The Gemara says that if one says "You are hereby betrothed to me on condition that you have no claim upon me for food, clothing or marital relations," while R' Meir says this is void, R' Yehudah said is stands because it is a monetary matter.
How can it stand when it is action first, stipulation second? The Mishnah on the same page says that this order voids the statement?
Barry Epstein, Dallas, USA
Almost none of the stipulations which are brought in the Mishnah meet all the conditions necessarily for making a valed "Tenai." For example, the condition of Tenai Kaful, that the stipulation must be two-sided, is invariably deleted. (See Tosfos Kesuvos 56a DH Harei, who points out that the case you mentioned must also be discussing a stipulation that was two sided.)
From this it is obvious that the Mishnah and the Gemara bring the stipulations in abridged form, without the proper formulation. The proper formulation can be deduced from elsewhere.
D. Zupnik