Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Even ha-Ezer/31

Paragraph 1- One may not marry with an item worth less than a perutah. If one simply marries with an item, however, no initial appraisal is required to see whether it is worth a perutah or not. Rather, if it is worth a perutah, she is married. Even if he told her to marry her with this item that is worth 50 zuz and they did not initially appraise it, if it is later discovered to be worth 50 zuz, she would be married.

Paragraph 2- There are those who say that if one marries with an item where people are not experts in appraisal and sometimes greatly err, such as good or precious stones or something similar, and the man tells the woman to marry with this stone worth 50 zuz, an appraisal is required because she does not rely on what he said. There are those who say that even if he simply married with the stone and did not tell her it was worth 50 zuz, an appraisal is required. This is why we have the custom to marry with a ring that has no stone. ''If one marries with a ring that has a stone or with a standard ring that turns out to be copper, although that is not the practice, we would be concerned that the marriage is effective. Even if the witnesses under the chupa said the ring was gold and it turned out to be copper, although by law it would seem that she is not married, in an actual case one should be stringent. Nevertheless, we have the practice under the chupa to ask the witnesses if the ring is worth a perutah so that the bride knows she is only being married with a perutah. We also have the practice to cover the modest bride’s face and she is not concerned with what he marries her with.''

Paragraph 3- If one marries with food or a vessel or something similar that is worth less than a perutah, the woman’s marriage status would be uncertain because this item may be worth a perutah in another location. There are those who say that if he married with a cooked dish or vegetable that does not last or anything similar that is not worth a perutah in that location, she would not be married at all because this item cannot reach another location without perishing and thus is not worth a perutah.

Paragraph 4- In the case where we said that a woman’s marriage status is uncertain because the item may be worth a perutah in another location, she would need a get to allow her to marry someone else. If the man wants to remain married, she would need to receive marriage from him again. If a third party married her in a bona-fide manner, the first husband must divorce her and the second one can marry her. The second husband cannot divorce her and then have the first husband marry her, however. ''This is only where the second husband did not have sexual relations with her before the divorce. If he did have sexual relations, she has become prohibited to the first husband, and just as she is prohibited to the husband, she is prohibited to the man she had an affair with.'' There are those who say that if she had a child from the second husband without the first husband divorcing her, the child would be legitimate.

Paragraph 5- If a man tells a woman, “be married to me with this date, be married to me with this, be married to me with this,” and one of the dates is worth a perutah, she would be married. If not, she would only be married out of doubt that one of the dates is worth a perutah in another location. If he told her, “be married to me with this, and this, and this,” they would all combine, in that if the sum of all of them were worth a perutah, she would be married. If not, she would only be married out of doubt. If she consumed them one at a time and the last one was worth a perutah, she would be married. If not, she would only be married out of doubt because the dates she consumed have the status of a loan and a woman is not married if the marriage was through a loan, and thus the marriage is only done via the last date.

Paragraph 6- If the man told the woman, “be married to me with these,” and she consumed them one at a time, even the ones she consumed can combine for a perutah. Because he completed his entire statement before giving her anything, as soon as he gave her the first item, she received it as a marriage item and consumed her own item. The same would be true where he said “with this, with this” and he completed his words before she received them, and they would all combine, even if she consumed one by one. There are those who disagree with this.

Paragraph 7- If a man tells a woman, “half of you shall be married to me with half a perutah, and half with half a perutah,” “half of you shall be married to me with a perutah, and half with a perutah,” “half with a perutah today and half with a perutah tomorrow” or “two of your halves with a perutah,” or if one tells another man “your two daughters for my two sons with a perutah,” “your daughter shall be married to me and your cow shall be sold to me for a perutah” or “your daughter shall be married to me and your real property sold to me for a perutah,” the woman’s marriage would be uncertain.

Paragraph 8- If a man tells a woman, “be married to half of me,” she would be married. What is this comparable to? To a man who tells a woman that she and another woman should be his wife, resulting in the woman only having “half” a husband. If he tells her “half of you shall be married to me,” however, she would not be married because a woman cannot be married to two men. Likewise, if he said “you are married to me and this person,” she would not be married.

Paragraph 9- If one married a woman with money worth less than a perutah, even if he later sends wedding-presents, we would not be concerned that the gifts he sent were for marriage. If he married her with less than a perutah and then had sexual relations in the present of witnesses without specifying the purpose, however, she would need a get because he certainly had the relations for the sake of marriage. ''The same would be true in the case of a minor who married and then became an adult, and she would need a get because he certainly had sexual relations for the sake of marriage. This is only true in such cases because everyone is aware that marriage of a minor or with less than a perutah is of no effect so he must have had sexual relations for the sake of marriage. In a situation where one may err, however, another marriage would be required as was discussed in paragraph 4 of this Siman.''