משנה: הָאוֹמֵר לָאִשָּׁה הֲרֵי אַתְּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת לִי לְאַחַר שֶׁאֶתְגַּייֵר אוֹ לְאַחַר שְׁתִּתְגַּייְרִי לְאַחַר שֶׁאֶשְׁתַּחְרֵר אוֹ לְאַחַר שֶׁתִּשְׁתַּחְרְרִי לְאַחַר שֶׁיָּמוּת בַּעֲלֵיךְ אוֹ לְאַחַר שֶׁתָּמוּת אֲחוֹתֵיךְ לְאַחַר שֶׁיַּחֲלוֹץ לֵיךְ יְבָמֵיךְ אֵינָהּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵירוֹ אִם יָֽלְדָה אִשְׁתְּךָ נְקֵיבָה הֲרֵי הִיא מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת לִי לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. MISHNAH: If somebody say to a woman: You are preliminarily married to me after I convert, or after you are converted148While marriage exists for Gentiles, preliminary marriage is a uniquely Jewish institution. If one or both parties are Gentile, no preliminary marriage is possible., after I am freed, or after you are freed149A slave cannot marry. Therefore, if one or both parties are servile, no preliminary marriage is possible., after your husband has died150A married woman cannot marry another party. A preliminary marriage in anticipation of the husband’s death is impossible., or after your sister has died151If the man was once married to a woman, her sister is forbidden to him during the woman’s lifetime. This is the only incest prohibition of Lev. 18 for which no criminal penalty is indicated in Lev. 20. But Lev. 18:18 is read as: “A woman in addition to her sister you are unable take, to be co-wives, to uncover her nakedness in addition to her, during her lifetime.” The act of preliminary marriage is here defined as impossible during the sister’s lifetime., or after your levir has given you ḥalîṣah152This Tanna follows the majority interpretation of Deut. 25:5, which reads: “If brothers dwell together and one of them die without children, the widow of the deceased is unable to be an outside man’s.” Cf. Yebamot 1:1, Notes 93–103; Note 166 below., she is not preliminarily married. Similarly, if somebody say to another, if your wife have a daughter, she shall be preliminarily married to me, he did not say anything153A marriage contract cannot be concluded as a futures contract on anything which does not yet exist. The Mishnah in the Babli states in addition that if the wife of the prospective father-in-law was visibly pregnant, the contract is valid. The Halakhah shows that the Yerushalmi clearly holds that a woman is said to exist only from the moment of her birth, not while she still is in her mother’s womb..
הלכה: הָאוֹמֵר לָאִשָּׁה הֲרֵי אַתְּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת לִי כול׳. בְּעוֹן קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מַה בֵּינָהּ לָאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי זוֹ תְרוּמָה עַל הַמְחוּבָּרִין הַלָּלוּ שֶׁיִּתָּלֵישׁוּ. אָמַר לוֹן. תַּמָּן יֵשׁ בְּיָדוֹ לִתְלוֹשׁ בְּרַם הָכָא אֵין בְיָדוֹ לְשַׁחְרֵר. הָתִיב רִבִּי פֶס. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁהָֽיְתָה שִׁפְחָתוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בָּר מָמָל. לִכְשֶׁתִּשְׁתַּחְרֵר נִתְלֵית בְּדַעַת אַחֶרֶת. HALAKHAH: “If somebody say to a woman,” etc. They asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: What is the difference between this and one who says, “this shall be heave for this standing produce after it has been cut”154It is impossible to give heave from standing grain since the obligation of heave starts only at the end of the harvesting process. Nevertheless, the farmer can set aside a certain amount for heave at the start of the harvest to cover everything he will harvest in the future. Then why is it impossible for somebody who at the moment is unable to contract a preliminary marriage to give a gift which is to become a marriage gift as soon as the obstacle to his contracting is removed? The same question is asked in the Babli, 62a.? He said to them, there, it is in his power to cut; but here, it is not in his power to be freed155But it is uniquely in the power of the slave’s owner, or, in the case of Gentiles, in the power of the rabbinic court to whom they must apply for conversion.. Rebbi Ephes asked, think of it, if she was his slave girl156Since it is in his own power to free her. In the Babli, 62b, the question is attributed to R. Abba bar Mamal.? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, “after you are freed”, she is made dependent on another person’s will157In the case of the owner marrying his own slave girl, it is purely a matter of formulation. By making it conditional, “if you be set free”, he abdicates his own power. The Yerushalmi will agree that if the owner simply marries his slave girl, without mentioning her need to be freed, by one action he sets her free and marries her (R. Moses Isserles in Šulḥan ‘Arukh Yore Dea’ 267:58). (The classical commentators of the Yerushalmi incorrectly read the Babli’s explanation into the Yerushalmi text.).
דְּלֹמָא. רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה רַבָּא וְרִבִּי יוּדָן נְשִׂייָא הֲווֹן יְתִיבִין. אָֽמְרִין. נֵימָא חָדָא מִילָּה בְקִידּוּשִׁין. הָאוֹמֵר לָאִשָּׁה הֵא לֵיךְ פְּרוּטָה זוֹ שֶׁתְּקַדְּשִׁי לִי לִכְשֶׁאֲגָֽרְשֵׁךְ. מָהוּ. גָחֲכוֹן וְקָמוּן לְהוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְלָמָּה גָחֲכוֹן. לֹא אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל. לִכְשֶׁתִּשְׁתַּחְרֵר נִתְלֵית בְּדַעַת אַחֶרֶת. וְהָכָא לִכְשֶׁתִּתְגָּרֵשׁ נִתְלֵית בְּדַעַת אַחֶרֶת. אִין אַתְּ בְּעִי מַקְשָׁייָא הָכֵן קְשִׁי. חַד בַּר נַשׁ הֲוָה אֲזִיל מְקַדְּשָׁא חָדָא אִיתָא. קְדָמֵיהּ חַבְרֵיהּ וַאֲמַר לָהּ. הֲוֵי יָֽדְעָה דְּהָהֵן גָּבְרָא דְּהוּא אֲזַל מְקַדֵּשְׁתִּיךְ דַּעְתֵּיהּ בִּישָׁא. עָתִיד הוּא מִישְׁבַּק לִיךְ. אֶלָּא הֵא לִיךְ פְּרוּטָה זוֹ שֶׁתִּתְקַדְּשִׁי לִי בָהּ לִכְשֶׁאֲגָֽרְשָׁךְ. מָהוּ. The elder Rebbi Hoshaia and Rebbi Jehudah Neśia were sitting together. They said, let us say something on the subject of preliminary marriage. If somebody say to his158Translation follows the Genizah text. wife, here you have a peruṭaḣ that you should be preliminarily married to me after I have divorced you, what is the rule? They laughed and got up159The Babli, 62b, takes R. Hoshaia’s question seriously. Naturally, the answer to the question as stated is simply that the action is invalid since a married woman cannot marry again while married, not even her own husband.. Rebbi Yose said, why did they laugh? Did not Rebbi Abba bar Mamal say, “after you are freed”, she is made dependent on another person’s will; and here “after you are divorced,” she is made dependent on another’s will160In the opinion of the Babli, the reason is that while the husband can divorce her unilaterally, he cannot marry her again against her will. This is the “other will” which is involved here.. If you want to find a difficulty. ask the following: A person went to preliminarily marry a woman. Another person overtook him and said to her, you should know that the man who is coming to preliminarily marry you has a bad mind. In the future he will abandon you. But here you have this peruṭah that you should be preliminarily married to me after he will have158Translation follows the Genizah text. divorced you161It was shown in 3:1 that if a man gives a gift for preliminary marriage stipulating that the marriage be valid only after 30 days, and another man came, married, and divorced her within those thirty days, the first man’s marriage is valid. The problem naturally is that “30 days” is an objective standard, not depending on another’s will; but the clause “if the other man will have divorced you” makes it dependent on another’s will and invalidates the preliminary marriage.. What is the rule?
תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן. הֲרֵי הַנְּטִיעוֹת הָאֵילּוּ קָרְבָּן אִם אֵינָן נִקְצָצוֹת. טַלִּית זוֹ קָרְבָּן אִם אֵינָהּ נִשְׂרֶפֶת. וְנִשְׂרְפָה. לְמַפְרֵיעָן קָֽדְשׁוּ. מָעַל. אִין תֵּימַר. מִיכָּן וְלָבֹא. לֹא מָעַל. There162Mishnah Nedarim 3:6 and the relevant Halakhah (Notes 110–121). The text here does not make any sense and is not intended to make any sense. The Genizah fragment starts the quote of the Mishnah; the missing part of the line contained an instruction to continue the text in Nedarim. The same is intended here. We have a quote of the start of the Mishnah and a few words from the first paragraph of the Halakhah, ending with a complete copy of the last sentence, a sign that the copy now starts in earnest. It is clear that both scribes of the Genizah and the Leiden mss. considered the Nedarim text as the original for Qiddušin. For the reader’s convenience, here is the text omitted by the scribes:
Halakhah 6: “These orchard trees shall be qorbān,” etc. If he saw the king’s cutting crew coming near, if he saw fire coming near, and he said: These orchard trees shall be qorbān if they are not cut, this garment shall be qorbān if it is not burned or torn. Were they sanctified retroactively or only for the future? What is the difference? If he used them. If you say that they are sanctified retroactively, he committed larceny. If you say that it refers to the future, he did not commit larceny., it was stated: “These orchard trees shall be qorbān if they are not cut, this garment shall be qorbān if it is not burned.” And it was burned. Were they sanctified retroactively? He committed larceny. If you say that it refers to the future, he did not commit larceny.
חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר. פְּדָייָן חָֽזְרוּ לִקְדוּשָׁתָן. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. פְּדָייָן פְּדוּיִין. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. אֵין לָהֶן פִּדְיוֹן. פָּתַר לָהּ. לִכְשֶׁקָּצֵצוּ אֵין לָהֶן פִּדְיוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. מָאן דְאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה בְּשֶׁפְּדָייָן הוּא. אֲבָל אִם פְּדָייָן אַחֵר פָּֽקְעָה מֵהֶן קְדוּשָׁתָן. מִחְלְפָא שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי. תַּמָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר. פְּדָייָן אַחֵר פָּֽקְעָה מֵהֶן קְדוּשָׁתָן. וְהָכָא הוּא אָמַר. נִישֵּׂאת לְאַחֵר לֹא פָֽקְעוּ מִמֶּנּוּ קִידּוּשִׁין. לֹא צְרִיכָא דְלֹא כְּשֶׁנָּתַן לָהּ שְׁתֵּי פְרוּטוֹת. אֶחָד מִכְּבָר וְאֶחָד לִכְשֶׁיְּגָֽרְשֶׁהָ מָהוּ. 165Nedarim 3:6, Notes 114–121. Ḥizqiah said, if he redeemed them they revert to their sanctity. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if he redeemed them they are redeemed. The Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “These have no redemption.” He explains thus: After they were cut they do not need redemption. Rebbi Yose said, what Ḥizqiah said refers to the case that he himself redeemed them. But if another person redeemed them, the sanctity is removed from them. The argument of Rebbi Yose is switched: There, he says that if [another] redeemed them, the sanctity is removed from them, but here, he says that if she was married to another man the qiddušin [of the first] were not removed! All that is questionable for him is if he gave her two peruṭot, one for the moment and one for after he divorced her; what is the situation?
אָמַר רִבִּי יַנַּאי. נִימְנוּ שְׁלֹשִׁים וְכַמָּה זְקֵינִים. מְנַיִין שֶׁאֵין קִידּוּשִׁין תּוֹפְשִׂין בִּיבָמָה. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר. שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא בָּהּ הֲוָייָה לְזָר. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. וְלָאו מַתְנִיתָה הִיא. אוֹ לְאַחַר שֶׁיַּחֲלוֹץ לֵיךְ יְבָמֵיךְ. אֵינֶהּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. וַהֲוָה רִבִּי יַנַּאי מְקַלֶּס לֵיהּ. הַזָּלִים זָהָב מִכִּיס. בְּנִי אַל יָלִיזוּ מֵעֵינֶיךָ. חֲכַם בְּנִי וְשַׂמַּח לִבִּי וְאָשִׁיבָה חוֹרְפִי דָבָר. תֵּן לְחָכָם וְיֶחְכַּם עוֹד. יִשְׁמַע חָכָם וְיוֹסֵף לֶקַח וגו׳. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ בָּתַר כָּל־אִילֵּין קִילּוּסַייָא יְכִיל הוּא פָּתַר לֵיהּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. יֵשׁ מַמְזֵר בִּיבָמָה. 166Yebamot 1:1 (א), Notes 95–100. In the Genizah text, the entire paragraph again is only worth one line’s mention. Rebbi Yannai said: More than 30 Elders voted: from where that qiddushin have no legal effect on a sister-in-law? The verse says, “the wife of the deceased may not belong to any outside unrelated man”, that she cannot have any existence with an outsider. Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, is that not a Mishnah? “Or after your levir will have performed ḥalîṣah with you, she is not preliminarily married.” And Rebbi Yannai praised him “those who pour out gold from the wallet,” “my son, they should not be removed from your eyes,” “get wise, my son, and make me happy, that I can answer those who insult me”, “give to the wise that he shall become wiser,” “let the wise listen that he increase in knowledge.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, after all these praises I can explain it following Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba said that there exists a bastard from a sister-in-law!
שְׁמוּאֵל אוֹמֵר. בַּעֲניּוּתֵינוּ צְרִיכָה מִמֶּנּוּ גֵּט. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. מַתְנִיתָא לְאַחַר שֶׁיַּחֲלוֹץ לֵיךְ יְבָמֵיךְ. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר. לְאַחַר שֶׁיָּמוּת יְבָמֵיךְ. הֲרֵי זוֹ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָה. בַּת יוֹמָהּ מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בַּכֶּסֶף. בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. מַתְנִיתָא אָֽמְרָה כֵן. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵירוֹ אִם יָֽלְדָה אִשְׁתְּךָ נְקֵיבָה הֲרֵי הִיא מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת לִי. לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָהּ בְּעוֹלָם. הָא אִם הָֽיְתָה בְעוֹלָם הֲרֵי זוֹ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. 167Here starts the discussion of the Mishnah dealing with the widow of a childless man. Samuel disagrees with the Mishnah; his position is accepted in the Babli as practice (Yebamot 92b). While the marriage of the widow outside the family without ḥalîṣah certainly is sinful, it nowhere in the biblical text is punished as a criminal act; for Samuel this indicates that such a marriage should not be void by biblical standards. Samuel said, in our poverty, she needs a bill of divorce from him. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the Mishnah [said], “after your levir has given you ḥalîṣah”; but if he said, “after your levir has died,” she is preliminarily married168He holds that the Mishnah can be explained following Samuel. Even though the marriage by the widow of the childless man outside the family is valid, the marriage conditional on the action of the levir is invalid as explained by R. Abba bar Mamal. Therefore, the marriage conditioned on an act of God is valid, in particular also since after the death of the levir it no longer is sinful.. 169Here starts the discussion of the Mishnah dealing with the newborn girl. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: A one-day-old girl can be preliminarily married by money; a girl of three years and one day can be preliminarily married by intercourse.” Rebbi Mana said, the Mishnah implies this: “Similarly, if somebody say to another, if your wife have a daughter, she shall be preliminarily married to me, he did not say anything,” because she does not exist. Therefore, if she does exist, she is preliminarily married.