💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Marri… captured on 2024-08-31 at 16:35:20. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2024-05-10)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
4 [1] A woman may be consecrated only voluntarily. If one forces a woman to be consecrated, she is not consecrated. When a man, by contrast, is forced to consecrate [a woman], she is consecrated.
A man may consecrate many women at one time, provided that he does so by [transferring] money, and there is enough money to give each one a *p'rutah*. One of these [women] or another person may accept the money on behalf of them all, [provided] they consent. [2] When a person [desires to] consecrate a woman, and with her consent gives the *kiddushin* to another woman, and tells the latter "And you as well," or uses another similar expression, they are both consecrated.
When, however, the man places [the *kiddushin*] in the hand [of the second woman] and says, "And you," there is doubt whether or not the *kiddushin* are valid. Perhaps his intent was only to clarify her feelings. It was as if he asked her, "What would you say about this?" Therefore, she accepted the *kiddushin*, for she thought he was still asking her about her intent. For this reason, [the question is unresolved,] and the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. [3] If he told her, "Become consecrated to me with this *dinar*," and she took it and threw it in front of him or to the sea, into a fire or into anything that will cause it to be destroyed, she is not consecrated.
If she told him, "Give it to my father," "...to your father" or "...to so and so," she is not consecrated. If she told him, "Give it to him, so that he will accept it on my behalf," she is consecrated. [4] [In the above instance, if] the woman told the man, "Place [the *kiddushin*] on [this] rock," she is not consecrated. If the rock belonged to her, she is consecrated. If the rock belonged to both of them, [the question is unresolved, and] the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt.
If he told her, "Be consecrated to me with this loaf of bread," and she told him, "Give it to a poor person," she is not consecrated. [This applies] even if she supports the poor person in question.
[If she told him,] "Give it to a dog," she is not consecrated. If the dog belonged to her, she is consecrated. If [the dog] was chasing after her and she told him, "Give it to this dog," [the question is unresolved, and] the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. [5] [The following laws apply when a man] was selling produce, utensils or the like, and a woman came and asked him: "Give me some of these." If he asked her, "If I give them to you, will you be consecrated to me?" and she said, "Yes," she is consecrated when he gives [the items] to her. If, however, she replied to him: "[Just] give them to me," "Heave them over," or another reply that means "Don't fool around with me regarding such matters, just give me [what I asked for]," she is not consecrated although he gave her [what she asked for].
A similar [decision is rendered] if [a man] was drinking wine and [a woman] asked him, "Give me a cup," and he asks her, "If I do, will you be consecrated to me with it?" If she replies, "[Just] let me drink," "Give me," "Serve me drink," or "Dish it out," she is not consecrated. Her words imply: "Just give me a drink, and don't fool around with me regarding such matters." [6] When [a man] consecrates [a woman] in the presence of a single witness, his *kiddushin*] are of no consequence. [This applies] even when both [the man and the woman] acknowledge [that the *kiddushin* were given]. Surely this applies when [a man] consecrates [a woman] without any witnesses at all [observing the act].
When [a man] consecrates [a woman] in the presence of individuals who are disqualified from serving as witnesses by Scriptural law, she is not consecrated. [When he consecrates her in the presence of] individuals who are disqualified from serving as witnesses by Rabbinic law, or in the presence of witnesses regarding whom there is doubt whether or not they are acceptable according to Scriptural law, [the following rules apply:] If he desires to consummate the marriage, he should consecrate the woman again in the presence of acceptable witnesses. If he does not desire to consummate the marriage, the woman must receive a *get* from him [to enable her to marry others], because of the doubt. [This ruling applies] even when the woman denies [the matter], contradicting the witnesses and saying that she was never consecrated.
This ruling applies with regard to all situations in which the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. If [the man] desires to consummate the marriage, he should consecrate the woman again in a manner that is unequivocally acceptable. If he does not desire to consummate the marriage, the woman must receive a *get* from him, because of the doubt. [7] When a minor consecrates [a woman], his *kiddushin* are of no consequence. When, by contrast, a male past the age of majority consecrates a girl below the age of majority who is an orphan, or who has left her father's authority, [different rules apply]: If she is below the age of six, even if she is one who shows deep understanding of secret matters, and can differentiate and discern, she is not married, and there is no need for *mi'un*.
If she is more than ten years old, even when she is very foolish, since she willingly accepted the *kiddushin*, she is consecrated [according to Rabbinic law] and [must perform] *mi'un* [should she desire to nullify the marriage]. If she is between the ages of six and ten, [the rabbis] must evaluate her ability to discern. If she is able to differentiate and discern with regard to matters of marriage and *kiddushin*, [the marriage is binding according to Rabbinic law] and *mi'un* is necessary. If she lacks [this degree of discernment], she is not consecrated [at all], and need not perform *mi'un* [to nullify the marriage]. [8] What is meant by the statement that she is consecrated [according to Rabbinic law], and [must perform] *mi'un* [should she desire to nullify the marriage]? If she was consecrated but no longer desires to remain with her husband, she must perform *mi'un* in the presence of two witnesses. She should say: "I no longer desire him." Afterwards, she leaves [the relationship] without a divorce, as will be explained in *Hilchot Gerushin*.
Why does she leave [the relationship] without a divorce? Because the consecration is not absolutely binding according to Scriptural law; it is merely a Rabbinic institution. [According to Scriptural law, the outcome] is tentative. If she continues living with her husband until she reaches the age of majority, the *kiddushin* are finalized, and she becomes a married woman in the complete sense of the term. There is no need for [her husband] to consecrate her again after she attains majority. If she does not want [to continue] living with him, she must perform *mi'un*; she then leaves [the relationship] without a divorce. [9] When a male deaf mute marries a mentally competent woman, or a female deaf mute marries a mentally competent man, the marriage bond is not absolutely binding according to Scriptural law; it is merely a Rabbinic institution. Therefore, if a mentally competent man consecrates the wife of a deaf mute man who is herself mentally competent, she is considered to be consecrated to the mentally competent man. He must give her a *get*, and she is permitted to remain married to her deaf mute husband.
When, by contrast, a mentally incompetent man consecrates a mentally competent woman, or a mentally competent man consecrates a mentally incompetent woman, the marriage bond is not at all binding - neither according to Scriptural law nor according to Rabbinic law. [10] When a sexually impotent male - whether a *s'ris chamah* or a *s'ris adam* - consecrates [a woman], and similarly, when [a man] consecrates an *aylonit*, the *kiddushin* are absolutely binding. [11] When a *tumtum* or an *androgynous* consecrates a woman, or when either of these individuals has been consecrated by a man, there is doubt whether these *kiddushin* are binding, and because of the doubt, a *get* is required. [12] When a person consecrates one of the women forbidden as *arayot*, his act is of no consequence. For *kiddushin* are not binding with regard to these forbidden relationships, with the exception of [*kiddushin* given] a *niddah*. When a man consecrates a *niddah*, the *kiddushin* are binding absolutely. It is, nevertheless, improper to do so. [13] When a married woman accepts *kiddushin* from another man in the presence of her husband, she is considered to be consecrated to the second man. For a woman's word is accepted when she tells her husband to his face that he had divorced her. We assume it axiomatically that a woman would not act so brazenly in her husband's presence [unless it were true].
If, however, the other person consecrates her outside her husband's presence, these *kiddushin* are not considered to be binding unless she brings proof that she was divorced before she was consecrated. As long as she is outside her husband's presence, it is possible that she will act brazenly. [14] When a man consecrates one of the *shniyot* or a woman forbidden because of a negative commandment [not associated with *karet*] or because of a positive commandment, the *kiddushin* are binding absolutely. [The same ruling applies when] a *yavam* consecrates a woman who was married to the same man as his *yevamah*.
There is one exception to the above principle: when a person other than [the *yavam*] consecrates a *yevamah*, [the question is unresolved, and] the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. For our Sages were unsure whether the *kiddushin* of a *yevamah* are valid, like those of others in which the relationship is forbidden by merely a negative commandment, or whether the *kiddushin* are of no consequence, as in the case of an incestuous relationship.
In all the situations mentioned above, although the man who gave the *kiddushin* is forbidden to consummate the marriage, he must terminate it by giving a *get*. [15] [When] a man consecrates a gentile woman or a [Canaanite] maidservant, the *kiddushin* are of no consequence; the woman's status is the same after receiving the *kiddushin* as beforehand. Similarly, when a gentile or a [Canaanite] servant consecrates a Jewish woman, the *kiddushin* are of no consequence.
When an apostate Jew consecrates [a woman], his *kiddushin* are absolutely valid, despite the fact that he willingly worships a false deity. The woman must receive a *get* from him. [16] When a man consecrates a woman who is half a maidservant and half a free woman, she is not completely consecrated until she becomes [totally] free. Once she becomes free, the *kiddushin* are [automatically] completed, like the *kiddushin* of a minor who comes of age. There is no need for her to be consecrated again.
If another man consecrates such a woman after she was granted her freedom [before the person who consecrated her originally consummates their marriage], there is doubt regarding the matter, and the status of both their *kiddushin* is in doubt. [17] What then is a *shifchah charufah* [a betrothed maidservant] as described by the Torah [Leviticus 19:20]? A woman who is half a maidservant and half a free woman, who was consecrated by a Hebrew servant.
When a male who is half a servant and half a free man consecrates a woman, [the matter is unresolved, and] the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. [18] When a drunk gives [a woman] *kiddushin*, they are valid, even if he is very drunk. If he reaches a state of drunkenness comparable to that of Lot, the *kiddushin* are of no consequence. This matter requires ample deliberation. [19] When a man gives money worth less than a *p'rutah* as *kiddushin*, the *kiddushin* are not valid. When a man consecrates a woman with food or with a utensil worth less than a *p'rutah*, the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt; perhaps the *kiddushin* are worth a *p'rutah* in another place.
From this one can deduce that whenever a person consecrates a woman with an article worth money, if it is worth a *p'rutah* in that country the *kiddushin* are definitely binding. If it is not worth a *p'rutah* [there], the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt [as above].
It appears to me that if [a man] consecrated [a woman] with cooked food, a vegetable that will not be preserved or the like, and the item is not worth a *p'rutah* in that place, the *kiddushin* are not binding at all. For by the time this item reaches another place, it will spoil and be worthless. This is a reasonable inference; one may rely on it. [20] When [a man] consecrates a woman with less than a *p'rutah's* worth, or he consecrates two women with a *p'rutah*, the women are not consecrated. [This applies] even when he sends wedding presents [worth more than a *p'rutah*] afterwards. Similarly, when a minor consecrates a woman, the *kiddushin* are not valid, despite the fact that he sent marriage presents after he had attained majority. [This ruling was delivered because the presents] were sent because of the original *kiddushin*, which were invalid [and therefore are not considered to be significant in their own right]. [21] When [a man] consecrates a woman by [giving her] money or a legal document, he does not have to place the *kiddushin* in her hand. Instead, if she consents that he throw them to her and he does so, she is consecrated, whether he throws them into her hand, her bosom, her courtyard or her field.
If she is standing in a domain belonging to her [prospective] husband, he must place them in her hand or in her bosom. If she is standing in a domain that belongs to both of them, and he threw *kiddushin* to her with her consent, but they did not reach her hand or her bosom, the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. Even when she tells him, "Put the *kiddushin* down in this place," if the place belongs to both of them the status of the *kiddushin* is in doubt. [22] [The following rules apply when the two] are standing in the public domain or in a domain that does not belong to either of them, and he throws *kiddushin* to her: If they are closer to him, she is not consecrated. If they are closer to her, she is consecrated. If they are halfway between the two of them, or if there is doubt whether they were closer to him or to her, and they were lost before they reached her hand, there is doubt regarding the status of the *kiddushin*.
What is meant by "closer to him," or "closer to her"? A situation in which he can guard [the *kiddushin*] and she cannot is considered as "closer to him." One in which she can guard them and he cannot is considered to be "closer to her." One in which they can both guard them or neither can guard them is considered to be "halfway between the two of them."
Version: Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007
Source: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI
License: CC-BY-NC