לא עלתה בידו אלא רגזנותא ולאדם טוב מטעימים אותו מפרי מעשיו וכל שאינו לא במקרא ולא במשנה ולא בדרך ארץ דור הנאה ממנו שנאמר ובמושב לצים לא ישב מושבו מושב לצים

has managed to acquire only anger [ragzanuta], i. e., nothing beneficial comes through anger; in the end he is left with nothing but the anger itself. And a good person is given the fruit of his actions to taste. And with regard to any person who does not engage in the study of Bible, nor the study of Mishna, nor the desired mode of behavior, one should vow to not derive benefit from him, and one should have no contact with him, as it is stated: “ Nor sat in the seat of the scornful” (Psalms 1:1). The seat of this person is certainly the seat of the scornful, as he is engaged in nothing but idle matters.

הדרן עלך האשה נקנית

מתני׳ האיש מקדש בו ובשלוחו האשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה האיש מקדש את בתו כשהיא נערה בו ובשלוחו

MISHNA: A man can betroth a woman by himself or by means of his agent. Similarly, a woman can become betrothed by herself or by means of her agent. A man can betroth his daughter to a man when she is a young woman, either by himself or by means of his agent.

גמ׳ השתא בשלוחו מקדש בו מיבעיא אמר רב יוסף מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו כי הא דרב ספרא מחריך רישא רבא מלח שיבוטא

GEMARA: The Gemara starts by questioning the need for the seemingly extraneous halakha stated in the mishna: Now that the mishna stated that one can betroth a woman by means of his agent, is it necessary to state that a man can betroth a woman by himself? Rav Yosef says: The mishna writes both halakhot to teach that although the betrothal is valid either way, it is more fitting that the mitzva be performed by the man himself than by means of his agent. This is like that story of Rav Safra, who would himself singe the head of an animal on Shabbat eve to prepare it to be eaten on Shabbat, and Rava, who would salt a turbot fish himself, to fulfill the mitzva to prepare for Shabbat, although this could have been done by others.

איכא דאמרי בהא איסורא נמי אית בה כדרב יהודה אמר רב דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב אסור לאדם שיקדש את האשה עד שיראנה שמא יראה בה דבר מגונה ותתגנה עליו ורחמנא אמר ואהבת לרעך כמוך

There are those who say: With regard to this particular mitzva of betrothal, it also involves a prohibition, in accordance with that which Rav Yehuda says that Rav says, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is forbidden for a man to betroth a woman until he sees her, lest he see something repulsive in her after the betrothal, and she will become repugnant to him, which will cause him to hate her. And to prevent this violation of what the Merciful One states in the Torah:“ And you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18), the Sages ruled that a man must betroth a woman in person, to ensure that he approves of her.

וכי איתמר דרב יוסף אסיפא איתמר האשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה השתא בשלוחה מיקדשא בה מיבעיא אמר רב יוסף מצוה בה יותר מבשלוחה כי הא דרב ספרא מחריך רישא רבא מלח שיבוטא

And if there is a prohibition against a man betrothing a women by means of an agent, then when the statement of Rav Yosef was stated, that it is merely preferable that the betrothal be performed without an agent, it was stated with regard to the latter clause of the mishna: A woman can become betrothed by herself or by means of her agent. Now that the mishna stated that she can become betrothed by means of her agent, is it necessary to state that she can become betrothed by herself? It was in response to this that Rav Yosef says: It is more fitting that the mitzva be performed by the woman herself than by means of her agent. This is like that story of Rav Safra, who would himself singe the head of an animal on Shabbat eve to prepare it to be eaten on Shabbat, and Rava, who would himself salt a turbot fish.

אבל בהא איסורא לית בה כדריש לקיש דאמר ריש לקיש טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו

But in this case of a woman who appoints an agent, there is no prohibition, as that which Reish Lakish said. As Reish Lakish said: Women have a say ing: It is better to sit as two bodies, i. e., be married, than to sit lonely like a widow. Once a woman has decided to marry, she will accept any husband whose betrothal her agent accepts on her behalf, and there is no concern that she will find her betrothed repulsive and violate the mitzva of loving one’s neighbor like oneself.

האיש מקדש את בתו כשהיא נערה כשהיא נערה אין כשהיא קטנה לא מסייע ליה לרב דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב ואיתימא רבי אלעזר אסור לאדם שיקדש את בתו כשהיא קטנה עד שתגדל ותאמר בפלוני אני רוצה

The mishna teaches: A man can betroth his daughter to a man when she is a young woman. The Gemara infers: When she is a young woman, yes, he can betroth her; when she is a minor, no, he cannot betroth her. This statement supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says, and some say it was said by Rabbi Elazar: It is prohibited for a person to betroth his daughter to a man when she is a minor, until such time that she grows up and says: I want to marry so-and-so. If a father betroths his daughter when she is a minor and incapable of forming an opinion of the husband, she may later find herself married to someone she does not like.

שליחות מנלן דתניא ושלח מלמד שהוא עושה שליח

§ The mishna states that an agent has the power to effect betrothal. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that there is halakhic agency? The Gemara answers: As it is taught in a baraita:

The Torah states with regard to one who divorces his wife: “ That he writes her a bill of divorce, and gives it in her hand, and sends her [veshilleḥah] out of his house” (Deuteronomy 24:1). The verse employs the verb: And he sends [veshillaḥ]. The fact that the verse employs the term veshillaḥ, as opposed to another verb denoting divorce, vegereshah, teaches that he can appoint an agent [shaliaḥ], as both words share the root shin, lamed, ḥet. The husband does not have to personally give his wife the bill of divorce.

ושלחה מלמד שהיא עושה שליח ושלח ושלחה מלמד שהשליח עושה שליח

Additionally, the fact that the term “ and he sends her [veshilleḥah]” can also be read as: And she sends [veshalleḥa], teaches that she too can appoint an agent to accept her bill of divorce. Furthermore, in this same passage the verb is repeated in the phrases“ and he sends, ” “ and he sends her” (Deuteronomy 24: 1–3), which serves to teach that an agent can appoint another agent.

אשכחן בגירושין בקידושין מנלן וכי תימא דיליף מגירושין מה לגירושין שכן ישנן בעל כרחה אמר קרא ויצאה והיתה מקיש הויה ליציאה מה יציאה משוי שליח אף הויה נמי משוי שליח

The Gemara asks: We found a source for agency with regard to divorce; from where do we derive that there is agency with regard to betrothal? And if you would say that it is derived from divorce, i. e., just as a wife can be divorced from her husband by means of an agent, she can become betrothed to him in the same way, the two cases are not similar: What is unique about divorce is that it can be effected against her will, while betrothal cannot. Therefore, a means of effecting divorce cannot necessarily be used to effect betrothal. The Gemara answers: The verse states: “ And she departs out of his house, and goes and becomes another man’s wife” (Deuteronomy 24:2). Because the verse juxtaposes becoming married to leaving a marriage, just as a husband can appoint an agent for the purpose of leaving a marriage, so too he can appoint an agent for the purpose of becoming married.

ואלא הא דתנן האומר לשלוחו צא תרום תורם כדעת בעל הבית ואם אינו יודע דעת בעל הבית תורם בבינונית אחד מחמשים

The Gemara objects: But there is that which we learned in a mishna ( Terumot 4: 4): In the case of one who says to his agent: Go out and separate teruma from my field’s produce for me, the agent must separate teruma in accordance with the mindset of the owner. He must separate the amount that he assumes the owner would want to give, as there is no fixed measure for the amount that one must set aside as teruma. A generous person would give as much as one-fortieth of the produce as teruma, while a stingy person would give one-sixtieth. And if he does not know the mindset of the owner, he separates an intermediate measure, which is one-fiftieth of the produce.