Kiddushin, Daf Samekh, Part 5
Introduction
The Talmud continues to deal with the mishnah.
על מנת שאתן לך מכאן וכו’ פשיטא מהו דתימא לאו תנאה הוא ולזרוזיה קאמר קמ"ל
On condition that I give it to you from now [until thirty days] etc.
But that is obvious? I might have thought that it is not a condition, and he said it to urge himself on; hence we are told [that it is not so.]
The Mishnah seems to teach something too obvious if he says on condition that I give it to you from now until thirty days she is betrothed if he gives it to her within thirty days. Why would we ever have thought otherwise?
I might have thought that he is only saying that as a way to hurry himself up and that he does not really mean to make his betrothal conditional. Therefore, the mishnah needed to teach us that this is indeed a condition. The betrothal is not effective unless he gives her the monety within thirty days.
על מנת שיש לי מאתים זוז וכו’ וניחוש שמא יש לו
ועוד תניא חיישינן שמא יש לו
לא קשיא הא בקידושי ודאי הא בקידושי ספק
On condition that I possess two hundred zuz etc.
But let us fear that he does actually possess it?
Moreover, it was taught: We are concerned that he does possess it.
There is no difficulty: The one refers to certain kiddushin; the other, to doubtful kiddushin.
The Mishnah rules that if he says on condition that I possess two hundred zuz she is betrothed only if he does possess it. But how can we ever be sure that someone does not own two hundred zuz? Maybe he does and we, or even he, does not know about it.
The answer is that if we do not know that he has 200 zuz, she is only doubtfully betrothed. If we know that he has 200 zuz, she is certainly betrothed.
ע"מ שאראך מאתים זוז וכו’ תנא לא נתכונה אלא לראות משלו
On condition that I show you two hundred zuz etc.
A Tanna taught: Her purpose was to see nothing but his money.
He must show her his won money for she did not agree to simply see money belonging to someone else.
ואם הראה לה על השלחן אינה מקודשת פשיטא לא צריכא דאע"ג דנקט דמי בעיסקא
But if he show her [money lying] on the counter, she is not betrothed.
It is necessary [to teach it] only if he holds the money in an investment.
The mishnah again seems to teach something obvious if he just shows her money on the table she is not betrothed.
The Talmud resolves this by saying that even if this is money someone gave him to invest, she is not betrothed. The money needs to be his, not just given to him to use as an investment.