And I will be betrothed to you - when he gives [the 100 dinars] to [the other man], he says "be betrothed to me" -- she is betrothed, even though she receives no benefit.

From the halakha of a guarantor - we can derive from that which we find in the Torah, that a guarantor becomes responsible to the lender.

Here are one hundred dinars for you, and you become betrothed to so-and-so - and he [acts as] his agent, except that he is betrothing her using his own [money].

She is betrothed - even though the money does not belong to the principal.

From the halakha of a Canaanite slave - as is stated in a mishna later on [Kiddushin 22b:6]: "And he can acquire himself by means of money given by others" -- that others can redeem him with their own money, and he acquires himself and goes out to freedom, even though [the slave] loses nothing at all of his own money.

And I will be betrothed to him - to the same so-and-so to whom you give the money on my behalf.

From the halakha of both of these - from both of these laws: we derive it from that of the guarantor and that of the Canaanite slave.

There, the one who transfers - the owner of the slave who transfers the slave into freedom is the one who acquires the money that he receives for the slave's redemption.

And I will be betrothed to you - and he accepts [the money] and says to her: "you are betrothed to me with this."

She is betrothed - as [the Gemara] goes on to explain below.

Property that serves as a guarantee - a person [in this case, the woman] is compared to land, as is written, "you may keep them as a possession." [Leviticus 25:46]

With property that is not guaranteed - that one who sells or gives land and movable property, and the other pulls the movable property, and the land is transferred to him through the pulling of the movable property.

But we learned the opposite - that it is necessary to acquire the land using one of the three methods by which land is acquired; namely: money, a document, or by taking possession. [Taking possession means] where he locked [the door of the property], or fenced it or breached [its fence even] a bit [Bava Batra 42a:9]. Then, the movable property is acquired by way of [the land].

We are dealing with an important man - who does not usually [deign to] receive gifts.

Due to the benefit etc. - that she would want to give a peruta to someone who would flatter [the important man] into accepting a gift from her.

And similarly, with regard to monetary matters - this [entire] discussion of Rava's, in which we derive [the law of] betrothal from the law of a guarantor and from the law of a Canaanite slave -- it is likewise applicable to the matter of monetary transactions. If one sold a field to another, and said to him, "give the money to so-and-so and my field is sold to you" -- it is [indeed] thereby acquired, from the law of a guarantor. [If he said:] "Here is 100 dinars, and your field shall be sold to so-and-so" -- that so-and-so acquires it, from the law of a slave. [If he said:] "Give 100 dinars to so-and-so, and my field shall be sold to him" -- he thereby acquires it, from the laws of both of them.

It is amenable to her - to be acquired with any [form of benefit], with an acquisition of any amount, and even the mere benefit of discretion.

Tan du - as two bodies, a husband and his wife, even if she only has the mere [benefit of being able] to instruct [the husband on the disposition of money].

Because it can be waived - since one is permitted to waive [his monetary claim].

There, it is an animal - and it belongs to him, and there is nothing preventing him from sanctifying it. Therefore his utterance has the power to spread [the sanctification across both halves of the animal]. But here, there is another mind as significant as his which can prevent the thing -- since if the woman does not want it, [the money] does not work to betroth her. Only half of her was persuaded, so his words do not effect her [betrothal].

This case is comparable only etc. - [this passage serves as] the conclusion of the [Gemara's] reply [rejecting the possibility that the betrothal can spread to both halves]. This case is comparable only to that of an animal belonging to two partners, where there likewise is another mind that can prevent [the sanctification from spreading]. There, we did not say that the animal is fully sanctified by [the actions of] one of them.

It may not be sacrificed - since at the initiation of its sanctification it was not fit to be sacrificed, since only half of it was sanctified. It must be sold and another animal sacrificed using its value.