(Beraisa): If he said 'you are my wife', 'you are my betrothed', or 'you are acquired to me', she is Mekudeshes;

If he said 'you are mine', 'you are in my domain', 'you are Zekukah (in need of) me', she is Mekudeshes.

Question: Why didn't the Beraisa teach all six cases in one clause?

Answer: The Tana first heard the first three cases, and taught them. He later heard the latter three, and appended them.

Question: What is the law in the following cases? He said 'you are Meyuchedes (special) to me', 'you are Meyu'edes (designated) for me', 'you are my helpmate', 'you are my counterpart', 'you are Atzurasi (my gathered one )', 'you are Tzalasi (my side)', 'you are Segurasi (closed off to me)', 'you are under me', 'you are Tefusasi (the one I seized)', or 'you are Lekuchasi (the one I took).'

Answer (for to the last case - Beraisa): If one said 'you are Lekuchasi', she is Mekudeshes, like it says 'Ki Yikach (when a man will take) a woman'.

Question: If he says 'you are my Charufah', what is the law?

Answer (Beraisa): If he says 'you are my Charufah' she is Mekudeshes, for it says "and she is a Shifchah (Kena'anis slave) Charufah to a man." Also, in Yehudah, an Arusah (one who was Mekudeshes, before Nisu'in) is called Charufah.

Question: Since the Torah uses the word to refers to marriage, why must we bring support from the way people speak in Yehudah?

Correction: The Beraisa means that in Yehudah, if one said 'you are my Charufah', she is Mekudeshes, because in Yehudah, an Arusah is called Charufah.

Question: What is the case of the expressions about which we asked above?

If he was not talking with her about Kidushin, how would she know that he intends to be Mekadesh her?

If he was talking with her about Kidushin, he need not say anything else!

(Mishnah - Rebbi Yosi): If a man was talking with a woman about divorce or Kidushin, and gave her a Get or Kidushin money without specifying (that he intends to divorce or Mekadesh her), it works;

Rebbi Yehudah says, he must specify.

(Rav Huna): The Halachah follows Rebbi Yosi.

Answer: The case is, he was talking with her about Kidushin. Indeed, had he given the money silently, she would be Mekudeshes;

If he said one of the doubtful expressions, we are not sure if he meant to be Mekadesh her or to employ her.

These questions are unresolved.

(Mishnah - Rebbi Yosi): If a man was talking with a woman about divorce or Kidushin, and gave her a Get or Kidushin money without specifying, it works;

Rebbi Yehudah says, he must specify.

(Rav Yehudah and R. Elazar): The case is, they were discussing the divorce or Kidushin (right before he gave it to her).

(Later) Tana'im argue about whether or not Rebbi Yosi and Rebbi Yehudah indeed argued in this case.

(Beraisa - Rebbi): The case is, they were discussing the divorce or Kidushin;

R. Elazar b'Rebbi Shimon says, it is even if they were not discussing it.

Question: If he were not talking with her about Kidushin, how would she know that he intends to be Mekadesh her?

Answer (Abaye): They were discussing the divorce or Kidushin, then discussed related matters, and he gave a Get or money to her.

(Rav Huna): The Halachah follows Rebbi Yosi.

(Rav Yehudah): Anyone who is not an expert in divorce and Kidushin should not rule about such matters.

Question (Rav Yemar): Must one know even Rav Huna's ruling?

Answer (Rav Ashi): Yes.

(Beraisa): Similarly regarding divorce, if a man gave to his wife a Get and said 'you are sent', 'you are divorced', or 'you are permitted to any man', she is divorced.

Clearly, if he (gave her a Get and) said 'you are a free woman', this has no effect;

If he told his Shifchah 'you are permitted to any man', this has no effect.

Question: If he told his wife 'you are to yourself', what is the law?

Does he mean 'you may keep your earnings'?

Or, does he mean 'you are entirely to yourself (i.e. divorced from me)'?

Answer (Ravina - Beraisa): The essence of a Get of freedom is 'you are free' or 'you are to yourself'.

'You are to yourself' works even for a slave, who bodily belongs to his master. All the more so, it works for a wife, since her husband does not own her!

Question (Ravina): If one told his slave 'I have no involvement with you', what is the law?

Does he mean, 'I have no involvement with you' at all (and you are free)?

Or, does he mean 'I will not make you work for me'?

Answer (Rav Nachman - Mishnah): If one sold his slave to a Nochri, the original master must free the slave with a document (this is a fine);

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, if the original master wrote Ono, no other document is needed.

(Rav Sheshes): An Ono says 'if you flee from your new master, I have no involvement with you.'

(Abaye): If a man was Mekadesh a woman with a loan, she is not Mekudeshes;

If he was Mekadesh her with the benefit of a loan, she is Mekudeshes, but this is forbidden because it is a ruse for usury.

Question: What is the case of benefit of a loan?

Suggestion: He lent her four coins on condition that she repay five, and he is Mekadesh her with the fifth coin.

Rejection #1: That is absolute interest, not just a ruse!

Rejection #2: That is just like Kidushin with a loan (which does not work)!

Answer: Rather, he granted her an extension on her loan (Rashi; Tosfos - he paid her creditor to grant her an extension).

(Rava): If one said 'here is money on condition that you return it to me', this is not a valid Kinyan Kesef (to buy land), it cannot make Kidushin, and (if he give to a Kohen) it cannot redeem a firstborn son;

One fulfills the Mitzvah of giving Terumah even if he stipulates that the Kohen return it;

However, this is forbidden, for it is like a Kohen who helps in the granary in exchange for receiving Terumah.

Objection #1: No matter how Rava holds, this is difficult!

If a gift on condition to return it is considered a gift, it should work in all the cases!

If it is not considered a gift, it should not help for Terumah, either!

Objection #2: Elsewhere, Rava considers it to be a gift!

(Rava): If one said 'this Esrog is yours on condition that you return it to me', the recipient fulfilled the Mitzvah only if he returned it.

(Rav Ashi): Rather, such a gift works in all cases, except for Kidushin, because (it is like Chalipin, and) a woman cannot be acquired through Chalipin.

(Rav Huna Mar Brei d'Rav Nechemyah): I heard that Rava actually taught like you said.