(Mishnah): If a man betrothed two women with one Perutah or one woman with less than a Perutah, even if he later sent her gifts, she is not betrothed, as he sent them relying on the original Kidushin.

This also applies to child who betrothed (and later sent gifts when he was already an adult).

(Gemara - Beraisa): In all of these cases, if he later had relations with her, he acquires her (through those relations).

R. Shimon ben R. Yehudah citing R. Shimon: In all of these cases, if he later had relations with her, he does not acquire her, as his act of relations was done relying on the original Kidushin. Even according to the 1st opinion, R. Chiya citing R. Yochanan says that she is given the stringencies of being betrothed.

R. Chiya citing R. Yochanan: Any case where the action preceded the condition (as learned from the condition made to the Bnei Gad and Bnei Reuven, that they would be able to live in the Transjordan area on condition that they would come to conquer the Land of Israel) is given the stringencies of betrothal.

R. Mana to R. Yudan: This tana, who holds that any stipulation that began with the action is negated, is unlike Shimon.

R. Yudan citing R. Yochanan: Even R. Shimon agrees that she must be stringent as if she is betrothed.

Question: What would be an example of stating the action before the stipulation?

Answer: "I am betrothing you through having relations on condition that it will rain''. If it rained, she is betrothed; if not, she is no betrothed.

R. Chiya citing R. Yochanan: If one betrothed with a loan, she must be stringent as if she is betrothed.

If a lender said to a field owner, "Sell me your field instead of the money that you owe me'', he does not acquire the field.

If a lender said, "Sell me this garment with the money that you owe me'', if the lender retracted, he is not cursed with "Mi Shepara'' since no money changed hands for this sale.

Question: If the lender (buyer) wished to continue with the deal but the seller (borrower) wished to retract, what is the law?

Answer (Mishnah in Maseches Bava Metzia): "(In discussion the prohibition of taking interest) Reuven bought a year's supply of wheat according to the price that a kur of wheat was worth a golden dinar (which is 25 silver dinar) and the value of wheat increased to 30 silver dinar. Reuven then said, "Give me my wheat (according to the lower value) as I would like to buy wine with it''. Shimon replied, "I am willing to view the wheat that I owe you according to the higher price (as if you are now lending me the difference) and I accept to give you wine according to the wheat that I owe''. If Shimon does not have wine, it is a Rabbinical prohibition of taking interest.'' But if he has wine, Reuven may buy from him (since it is considered a regular transaction, without interest. Here also, if the seller has it, it is acquired by the buyer and he must be supplied with it.

Support - Beraisa (R. Chiya): If he has wine, he must give it to him.

R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak sent a message to Bavel, saying, "You know that R. Chiya rules in the name of R. Yochanan, that if one betrothed with a loan, she must be stringent as if she is betrothed. You also know that R. Zeira was unhappy with this. Why? Originally they were stringent as if it is a full Kidushin and now they are lenient to only view it as a doubtful one.

R. Yosa bei R. Bun: On the contrary, they were behaving leniently and I was stringent to say that since we view it as a betrothal as a stringency, if another man came and betrothed her, that Kidushin would take effect.

R. Yudan bei R. Chanan: If there is a case of a possible prohibition of Ervah (a possible close relative upon whom Kidushin does not take effect), be stringent to view the person as a non-Ervah, by saying that Kidushin does take effect.