ההוא גברא דאקדיש בשיראי:
רבה אמר: "לא צריכי שומא!"
רב יוסף אמר: "צריכי שומא!"
The gemarah tries to establish in what case they are arguing and comes
up with two alternate understandings of Rav Yoseph's reason for requiring an evaluation
Way number one - lishna kamma
אי דאמר לה "בכל דהו", כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא צריכי שומא. אי דאמר לה "חמשין" ולא שוו חמשין, הא לא שוו!
כי פליגי דאמר: "חמשין" ושוו חמשין!
רבה אמר: "לא צריכי שומא, דהא שוו חמשין!"
רב יוסף אמר: "צריכי שומא, כיון דאיתתא לא בקיאה בשומא לא סמכה דעתה!"
Way number two - lishna basra
איכא דאמרי: בכל דהו נמי פליגי
רב יוסף אמר: "שוה כסף הרי הוא ככסף, מה כסף דקיץ אף שוה כסף נמי דקייץ"
§ The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who betrothed a woman with silk [beshira’ei] garments. Rabba said: An appraisal of the value of the garments is not necessary, as they are certainly worth more than one peruta. Rav Yosef said: An appraisal of the value of the garments is necessary, and as the man did not determine the value of the silk garments before the betrothal, the betrothal is invalid. The Gemara comments: If he said to her that she should become betrothed to him by any amount, regardless of the value of the silk garments, everyone agrees that the garments do not require appraisal, as they are undoubtedly worth more than one peruta. Conversely, if he said to her that they are worth fifty dinars, and they are not worth fifty dinars, then everyone agrees that the betrothal is not valid, as they are not worth the amount he specified. They disagree when he said that they are worth fifty dinars, and in actuality they are worth fifty dinars. Rabba said: An appraisal of the value of the garments is not necessary before the betrothal, as they are worth fifty dinars. Rav Yosef said: An appraisal of the value of the garments is necessary, because the woman herself is not an expert in appraisal and she does not rely on his assessment. Since she is unsure if the garments are actually worth fifty dinars as he claimed, she does not agree to be betrothed. There are those who say that even in a case where he says to her: Be betrothed to me with these silk garments, whatever they are worth, the amora’im disagree with regard to the halakha. The reason for the dispute in this case is as follows. Rav Yosef said: An item worth money is like money in every way. Just as money is set, i.e., it has a clearly defined value, so too, an item with an item worth money must be set, i.e., it must have a clearly defined value.
ההוא גברא דאקדיש בזוודא דאורדי יתיב רב שימי בר חייא קמיה דרב וקא מעיין בה אי אית בה שוה פרוטה אין אי לא לא ואי לית בה שוה פרוטה לא.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who betrothed a woman with a bundle of rags [zavda de’urdei]. Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya sat before Rav and examined the bundle to see if it had the value of one peruta. If it was worth one peruta, yes, she was betrothed, and if not, no, she was not betrothed. The Gemara asks: And if it does not have the value of one peruta, is she not betrothed? But didn’t Shmuel say that we are concerned that the item might be worth one peruta in Media? The Gemara explains: This is not difficult. This ruling of Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya is referring to betrothal whose status is certain, whereas this statement of Shmuel is referring to betrothal whose status is uncertain.
אף שוה כסף דקיץ - הא דאמרינן לקמן (קידושין דף יב.) ההוא גברא דקדיש בזוודא דאורדי יתיב רב שימי בר חייא וקא מעיין בה אי אית בה שוה פרוטה אין אי לא לא לכאורה דומה דלא כרב יוסף:


