These are the four requirements of every valid condition:
Each of the following requirements must be fulfilled for the condition to control the legal act.
,
the condition must be stated in a twofold manner,
The person must state both what will happen if the condition is fulfilled and what will happen if it is not fulfilled.
◇A helpful concept
This is called a , a doubled condition.
,
its positive statement must precede its negative statement,
He must first state the result if the condition is fulfilled, and only afterward state the result if it is not fulfilled.
,
the condition must be stated before the act,
He must state the condition before completing the act that he wishes to make dependent upon it.
.
and the condition must be something that can possibly be fulfilled.
A condition requiring something impossible is not regarded as a genuine condition.
◇A helpful concept
The derives these requirements from the condition made with the tribes of and before granting them land east of the Jordan River.
—
If the condition lacks any one of these requirements —
Even if the other three requirements were met, the condition is invalid.
,;
the condition is nullified, and it is considered as though no condition was made at all.
The legal act itself is not necessarily nullified. Instead, it takes effect without being restricted by the invalid condition.
,
Thus, the woman is or divorced,
The or divorce takes effect immediately and unconditionally.
,
and the sale or gift takes effect immediately,
The transaction is completed without waiting for the condition to be fulfilled.
,
as though no condition had been made,
The condition is disregarded entirely.
.
because the condition lacked one of the four requirements.
Since it was not formulated properly, it has no power to limit the legal act.
Synopsis
A condition must satisfy all four requirements; otherwise, the condition is ignored and the legal act takes effect without it.
🔎Dig DeeperThe Four Requirements of a Valid Condition
The Four Requirements of a Valid Condition
The Sages derive the formal rules of a condition from ’s agreement with the tribes of and . first stated what would happen if they crossed the Jordan to fight, and then what would happen if they did not. That agreement therefore became the model for a effective condition.
The understands ‘the condition must precede the act’ literally: the condition must be stated before the act being made conditional is completed. The understands it as a rule about wording: within the sentence, the condition must be stated before its legal result. The accepts the Raavad’s interpretation rather than the Rambam’s.
The now demonstrates how all four requirements are included in a valid condition.
:״,;
A man tells a woman: “If you give me two hundred , you are to me with this ;
This is the positive part of the condition: if she gives him the specified sum, the will take effect.
,״.
but if you do not give it to me, you will not be .”
This is the negative part of the condition: if she does not give him the money, the will not take effect.
◇A helpful concept
A and a are units of currency used in the times of . The given to the woman effects the , while the two hundred are the amount she must later give the man to fulfill the condition.
,—
After stating this condition, he gave her the —
He stated the complete condition before performing the act of giving her the .
,
the condition is valid,
It satisfies the required form of a binding condition.
;
and she is conditionally.
The final status of the now depends upon whether she fulfills the condition.
—,
If she gives him the two hundred , she is ;
By giving him the money, she fulfills the condition upon which the depend.
—.
but if she does not give it, she is not .
If the condition is not fulfilled, the do not take effect.
Synopsis
When the complete condition is stated before the are given, the depend upon whether the condition is fulfilled.
In what situation did our Sages say: “Whenever a person makes a condition contrary to what is written in the , his condition is nullified—except when it concerns a monetary matter”?
The now explains which type of condition is truly considered an attempt to contradict the .
◇A helpful concept
A person may generally waive a monetary right that the granted him. He cannot, however, cancel a obligation or prohibition that is not merely financial.
—
For example, a person effects , gives a divorce, presents a gift, or makes a sale —
He performs a valid legal act but attaches a condition to it.
,
on a condition through which he seeks to acquire a right that the did not grant him, but instead withheld from him,
He attempts to use his condition to give himself permission or authority that the explicitly denied him.
—
or to free himself through his condition from an obligation that the imposed upon him —
He attempts to make the legal act binding while avoiding a obligation that normally accompanies it.
:״,;
we tell him: “Your condition is nullified, but the act you performed has already taken effect.
The invalid condition is disregarded, while the underlying , divorce, gift, or sale remains binding.
,
You are not freed from anything that the obligated you to do,
His condition cannot remove a obligation.
״.
nor do you acquire a right that the withheld from you.”
His condition cannot grant him something that the prohibited or denied.
Synopsis
A condition cannot cancel a nonmonetary obligation or create a right that the withheld; the condition is void, but the underlying legal act remains binding.
Financial Rights May Be Waived—Other Obligations May Not
?,—
What is an example? A man effects with a woman on condition that he will not owe her food, clothing, or —
He attempts to make the marriage binding while removing the three marital obligations stated by the .
◇A helpful concept
She’er refers to the husband’s obligation to provide food, kesus to his obligation to provide clothing, and to his obligation to provide conjugal relations.
:״—״,
we tell him: “Regarding clothing and food, your condition is valid,”
These are financial obligations. Since the woman may agree to waive monetary rights owed to her, this part of the condition can take effect.
.
because it is a condition concerning monetary matters.
A person may choose to surrender a financial benefit to which the entitled her.
—,
But regarding , your condition is nullified,
are not treated as an ordinary financial benefit that may be removed through such a condition.
,
because the obligated you in her .
The husband cannot use a condition to release himself from this personal marital obligation.
,,
The woman is , and you remain obligated in her .
The marriage takes effect, but the invalid portion of the condition is disregarded.
״.
You do not have the power to free yourself from this responsibility through your condition.”
A private agreement cannot remove this obligation.
.
The same applies in all similar situations.
A condition may waive monetary rights, but not other obligations that the requires.
—
Similarly, if a man effects with a woman taken captive in war on condition that he may treat her as a servant —
He attempts to make the marriage binding while reserving a right that the denied him.
◇A helpful concept
The permits a Jewish soldier, under specific conditions, to marry a female captive described as a yefas toar. After taking her as a wife, he may not sell her or treat her as a slave.
,;
she is , but he may not treat her as a servant.
The take effect, while the condition granting him control over her is nullified.
,
because the prohibited him from enslaving her after having relations with her.
Once their relationship has been consummated, the expressly denies him the right to treat her as a slave.
,
His condition cannot grant him a right that the withheld from him.
A person cannot create permission for himself merely by including it in a condition.
.
Rather, his condition is nullified.
The forbidden condition is ignored, while the remain valid.
.
The same applies in all similar situations.
Whenever a condition attempts to create a right prohibited by the , the condition is void.
Synopsis
Financial rights may be waived by agreement, but a condition cannot remove other obligations or grant a privilege that the forbids.
🔎Dig DeeperFinancial Rights May Be Waived—Other Obligations May Not
Financial Rights May Be Waived—Other Obligations May Not
The distinguishes provisions and clothing from . The first two are monetary obligations and may be waived. cannot be removed by a condition because withholding them is treated as physical anguish rather than merely the loss of a financial benefit.
The is understood by the and as supporting another view: because marital intimacy provides physical pleasure, it may also be treated as a waivable financial-type benefit. That position is not accepted as the practical ruling presented here.
The second example concerns a yefas toar. The permits a soldier, under tightly defined conditions, to marry a captive woman, but after relations he may not reduce her to servitude. A private condition cannot grant him the power that the expressly withheld.
If a man stipulates at the time of or divorce that the woman must engage in relations with her father, brother, son, or another forbidden relative —
Fulfilling this condition would require not only the woman’s participation in a grave transgression, but also the willing participation of another person.
,
it is regarded as though he stipulated that she ascend to the heavens or descend into the depths.
The condition is treated as impossible, just like the impossible conditions discussed previously.
,
and his condition is nullified,
Because it is not a valid condition, it cannot determine whether the or divorce takes effect.
,
because it is not within her power to cause others to transgress and engage in a forbidden relationship.
Even if the woman chose to sin, she cannot control whether the other person will agree to participate. The condition therefore requires a result that is not within her ability to bring about.
.
It follows that he made the condition dependent upon something that is not within her power to fulfill.
A valid condition must involve an outcome that the responsible party has a realistic ability to produce.
.
The same applies in all similar situations.
Whenever fulfillment depends upon persuading another person to commit a transgression, the condition is treated as impossible.
Synopsis
A condition requiring the participation of another person in a transgression is invalid because the woman cannot control whether that person will cooperate.
Influencing Another Person Can Be a Possible Condition
,
But if he stipulates that a particular person must give him his courtyard,
The woman does not control the courtyard, but she may be able to persuade its owner to give it to the man.
,—
or that the person must marry his daughter to the man’s son, or something similar —
This result also depends upon another person’s agreement, but the woman may have a legitimate way to obtain that agreement.
;
his condition is valid.
Unlike the previous case, the requested outcome is considered realistically achievable.
,
because it is possible for her to fulfill it,
A result can be considered within her power even when she cannot produce it directly, provided that she has a realistic and permitted way to bring it about.
,,—
for she can give that person a large sum of money until he agrees to give the man his courtyard or marry his daughter to the man’s son —
The woman could offer him enough financial benefit to persuade him willingly. Therefore, the result is not beyond her ability to influence.
.
because no transgression is involved.
The other person is being asked to make a permitted choice. This distinguishes the case from Halachah 11, where fulfillment required another person to sin.
.
The same applies in all similar situations.
A condition may validly depend upon persuading another person to perform a permitted act.
Synopsis
A condition involving another person is valid when the woman has a realistic, permitted way to persuade that person to cooperate.
The Four Rules Apply Wherever a Condition Is Mentioned
.
Keep these rules governing conditions before your eyes at all times.
The instructs the reader to treat the four requirements as general rules that apply throughout the laws that follow.
:,
Whenever you encounter a case in which a man effects subject to a particular condition,
The will not repeat each time that the condition must be formulated correctly. That requirement should be understood automatically.
,
or gives a subject to a particular condition,
The same four requirements apply to a conditional divorce.
,—
or sells something or gives a gift conditionally —
They also apply to conditional sales, gifts, and other financial transactions.
,
you should understand that the condition contains the four elements that we have explained.
Whenever the later describes a valid condition, he assumes that it was doubled, stated positive before negative, stated before the act, and possible to fulfill.
.
This prevents the need to explain those requirements in every individual case.
The establishes the rule once and relies upon the reader to apply it wherever conditional agreements appear.
,.
If any one of these elements is missing, there is no valid condition.
Unless a later law states an exception, an improperly formulated condition is disregarded and the underlying act takes effect without it.
Synopsis
Whenever the mentions a condition, assume that it satisfies all four requirements unless he states otherwise.
Some of the later maintained that a person must state both sides of a condition only with regard to divorce and ,
According to their view, the special seriousness of creating or ending a marriage requires the condition to be stated with complete precision.
◇A helpful concept
The were the leading authorities of the great academies in Babylonia during the period following the completion of the .
,.
but in monetary law, he does not need to state the condition in a twofold manner.
According to this opinion, a financial condition can be valid even if the person states only what will happen when the condition is fulfilled.
,
It is not proper to rely upon this view,
The rejects this distinction and requires a doubled condition in financial transactions as well.
,,
because the Sages derived the doubling of the condition, together with the other requirements, from the condition made with the tribes of and :
made their receipt of land east of the Jordan dependent upon their joining the other tribes in battle. The precise wording of that agreement serves as the model for valid conditions.
״...״(,).
“If the descendants of cross over… but if they do not cross over…” (Numbers 32:29–30).
first stated the result if they fulfilled the condition and then stated the result if they did not. This is the source for stating both sides of a condition.
.
This condition involved neither divorce nor .
Because the ’s model concerns the transfer of land, its requirements cannot be limited to marriage and divorce.
,
The great of the earlier generations ruled in this manner,
Those earlier authorities applied the four requirements to financial agreements as well as to marriage and divorce.
.
and this is the proper practice.
The concludes that all conditional agreements, including financial ones, should follow the complete four-part structure.
Synopsis
According to the , the four requirements of a valid condition apply to financial transactions as well as to and divorce.
🔎Dig DeeperDoubled Conditions Apply to Monetary Law as Well
Doubled Conditions Apply to Monetary Law as Well
The maintains that the four formal rules apply to monetary transactions as well as to and divorce. His proof is that the original condition with and concerned the allocation of land—not marriage or divorce.
The ,, and disagree. They understand the requirement to repeat both sides of the condition as a special stringency associated with creating or ending marriage. The and in follow the Rambam’s position for monetary law.
The now limits Halachah 15, which stated that a conditional act normally takes effect only when its condition is fulfilled.
,״״;
When a condition was made and the person did not say, “from now”;
Without the words “from now,” nothing takes effect until the condition is actually fulfilled.
:״,״,
But if he tells her: “You are to me from now with this , if I give you two hundred ,”
The words “from now” establish the original giving of the as the intended starting point of the . The condition will determine later whether those are confirmed.
—
and after some time he gives her the two hundred —
By giving her the money, he fulfills the condition attached to the original .
,
she is retroactively from the time of the original .
Once the condition is fulfilled, it is established that the had already taken effect when she first received the .
◇A helpful concept
Lemafre’a, “retroactively,” means that a later event establishes the legal effect as having begun at an earlier time.
.
This applies even if his condition was not fulfilled until a long time afterward.
The length of the delay does not change the starting point. Once the condition is fulfilled, the are traced back to the original act.
,—
Therefore, if another man effects with her before the condition is fulfilled —
The second man acts while the first condition is still pending. Nevertheless, if the first man later fulfills his condition, his are established as having begun earlier.
.
she is not to the second man.
If the first man later fulfills his condition, his are established retroactively as having preceded the second man’s attempt.
.
The same law applies to divorce and monetary matters.
When a conditional divorce, sale, or gift is stated to take effect “from now,” fulfillment of the condition confirms that the legal change began at the time of the original act.
Synopsis
When a person says “from now,” fulfillment of the condition causes the or other legal act to take effect retroactively from the original act.
He indicates that the legal act begins immediately, although its final validity still depends upon fulfillment of the condition.
,
he does not need to state both sides of his condition,
It is enough to state what must occur. He does not also have to spell out the result if the condition is not fulfilled.
,
nor must he state the condition before performing the act.
The condition remains valid even if he first gives the ,, or property and then completes his statement.
—.
Rather, even if he performed the act before stating the condition, his condition is valid.
The phrase “from now” connects the condition to the original act even though the usual order was not followed.
◇A helpful concept
Since the condition does not have to be doubled, there is also no requirement to state its positive side before its negative side.
;
He must, however, make the condition dependent upon something that can possibly be fulfilled.
Saying “from now” relaxes the requirements governing the wording and order of the condition, but it cannot turn an impossible demand into a genuine condition.
—
If he makes the condition dependent upon something that cannot possibly be fulfilled —
The condition fails because no one could realistically bring about the required result.
,.
he is regarded as merely putting the other person off with words, and there is no condition.
An impossible statement is treated as jesting rather than as a serious limitation upon the legal act.
״״—
Whenever a person says, “on condition that” —
The expression gives the condition the same basic structure as saying “from now.”
״״,
it is regarded as though he said, “from now,”
The act is intended to begin at once, subject to the condition later being fulfilled.
,
and he does not need to state both sides of the condition,
He may state only the required outcome without adding what will happen if it does not occur.
.
nor must he state the condition before the act.
Even if the act comes first, the words “on condition that” can still make the condition effective.
Synopsis
When a person says “from now” or “on condition that,” he need not double the condition or state it before the act, but the condition must still be possible to fulfill.
🔎Dig Deeper“From Now” Changes the Formal Requirements
“From Now” Changes the Formal Requirements
When a person says , the act begins now and remains dependent upon the condition’s later fulfillment. Because the act is not being suspended in the same way as an ordinary ‘if’ condition, the does not require the condition to be doubled or stated before the act.
The Rambam treats —‘on condition that’—like . and many later authorities disagree with that equivalence, and the records the dispute.
What is an example? A man tells a woman: “You are to me on condition that you give me two hundred ”;
He gives her now, but whether they are ultimately established as valid depends upon her later payment.
״״,
or: “This is your on condition that you give me two hundred ”;
He gives her the now, but the divorce depends upon her fulfilling the stated condition.
״״—
or: “This courtyard is given to you as a gift on condition that you give me two hundred ” —
The recipient takes possession of the courtyard now, subject to the required payment.
,
his condition is valid,
The wording , “on condition that,” creates a binding condition even without all the usual formal wording.
,,,
and the woman is , the wife is divorced, or the recipient acquires the courtyard,
The original act serves as the starting point of the , divorce, or transfer. Its final validity depends upon fulfillment of the condition.
.
and they must give the two hundred .
The person upon whom the condition was imposed must make the required payment for the legal act ultimately to be established as valid.
—
But if they do not give the money —
The condition upon which the act depended has not been fulfilled.
,,.
the woman is not , the wife is not divorced, and the recipient does not acquire the courtyard.
If the condition is not fulfilled, the intended legal result is treated as never having taken effect.
וְאַף עַל פִּי,
This applies even though he did not state both sides of his condition,
The words “on condition that” make it unnecessary to add explicitly what will happen if the payment is not made.
וְאַף עַל פִּי,
and even though he performed the act before stating the condition,
The condition remains valid even when the item was handed over before the statement was completed.
,,;
for he placed the or the in her hand, or the recipient took possession of the courtyard, and only afterward he completed the condition;
Ordinarily, placing the act before the condition would invalidate the condition. The wording “on condition that” allows the condition to remain attached to the act despite this reversed order.
—
because when the condition is fulfilled —
Fulfillment does not create a new legal act at that later moment. Instead, it confirms the act that was performed earlier.
,,,
the recipient acquires the courtyard, the woman becomes , or the wife becomes divorced from the original time when the act was performed,
Once the condition is fulfilled, the legal effect is traced back to the original delivery of the courtyard, , or .
.
as though no condition had existed at all.
After fulfillment, the act is treated as having been fully effective from its original moment, without any interruption.
Synopsis
“On condition that” allows the act to begin from the original moment without a doubled condition or the usual order, but its final validity still depends upon fulfillment of the condition.
🔎Dig DeeperHow “On Condition That” Works
How “On Condition That” Works
explains that the detailed rules were learned from the condition with and , which used the language ‘if.’ Since and use a different legal structure, they do not require all the same wording.
The explains the distinction conceptually. An ordinary ‘if’ condition can nullify the act, so it needs exact formulation. or does not erase the act; the act begins immediately but remains dependent on fulfillment of the condition. Since the condition has a less destructive role, its wording need not be as exact.
Translation and elucidation: Independently prepared for Rambam, Clearly in contemporary English. Translation follows the Rambam’s words; elucidation supplies only the context needed to understand them.
Word cards and glossary: Hebrew word cards distinguish a word’s basic meaning from its meaning in the particular phrase. Shared glossary entries explain recurring terms; biography entries identify the cited authorities.
Explain and Background: Explain provides context needed for the ruling. Optional Background panels provide additional context that can be skipped without losing the essential explanation.
Synopsis: A short summary follows each halachah. It is a guide to the central ruling, not a replacement for the full text and its qualifications.
Dig Deeper: Based on the classic commentaries named inside each panel. Editorial explanations are not presented as quotations.
Live It: Where present, these panels connect a particular halachah to a suggested personal reflection and an action to try. Original applications are labeled as suggested reflections. They are distinct from the ruling and are not attributed to the Rebbe merely because his guidance supports seeking a practical lesson.
Measurements: Modern equivalents draw on Chabad.org’s measurement glossary and cited halachic calculations. They show a range when major accepted calculations differ. Monetary equivalents fluctuate with the price of silver.
The Rebbe’s teachings and guidance: Source links accompany the completion teachings and the guidance inside Dig Deeper and Live It. Quotations, translations, and adaptations are identified; the general guidance is separate from the sources for a panel’s particular discussion.
Editorial responsibility: Created and prepared for this project by Levi Gelb. Corrections and suggestions can be submitted below. This presentation supports learning; practical halachic questions should be brought to a qualified rav.
Chapter 6 at a glance
How conditions control a legal act
This chapter explains when a condition can determine whether , divorce, a sale, or a gift takes effect.
An ordinary condition must state both outcomes, place the positive outcome first, be stated before the act, and be possible to fulfill.
If one of these requirements is missing, the condition is disregarded and the legal act generally takes effect without it.
A physically possible condition can be valid even when fulfilling it would involve a prohibition. A condition cannot, however, remove a obligation that cannot be waived.
Without the words ‘from now,’ the legal effect begins when the condition is fulfilled. Saying ‘from now’ makes it take effect retroactively from the original act.
‘On condition that’ is treated like ‘from now’: the condition need not be doubled or stated before the act, but it must still be possible to fulfill.
פרק ו
End of chapter.
You have reached the end of all eighteen halachos.