0

While Kiddushin is a necessary step in a Jewish wedding, all marital obligations only apply after Kosher Nissuin (Rambam Ishut 10).

Nowadays we make Chuppah with some variations for Ashkenazis and Sefardis. I'd like to focus on the standard Ashkenazi tradition:

  • Signing the Kettubah
  • Walking the couple into under the Chuppah
  • 7 rounds for the bride around the groom
  • Kiddushin ceremony
  • 7 Brochos and breaking the glass
  • Cheder Yichud (staying in a secluded locked room usable for marital relations).

Let's take the husband's monetary obligations to heal his wife (I think it's better than burying or paying a ransom). I imagine that at any stage the bride can have, say, an asthma attack (or break a leg or worse).

After what stage exactly would the husband be obligated to pay his wife's medical expenses?

  • 3
    For lomdus this is an important question. Practically, if they're arguing about who pays for a broken leg, they shouldn't be married. – Heshy Nov 26 '19 at 20:52
  • 1
    Probably the last possible cause of nissuin (biah) as any stage earlier the chosson can say kim li that biah is nissuin – robev Nov 27 '19 at 3:41
0

The chuppa, according to the rema includes that we accompany them to their house to eat. See EH 55.1

ואחר כך מוליכים אותם לביתם ואוכלים ביחד במקום צנוע, וזהו החופה הנוהגת עכשיו

From this quote of the Rema it seems that if all is stopped after the Chuppa ceremonial, this is not Nisuim.

Additionally, 7 berachot is not a part of the kinyanim, see this quote in the same Rema.

כנסה לחופה ולא ברך ברכת חתנים, הוי חופה גמורה, דאין הברכות מעכבות;‏

There is a Machloket about a betula if to go home without yichud is chuppa. But for almana no. It seems that for a nidda there is no value for chuppa and even yichud yichud because it's not kriva lebia. See Bash sk 9. From the words of the Rema, it seems that chuppa alone without to go home is not enough. 7 Berachot are not a chelek of the chuppa.

I will try to quote an interesting Gemara in Yevamot that explains the meaning of chuppa.

Yevamot 58a

א"נ עד כאן לא קאמרי רבי אלעזר ורבי שמעון התם אלא בקדושין דלא קריבי לביאה אבל חופה דקריבא לביאה הכי נמי דפסלה

else: Rabbi Eleazar and Rabbi Simeon may have advanced their view there only, in respect of betrothal, since it is not close to the act of intercourse; but the bridal chambe which is close to the act of intercourse, may well cause ineligibility.

From this quote we see that chuppa is is an approach to intercourse. (even without yichud.)

אלא דקני לה כשהיא ארוסה ואיסתתרה ונכנסה לחופה ולא נבעלה ושמע מינה יש חופה לפסולות אמר רבא ותסברא דהא מתרצתא היא והא כי אתא רבי אחא בר חנינא מדרומא אתא ואייתי מתניתא בידיה (במדבר ה, כ) מבלעדי אישך דמי שקדמה שכיבת בעל לבועל ולא שקדמה שכיבת בועל לבעל אמר רמי בר חמא משכחת לה כגון שבא עליה ארוסה בבית אביה דכוותה גבי שומרת יבם שבא עליה יבם בבית חמיה

Surely when Rav Aha Bar Hanina arrived from the South, he came and brought a Baraitha with him: Besides thy husband, only when the cohabitation of the husband preceded that of the adulterer, but not when the cohabitation of the adulterer preceded that of the husband! Rami Bar Hama replied: This is possible where, for instance, he cohabited with her while she was only betrothed and still in the house of her father.

From this quote we see that an intercourse out of the house of the chatan is not a chuppa, and that there is chuppa without intercourse.

So, if the Cheder Yichud is not interpreted as the home of the Chatan, e.g. if this is a room in the house of the Shver, it's not Nisuyin according to the Bash. But if they want to lend a room specifically for this purpose there is Machloket acharonim and the Pitche Teshuva is Machmir Lechatechilla. (1).

(1) Pitche Teshuva sk2. But he concludes that Bediavad the Bash validates without a regular Cheder Yichud.

גם הט"ז בסי' נ"ז סק"ד ובסי' ס"ד סק"א כ' כדעת הח"מ ממש והוסיף עוד דאפילו אם החתונה בבית אבי הכלה לא הוי כבית שלה כיון דכבר נתן האב אותו החדר לחתנו אפי' דרך שאלה הוי כממכר כו' וכיון שהולך החתן עם הכלה מן החופה לבית הנישואין שפיר קונה מצד מסירה לרשותו כו' ע"ש והובא בקצר' בב"ש סי' נ"ז סק"א ובסי' ס"ד סק"ו … ... ושם מסיים כ' ואינו נראה … אבל לעולם מודה הב"ש דאינו לעיכובא ‏

| improve this answer | |
  • Please continue to connect your sources to my question. When in OUR tradition does it apply? – Al Berko Nov 26 '19 at 22:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .