize the true husband, so he gives a get, and the other is presumed to be the true husband.
- מהו לסקול על ידו
The Gemara asks: If a father testifies that he accepted kiddushin for his daughter, מהו לסקול על ידו – would we stone to death based on his testimony if she commits adultery as a naarah? Rav says we would not, because the Torah only granted the father credibility regarding prohibition, but not for capital punishment. Rav Assi says we would stone based on his testimony, and the father is fully believed. Rav Assi agrees that a woman who admits to being married would not receive the death penalty for adultery. He commented: הני שמעתתא דידי מרפסן איגרי – These teachings of mine appear to “shatter roofs,” meaning completely unlikely to those who do not understand them: if the father’s testimony, which allows for someone to claim he is the husband (indicating a “weaker” reliability that she is married altogether), yet is sufficient for capital punishment, then a woman’s testimony, which does not allow someone to claim to be the husband (indicating a “stronger” reliability of her marriage), it certainly should be sufficient for capital punishment!? But in truth, it is not difficult: לאב הימניה רחמנא – Hashem gave credibility to the father, לדידה לא הימנה – but did not grant her credibility. The distinction regarding someone claiming to be the husband was explained above.
