Study Kiddushin folio 47B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
is like a deposit. The Talmud analyzes this: They disagree only with regard to this: There is one Sage who holds that one can betroth a woman with a loan, even though the value of one peruta does not remain of it. And one Sage holds that if the value of one peruta remains from it, yes, he can betr
Rava said to him: And how can you understand it that way? Is this baraita fully explainable? It is corrupted and cannot be cited as a proof.
He explains why the baraita must be corrupted: What are the circumstances of this deposit discussed in the baraita? If she assumed financial responsibility to repay the owner for it if it is stolen or lost, it is the same as a loan, as even if it is entirely lost she must still repay its value. If
Rather, since the wording of the baraita cannot remain as is, answer this way: But if he betroths her with a loan that he had given her, she is not betrothed, despite the fact that the value of one peruta of it remains.
The baraita stated that R' Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of R' Meir: A loan is like a deposit. The Talmud asks: With regard to what principle do they disagree? Rabba said: I found the scholars in the study hall of Rav who were sitting and saying: They disagree with regard to the issue of wheth