Kiddushin, Daf Het, Part 4

 

Introduction

Today s sugya is about betrothing with a pledge, an item given to be reclaimed when money is paid.

 

אמר רבא אמר רב נחמן אמר לה התקדשי לי במנה והניח לה משכון עליה אינה מקודשת מנה אין כאן משכון אין כאן

 

Rava said in the name of R. Nahman: If he says to her, Be betrothed to me with a maneh, and gives her a pledge on it, she is not betrothed, there is neither a maneh here nor a pledge.

 

The man betroths a woman and promises to give a maneh. But instead of giving her the money itself, he gives her a pledge, an object for her to keep until he gives her the maneh.

R. Nahman rules that the betrothal is not valid. She has not received the maneh and the pledge is not hers. So in essence he has not given her anything.

 

איתיביה רבא לרב נחמן קידשה במשכון מקודשת

 

Rava raised an objection against R. Nahman: If he betroths her with a pledge she is betrothed.

 

The baraita clearly rules that a pledge can be used for betrothal.

 

התם במשכון דאחרים וכדרבי יצחק דאמר רבי יצחק מנין לבעל חוב שקונה משכון שנאמר (דברים כד, יג) ולך תהיה צדקה אם אינו קונה צדקה מנין מכאן לבעל חוב שקונה משכון

 

That case refers to a pledge belonging to others, and it is in accordance with R. Yitzchak, for R. Yitzchak said: How do we know that a creditor acquires a pledge? As it is said, You shall surely restore him the pledge when the sun goes down that he may sleep in his garment, and bless you; and it shall be righteousness to you (Deuteronomy 24:13), if he does not acquire the pledge, what righteousness is there? From here [we learn] that the creditor acquires the pledge.

 

The Talmud resolves the difficulty by saying that this pledge referred to here is a pledge that the betrother took from another person. Through a midrash the rabbis learn that a creditor has legal title to the pledge he takes. The Torah considers it righteous for a creditor to return a pledge to a poor person. If the pledge did not belong to the creditor, then how is this righteous? Thus the creditor is considered as the owner of the pledge. This does not mean that he need not return it to the debtor when the debt is paid back. It just means that while it is in his possession it belongs to him. If he wants, he could even use it to betroth a woman. But a man cannot betroth a woman by giving her a pledge on a debt that he himself owes her. In other words he can give it to her as a creditor possessing a pledge, but not as a debtor promising to give her money.

We should note that this is difficult. After all, if a creditor owns a pledge, then why is she not betrothed when he gives her his own pledge? The Tosafot explain that while the pledge might be hers, it is not considered money and a woman can be betrothed only with money or goods.

 

בני רב הונא בר אבין זבון ההיא אמתא בפריטי לא הוו בהדייהו אותיבי נסכא עליה לסוף אייקר אמתא אתו לקמיה דרבי אמי אמר להו פריטי אין כאן נסכא אין כאן

The sons of R. Huna b. Abin bought a female slave for copper coins. They did not have [the coins] at hand, so they gave a silver ingot as a pledge. Subsequently the slave’s value increased. They came before R. Ami. He said to them: There are no coins here, nor is there a silver ingot.

 

R. Ami rules here that the silver ingot given as a pledge does not acquire the slave. Thus we can see that a pledge cannot enact a transaction, only the giving of the money can. So too when it comes to kiddushin, the giving of a pledge is not considered akin to the giving of money and she is not betrothed.