Kiddushin, Daf Nun Tet, Part 1
Introduction
The Talmud begins to react to the first clause of the mishnah in which an agent betroths to himself the woman he is sent to betroth on behalf of another.
גמ׳ האומר לחבירו צא וקדש תנא מה שעשה עשוי אלא שנהג בו מנהג רמאות
ותנא דידן הלך נמי דקתני הלך ברמאות
GEMARA. If he says to his neighbor . . .
A Tanna taught: What he did is done, but he has behaved toward him in a deceptive manner.
And our Tanna? When he states: and he goes , he indeed means, he goes in a deceptive manner.
The agent s act is valid and the woman is betrothed to him, but he has not done the honorable thing. Indeed he has been deceptive. One might say that from this mishnah one learns a lesson when something is really important to you, try to get it done yourself.
מאי שנא הכא דקתני האומר לחבירו ומאי שנא התם דקתני האומר לשלוחו
הכא רבותא קמ"ל והתם רבותא קמ"ל
הכא רבותא קמ"ל דאי תנא שלוחו הוה אמינא שלוחו הוא דהוי רמאי דסמכה דעתיה סבר עבד לי שליחותי אבל חבירו דלא סמכה דעתיה אימא לא ליהוי רמאי
Why is it taught here, one who says to his neighbor, while elsewhere it is taught, one who says to his agent ?
Here it teaches us something new, and there it teaches us something new.
Here it teaches us something new: for had it taught his agent : I might have said, Only his agent is called deceptive, because he relied upon him, thinking, He will perform what I sent him to do ; but as for his neighbor, seeing that he does not rely upon him, I might say that he is not considered deceptive.
The Talmud asks why our chapter calls the one sent to betroth, his neighbor while the other chapter calls him his agent. It suggests that in both cases the mishnah uses a word that is new meaning it teaches us something that we would not have otherwise thought.
Here it teaches neighbor to let us know that even though one does not generally rely on neighbors for such types of favors, even so, the neighbor who betroths the woman to himself is still considered deceptive.
התם רבותא קמ"ל דאי תנא האומר לחבירו הוה אמינא חבירו הוא דכי קדשה במקום אחר אינה מקודשת דסבר לא טרח אבל שלוחו דטרח אימא מראה מקום הוא לו קמ"ל
There too it teaches us something new. For had it taught: If one says to his neighbor, I might have said, only if his neighbor betroths her elsewhere is she not betrothed, because he thinks that he will not trouble himself [to find her elsewhere]; but as for his agent, who will trouble himself, I might think, he merely indicates the place to him. Hence it teaches us [otherwise].
The other mishnah was about a man who sends his agent to betroth a woman in a certain place and the agent betroths her elsewhere. The woman is not betrothed. If that case had taught neighbor I might have thought that if he says this to his neighbor she is not betrothed because he thinks the neighbor won t bother looking for her elsewhere. He thus did not authorize him to betroth her elsewhere. However, if he says this to his agent, someone working for him, he surely realizes that the agent will look elsewhere for her. Thus this might be saying this only as a signpost as to where she is, and not that the betrothal is conditional upon her being in that particular place. Therefore, I would say she is betrothed. Thus I need the mishnah to teach me that she is not even if the one sent is his agent.