Si l'on dit à son ami: «Va me fiancer cette femme», et qu'il est allé la fiancer à lui-même, elle est fiancée. [Le gemara explique: Quelle est l'intention de "et il est parti"? Il est allé avec tromperie. Et cela explique: "il a dit à son ami" plutôt que: "il a dit à son messager"—pour nous informer que même s'il ne l'a pas nommé messager ab initio pour cela, mais lui a simplement dit: «Fiancé cette femme à moi», s'il l'a fiancée à lui-même, on dit qu'il est parti «avec tromperie», et il est considéré comme un trompeur.] De même, si quelqu'un dit à une femme: «Tu m'es fiancée après trente jours», et qu'un autre est venu et l'a fiancée dans les trente jours, elle est fiancée à la seconde. [Et il peut l'épouser même dans ces trente jours]. Si elle était la fille d'un Cohein (fiancée) à un Israélite [Si celle qui était fiancée après trente jours était la fille d'un Cohein], elle pourrait manger de la terumah [tous ces trente jours. Car elle n'a pas été rendue inapte à manger de la terumah de la maison de son père. Et si elle était la fille d'un Israélite (fiancé) à un Cohein, elle ne peut pas manger de terumah, n'étant pas encore l'épouse d'un Cohein.] (Si on lui dit: "Tu es fiancée à moi) à partir de trente ans jours, "et un autre est venu et l'a fiancée dans les trente jours, elle est fiancée et non fiancée [et elle a besoin d'un get des deux.] Si elle était la fille d'un Israélite (fiancé) à un Cohein, ou la fille d'un Cohein (fiancée) à un Israélite, elle ne peut pas manger de terumah.
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
האומר לחבירו צא וקדש לי אשה פלונית וקדשה לעצמו – We say in the Gemara (Kiddushin 58b) what is "והלך" /”and he went ? That he went with deception, and for that reason, the Mishnah teaches: “He who says to his friend” and it doesn’t teach: “He who says to his agent,” to teach us that even though he had not made him his agent from the outset to this, but said to him: “Betroth to me a specific woman,” if he betrothed him to himself, , we call him that he went with reception and that he was a deceiver.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
Introduction
The first section deals with a person who sends an agent out to betroth a woman on his behalf and then the agent betroths the woman to himself.
The second section deals with a man who betroths a woman but sets the betrothal date to occur in thirty days. The question is, if someone else betroths her within those thirty days, is she betrothed to the first man or to the second?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
ובא אחר וקדשה בתוך ל' יום מקודשת לשני – and he can consummate a marriage by conducting a woman to his home, even within these thirty days.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
If he says to his fellow, “Go out and betroth me such-and-such a woman,” and he goes and betroths her to himself, she is betrothed. Reuven sends Shimon out to betroth Rachel on his behalf. Upon seeing Rachel, Shimon decides that he himself wants to betroth her, and when he proposes betrothal, Rachel agrees. She is now betrothed to Shimon and the fact that Shimon was supposed to act as Reuven’s agent is irrelevant. Of course, we can be sure that Reuven will not be happy with Shimon and Shimon has acted shamefully with his friend (sounds like a movie plot). Nevertheless, this fact is not of legal significance.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
מקודשת – and she requires a Jewish bill of divorce from both of them.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
Similarly, if he says to a woman, “Be betrothed to me after thirty days,” and another comes and betroths her within the thirty days, she is betrothed to the second, [and in such cases] an Israelite’s daughter [betrothed] to a priest may eat terumah. The connection between this section and the previous one is that in both the woman under discussion is betrothed to the second man. In this case, Reuven betroths the woman but sets the betrothal to begin in thirty days. When Shimon betroths her within thirty days, she is betrothed to Shimon, because Reuven’s betrothal has not yet begun. When the thirty days are up, Reuven’s betrothal does not “kick-in”, because she is already fully betrothed to Shimon. The mishnah expresses the fact that she is fully betrothed to Shimon by stating that if she is an Israelite’s daughter and therefore prohibited to eat terumah, she is now fully betrothed to Shimon and if he is a priest she may eat terumah. Were she not fully betrothed, the mishnah would not say that she can eat terumah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kiddushin
בת כהן לישראל – if this woman is the daughter of a Kohen, that became betrothed after thirty days, all thirty days, she may consume the Priest’s sacred gifts, for she was not invalidated from eating Terumah of her father’s house. But if she is the daughter of an Israelite [who is betrothed] to a Kohen, she does not eat Terumah, for she is not yet the wife of a Kohen.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kiddushin
[But if he says, “Be betrothed to me] from now and after thirty days,” and another comes and betroths her within the thirty days, she is betrothed and not betrothed [to both]: [and in such cases] an Israelite’s daughter [betrothed] to a priest, or a priest’s daughter [betrothed] to an Israelite, may not eat terumah. In this case, Reuven makes an ambiguous statement, “Be betrothed to me from now and after thirty days.” It is unclear whether his betrothal begins now, or after thirty days. Alternatively, she may begin to be betrothed now but not fully betrothed until thirty days. In any case, if Shimon comes along and betroths her within the thirty days, his kiddushin is also doubtfully valid. If Reuven’s betrothal has begun, then she is betrothed to Reuven and Shimon’s act is irrelevant; but if Reuven’s betrothal has not begun, then she would be betrothed to Shimon. Alternatively, if Reuven’s betrothal has begun but not been completed, she may be betrothed to both of them at the same time. In such a situation she would be forbidden to both and require a get from both (see Gittin 7:3). If she was the daughter of a priest and one of them was an Israelite, she would no longer eat terumah lest her marriage to that man was valid. Similarly, if she is the daughter of an Israelite and one of the men was a priest she would not eat terumah lest her marriage to that man was not valid. In other words, we act stringently and she doesn’t get to eat terumah no matter what the case. Again, this is the mishnah’s way of saying that she is doubtfully married to both men and not fully married to either.
