16

The Gemara (Gittin 81b) learns that according to Beis Hillel, witnesses on the seclusion are like witnesses of the actual action. That is, watching the couple walk into a room together is enough for Kiddushin. The Rambam (Ishus 3:5) writes as follows: וְאִם קִדֵּשׁ בְּבִיאָה אוֹמֵר לָהּ הֲרֵי אַתְּ מְקֻדֶּשֶׁת לִי אוֹ הֲרֵי אַתְּ מְאֹרֶסֶת לִי אוֹ הֲרֵי ...


13

R' Elchonon Wasserman in Kovetz Shiurim (Kesuvos 74a) brings this question from R' Akiva Eiger, and explains how the Kiddushin of Biah is fundamentally different from Kessef and Shtar, and why that has ramifications with Shlichus and Tnai. Others (source to follow in edit, bli neder) explain that Kiddushei Biah is not just an arbitrary maaseh kinyan (like ...


13

That specific formulation is certainly not necessary. The Gemara (Kiddushin 5a) has several variant formulations: כיצד בכסף? נתן לה כסף או שוה כסף ואמר לה "הרי את מקודשת לי", "הרי את מאורסת לי", "הרי את לי לאינתו"-- הרי זו מקודשת How does [betrothal through] money work? He gives her money or monetary equivalent and says to her &...


13

The Ritva in Kiddushin 43a brings the custom of designating specific witnesses at a ceremony where there are invalid witnesses present, to get around the problem of עדות שבטלה מקצתה בטלה כולה (the dictum that any single witness from a group of witnesses who is found invalid invalidates the entire group). מיהו כל היכא שיש באותו מעמד כשרים ופסולים או קרובים ...


13

Rambam discusses this exact question in a responsum (1:150 in the Machon Yerushalayim edition) to R. Pinchas the Judge. He tells R. Pinchas to read his Sefer Hamitzvot where he lays out the rule that a mitzvah that is derived via one of the 13 principles of exposition is not called d'oraita unless the Sages explicitly say so. Kessef which is derived via a ...


12

The Minhag is mentioned in sources as early as the Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavy no. 65) and the Zohar, quoted by the Rama in Even Ha'Ezer 27:1. It is indeed a Minhag, and is quoted as such in many places (such as here, the Nitei Gavriel) The Rogotchover in his commentary to Rambam Ishus 3:1 gives the custom a creative halakhic basis: today, when Kiddushin and ...


12

1. Where does the principle of halachic marriage annulment (afka'inhu) apply? There are five Talmudic cases where this principle is invoked: A man betrothed (eirusin) a minor (rabinically) and was attempting to finalize the marriage (nissuin) once she reached majority. Before he did so, a second man seized her, and seemingly betrothed her on a biblical ...


12

From the day she is born (Shulchan Arukh EH 37:1).


11

See the Talmud’s elaboration on 49b: על מנת שאני עשיר אין אומרים כרבי אלעזר בן חרסום וכרבי אלעזר בן עזריה אלא כל שבני עירו מכבדים אותו מפני עושרו ‘On condition that I am wealthy,’ we do not say, like R. Eleazar b. Harsom and R. Eleazar b. Azariah, but as long as he is honoured by his fellow citizens on account of his wealth. (Soncino translation) Rashi ...


10

This question was posed to R. Moshe Feinstein by R. Ephraim Greenblatt in 1969, and is recorded in Igros Moshe E.H. 3:18. In the first paragraph he explains that the kiddushin is still effective even with a double-ring-ceremony: בדבר אלו שאחר שהחתן קדש בטבעת את הכלה נתנה גם הכלה להחתן טבעת ואמרה הריני מקודשת לך או אתה מקודש לי ודאי לענין הקידושין מאחר ...


7

Rambam's son, R. Avraham, as cited in Kesef Mishne, end of Ishus 1:1, answers that the command is to marry with kidushin and nisuin, which is why Rambam refers to even the first part as a mitzva, meaning the start of one, but doing the first part alone doesn't do a mitzva. KM implies by his wording, q.v., that the main part of the dual mitzva is the second ...


7

The Gomara discusses this (Kedushin 46a). This would only present a problem if it was stipulated that kedushin should only take effect at a later date and in the meanwhile the food is eaten (or becomes stale ect.). For a normal kedushin, effective immediately, what happens to the kesef kedushin (be it food, money or something else) after the kedushin is ...


7

Chatam Sofer Yoreh De'ah 134 writes pretty definitively that paper money is considered money for virtually all purposes: אבל גדר המטבע הוא שגזר המלך עליו שתצא ומי שממאן מלמכר וליקח באותו המטבע יחייב ראשו למלכות ... ואין חילוק אם יהי' זהב או כסף או נייר The definition of a coin is that which the king has decreed to be legal tender such that anyone who ...


7

Rambam, Hilchos Melachim 3:2: ואם הוסיף אחת ובעלה לוקה If he adds an extra wife and has relations with her, he gets lashed. So that answers question #3. As for the others: On the face of it, kiddushin ought to take effect like in any other case of חייבי לאוין (according to everyone except R' Akiva, and maybe even according to him, since the issur isn't ...


6

Rav Asher Weiss has a teshuvah about use of paper money for pidyon ha-ben. The basis for the question is that the Gemara (Bechoros 51a) states that one may not use shtaros for pidyon ha-ben because they are not "themselves money" (gufan mamon). He cites four views about the status of paper money today: הנה נחלקו האחרונים בדין כסף בזה"ז אם הוי גופו ממון ...


6

Tosafos in several places explain that we say k'das Moshe v'yisrael by marriage because marriage is effective contingent upon the approval of the Sages. In certain instances where the Sages disapprove of certain actions, they render the marriage as if it had never occurred. Gittin 33a (My emphasis) ומי איכא מידי דמדאורייתא בטל גיטא ומשום מה כח ב"ד יפה ...


5

In a lecture at YU's Gruss Kollel (I think this one) R. Aaron Rakeffet described how this question was asked by the high school students in the 1960s, and the answers they were given: I always tell the story of what happened in YU in the early 60s when the rebbeim were set up by the students. Every rebbe got the same question. We were teaching Masechet ...


5

Rama, Even Haezer 28:17, in my own loose translation: A guest sitting in someone's home who takes his portion of food and weds with it — she is wed. However, Bes Sh'muel there cites Bach and Taz as saying that marriage is effected only misafek (possibly).


5

No. The Rambam writes (Ishus 10:6[7]): וחכמים הם שתיקנו כתובה לאישה, כדי שלא תהיה קלה בעיניו להוציאה The sages are the ones who established a Kesuba for a wife, in order that he should not regard it as easy to divorce her. He also doesn't list the requirement of Kesuba in Sefer HaMitzvos as the Mitzvah of Kiddushin. As to why he terms it that way, Rabbi ...


5

As noted by @joelk in a comment, if the kiddushin (engagement) are not valid, there is a bitul aseh (annulment of a positive commandment; see Rambam Laws of Marriage 1:1-2) or, at worst*, no marriage (see, e.g. here). If, however, the giving of the get is invalid, every subsequent act of intimacy between the woman and any future "husband" is a capital crime ...


5

There are two issues at play here. 1) Who actually saw the event. 2) Who are the members of the "official group" ("Kaht") of witnesses that not only saw the event, but also serve as a specific group capable of authenticating the event for a Court of Law. Everyone present probably saw the event. They are all witnesses. However, the mesader kiddushin is ...


5

The Rambam writes how the Minhag of Klal Yisrael is to use Kesef or Shaveh Kesef, not Shtar; although, shetar is also an option. Rav Hershel Schachter (Kiddushin 5777 - Pesichah) quotes Prof. Simcha Assaf (from a book he found in his father's library) who thinks this is one of the Rambam's attacks on the Karaites, emphasizing how we believe in Torah Shebaal ...


5

The simple answer is that the eidei kiddushin witness the chupa, bideken and yichud, which between them constitute nissuin too. However, there is very convincing argument that nissuin does not require eidim lkiyum. Although by all chaluyos of dovor sh'berva we need eidim lkiyum (like gerushin and kiddushin, and others), there are two reasons why nissuin is ...


4

Even if there's no prohibition touching a penuya tehorah1 (single girl), these two cases have some sources which could indicate an issur. Arusa That very passage in masseches kalla states without sheva brachos a kallah is אסורה כנדה and this is quoted by Shu"t HaGeonim Shaarei Tzedek (4:4:24), Rashi Kesubos (7b) and many other sources. It is forbidden to ...


4

The Tosafot HaRosh is in Yevamot (34a) quoting R. Meir of Rothenburg. (Though in a resp. by R. Chaim of Vienna, son of the 'Ohr Zarua', (§164, beginning) he claims that RMR reconsidered his position.)


4

If it is at the time of wedding, under the chupa, it's good. Mishna in maaser sheni 4.7 היה מדבר עמה על עסקי גיטה וקדושיה ונתן לה גיטה וקדושיה ולא פרש רבי יוסי אומר דיו, רבי יהודה אומר צריך לפרש Bartenura שעסוקים באותו ענין ומתוך אותם הדברים עמד וגירש או קידש אין צריך לפרש, והלכה כרבי יוסי.‏ Gemara kiddushin 6a אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל והוא ...


4

See Kesef Mishna who explains that "her knowledge" must mean her consent, or it would be meaningless.


3

Kiddushin is fundamentally the act of the groom taking the bride, not the other way around or both ways. Hence, a double ring ceremony under the Chuppah would undermine the very mechanics of Kiddushin and is prohibited. Doing so is also a violation of the Torah’s mandate not to imitate non-Jewish practices. (Iggerot Moshe (Even HaEzer vol. 3 Siman 18 and 25, ...


3

I realize that both msh210 and IsraelReader already gave answers based on this source, but I think that neither one explained it fully/properly, so I would like to attempt to answer it myself. This question was asked to R. Avraham the son of Rambam. This was his answer: Birchas Avraham # 44 ואותה הקושיא שהקשית על עיקר דבריו לא קשיא עליה שבמנין המצוות ...


3

The straight forward answer is provided by the Maggid Mishna that this establishes what constitutes a marriage for non-Jews. The Lubavitcher Rebbe (Likkutei Sichos Vol. 39 p. 30ff) adds that this also establishes something about the nature of marriage - that it is fundamentally about a man and woman living together and not an acquisition like property (as ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible