Kiddushin - Daf 10
- תחילת ביאה קונה או סוף ביאה קונה
The Gemara asks: תחילת ביאה קונה – Does the beginning of the act of relations (העראה) acquire for kiddushin, או סוף ביאה קונה – or does the end the act of relations acquire? The Gemara mentions two practical differences: (1) כגון שהערה בה – in a case where he only did העראה (the beginning of the act), ופשטה ידה וקבלה קדושין מאחר – and she reached out her hand and accepted kiddushin from another man before completing the act. (2) Another difference: לכהן גדול דקא קני בתולה בביאה – for a Kohen Gadol (who may only marry a virgin) who is marrying through relations. If relations only acquire at the end, the woman would no longer be a virgin at the time he marries her and would be forbidden to him. Ameimar quotes Rava’s conclusion: כל הבועל – Anyone who has relations, דעתו על גמר ביאה – his mind is on the completion of relations, and that is the time kiddushin will take effect.
- ביאה נשואין עושה או אירוסין עושה
The Gemara asks: ביאה נשואין עושה – Do relations [done for kiddushin] effect nisuin as well, או אירוסין עושה – or do they only effect erusin? The practical differences are the three halachos that come into effect after nisuin: ליורשה – to inherit her, וליטמא לה – to become tamei for her burial if he is a Kohen, ולהפר נדריה – and to void her nedarim. After Abaye’s proof is rejected, Rava quotes a Mishnah which teaches that relations with a girl above three years of age have the full status of relations, which has numerous implications, including: מתקדשת בביאה – she can be married with relations, ואם בא עליה יבם קנאה – if her yavam had relations with her, he acquires her, among others. The Mishnah continues: ואם נישאת לכהן אוכלת בתרומה – And if she marries a Kohen [with nisuin], she may eat terumah. This implies that before nisuin, she may not eat terumah, although the Mishnah is discussing a girl who was married through relations. This proves that relations do not constitute nisuin!? The Gemara answers that the Mishnah means: אי הני נשואין דכהן נינהו אוכלת בתרומה – if these aforementioned nisuin (achieved with relations) were with a Kohen, she may eat terumah.
- Machlokes why an arusah of a Kohen after relations cannot eat terumah
Another Baraisa is brought to resolve whether relations effect nisuin: Yochanan ben Bag Bag sent to Rebbe Yehudah ben Beseirah: שמעתי עליך שאתה אומר – I heard about you that you say, ארוסה בת ישראל אוכלת בתרומה – An arusah of a Kohen, who is a Yisroel’s daughter, may eat terumah. He responded that she should be permitted, based on a kal vachomer: If a non-Jewish maidservant, who cannot eat terumah if a Kohen attempted to acquire her with relations, yet can eat terumah if he purchased her with money, then a Jewish woman, whose relations enable her to eat terumah, certainly should be able to eat terumah when married with money alone. But Rebbe Yehudah conceded that the Sages forbade an arusah from eating terumah until after chuppah (i.e., nisuin). This is explained in three ways: (1) A Jewish woman may eat terumah with relations alone, because they effect nisuin. (2) Relations only enable eating terumah when they are followed by chuppah, but the kal vachomer can be structured to incorporate this point (a maidservant cannot eat terumah even through relations followed by chuppah, yet may eat terumah when purchased with money alone). (3) All agree that Biblically, an arusah may eat terumah; their argument is why Rabbinically she cannot.
