Halakhah for Kiddushin 3:18

“On condition that I am rich, and found to be poor or poor and found to be rich”; “On condition that I am a Priest¹³¹The priest is the principle functionary in the divine services. They engage in cultic ceremonies which are conducted mainly in the Temple (in Jerusalem prior to 70 A.D.). In general the priest’s post is authorized by hereditary right and they constitute a distinct class separate from the rest of the people. The Hebrew term used to designate a priest is Kohen. According to sections of the Torah the right or priesthood is maintained exclusively for one family of the levite tribe, the family of Aaron.
In modern times the priest has the following privileges:
a) the right to be called first to the reading of the Torah.
b) the privilege of having the phrase, bi-reshut Kohen (with the permission of the Kohen) added to the Grace after Meals.
c) the laws prohibiting contact with the dead except for close relatives and met mitsva are in full force.
d) the laws prohibiting marriage to a Zonah, a halalah, a proselyte, a divorcee, a widow who has received ḥalizah are still in effect.
e) he is entitled to the priest’s position at the ceremony of the redemption of the first born male.
Reform Judaism does not follow all the traditional laws applying to a Kohen. and found to be a Levite¹³²The tribe of Levi was singled out as the servants of God in the Temple. They were chosen “in place of all the first born among the Israelite people” (Num. 3:40-43). Though priests came from one family of the tribe of Levi all Levites served as attendants to the Priesthood. The superiority of the family of Aaron over the Levites is clearly stressed in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers. Since the destruction of the Temple the Levite has no special privileges except being called second after the Kohen to Torah, and washing the hands of the Kohen before the latter blesses the people. Their first born sons need not be redeemed. or a Levite and found to be a Priest;” Netin¹³³Usually non-Jewish temple slaves. Traditionally they were considered descendants of the Gibeonites. This group was considered a second type of those in the prohibited category. and found to be a Mamzer¹³⁴Usually translated as “bastard” but the true definition is found in Kidushin 3:12 “If she cannot contract a legally valid marriage to this man, but can contract a legally valid marriage to others, her offspring [from the former] is a mamzer. A mamzer is the issue of a couple whose sexual relationship is forbidden according to the Torah and is punishable by excommunication or death. A mamzer is also the descendant of a mamzer. According to Deut. 23:3: “A mamzer shall not enter the congregation of the Lord” and may not marry a legitimate Jew or Jewess. Legally the status of a mamzer is no different than any other Jew except with regard to marriage. The mamzer is eligible to hold any public office and he or she maintains their appropriate inheritance rights. or Mamzer and found to be Netin; a town dweller and found to be a city dweller or a city dweller and found to be a town dweller; “on condition that my house is close to a bath” and it is found to be far, far and it is found close; “on condition that I have a slave girl” or “grown daughter or a baker” and he does not have, on condition that he does not have and he has; “on condition that he has a wife and sons”¹³⁵(children). and he does not, on condition that he does not have and he does have; in all of these, or if he said I betrothed you to me with this cup of wine and it is found to be honey or honey and it was found to be water, for example that it was covered and she did not recognize it until afterwards, in all these and similar events even if she said “in my heart I intended to be betrothed to him,” even if the condition is not fulfilled she is not betrothed. It makes no difference if she accepts the betrothal; it makes no difference if she told the agent to accept for her with conditions and the agent changed it, and the same holds true if she deceived him, even if he said¹³⁶(afterwards). “In my heart I intended to betroth her” even though she fooled me, she is not betrothed. [Note: Except if afterwards she explicitly said so at the time of betrothal and the husband heard and was silent (Tur) and similarly if she deceived him (and he said explicitly, even if it was not the case) the betrothal is betrothal.] However if he married her¹³⁷(without conditions). and he said “I thought that she was a Kohenet and she is a Levitess,” or¹³⁸(I thought). a Levitess and she is a Kohenet, rich¹³⁹(I thought). and she is poor, poor¹⁴⁰(I thought). and she is rich behold she is betrothed.

The Rishonim are divided as to how to resolve the Gemara’s dispute. The Tur (E.H. 42) states, as the primary opinion, that the betrothal ceremony is invalid, but he cites the Semag’s (Aseih 48) ruling that since the Gemara did not resolve the issue, we must rule strictly. The Beit Yosef (ad. loc. s.v. Hamekadeish) cites the Rambam (Hilchot Ishut 4:6), the Rif (Kiddushin 28a), and the Rosh (Kiddushin 3:13), who also rule that the kiddushin is invalid, and the Otzar Haposkim (42:2:18) likewise cites a very long list of Rishonim who agree with this view. Indeed, the Noda Biy’huda (2 E.H. 75, cited in the Pitchei Teshuvah E.H. 42:6) observes that the overwhelming consensus is that such a ceremony is invalid. However, the Beit Yosef also cites the aforementioned Semag, who cites the Sefer Yerei’im (167) as a precedent for his ruling.