I’m bringing a range of different sources. Some of them will be provocative. Some of them will deeply resonate with you, while others won’t. Try to reserve judgement until the end, and remember that the Talmud in particular is not just one opinion but a collection of a broad range of (often-contradictory) opinions.

Also, please note that portions of the discussion which follows are presented from a hetero-normative lens. We will need to extrapolate, thinking creatively but also halachically, in order to apply this to same-sex attraction and LGBTQ+ individuals broadly.

1) What do you find beautiful or meaningful in your understanding of Jewish marriage or wedding customs? Why?

2) What do you find difficult, problematic, frustrating, or irrelevant? Why?

1) Is marriage fundamentally an act of acquisition, partnership, or elements of both? How, if at all, has the Jewish perspective on this evolved over time?

2) What advantages and disadvantages are built into the traditional understanding of the marriage process, the ketubah, etc.?

3) What role does/should obligating oneself have in the functioning and success of a marriage?

Erusin - betrothal. Also called kiddushin - sanctification. A halachic "engagement", but unlike our modern understanding of the term. Erusin makes the woman legally married from a halachic point of view, and would require a get (a religious bill of divorce) to sever, but the couple are not yet considered a family unit for purposes of financial obligations, property rights, shared housing, or intimacy. In Biblical times, erusin could last up to a year (in order to first secure a marriage agreement but then provide time for the groom to begin earning a living prior to starting a family). But since Medieval times, the two components of the wedding process - erusin and nissuin (the marriage itself) - now occur back-to-back, with only a brief pause in between.

Ketubah - marriage contract. The ketubah is traditionally signed by the groom and two witnesses as part of erusin. The ketubah enumerates the husband's obligations to his wife (specifically: food, clothing, and conjugal rights), and a financial sum to be paid by the husband to the wife in the event of divorce - a form of alimony or spousal support. The ketubah also serves as a bill of record of the marriage, and was traditionally kept by the wife in the event proof was ever needed of her marriage. Today, ketubot are often ceremonial art pieces proudly displayed on the walls of a newlywed couple's home.

Note: Many couples will also now sign what is called the "halachic pre-nuptial agreement", a modern mechanism designed to avoid the tragic issue of agunot ("chained" women, or women whose husbands refuse or are unable - missing, incapacitated, etc. - to give them a get, a bill of divorce, which would then "unchain" them from their husbands and permit them to remarry and otherwise move forward in life).

Kinyan - acquisition. The groom formally accepts the unilateral obligations to which he is committing himself in the ketubah by performing an act of kinyan. The groom may do this by lifting up a pen, handkerchief, or other small object symbolically to affirm consent and demonstrate acceptance via a physical act of acquisition. Once kinyan is performed in front of signed witnesses, the ketubah is valid and binding.

The bride and groom are led to the chuppah (wedding canopy), and proceed with both portions of the wedding ceremony (erusin and nisuin) in rapid succession.

During erusin, the first part of the wedding ceremony, a blessing over wine and then the betrothal blessing (birkat erusin) are said.

The groom gives the bride an object, commonly a wedding ring, thought it can be anything of at least nominal/minimal value (i.e. it's not about the value of the item, it's just that the item must have some value). He then recites the traditional formula while placing the ring on the bride's finger:

"Behold, you are consecrated (mekudeshet) to me with this ring, according to the Law of Moses and Israel."

This completes erusin/kiddushin. In order to mark a separation between this stage and the second stage of the wedding ceremony, nissuin, the ketubah is often read aloud, or the rabbi, an honored guest, or the bride and groom themselves make speeches.

Nissuin - marriage. This is the second part of the wedding ceremony, and is effected by the recitation of Sheva Brachot(Seven Blessings) over a second cup of wine. The groom then customarily smashes a glass with his foot, guests cheer, and the ceremony is concluded.

Yichud - seclusion. In Ashkenazi custom, the bride and groom are immediately ushered away to a private room where they can be secluded together for the first time, a demonstration of their new status as husband and wife. Theoretically, they are secluded for sufficient time to make it possible to consummate the marriage. In practice, husband and wife will often use this time to simply decompress, eat food (especially if they have been fasting all day, as is the practice for some), and briefly bask in the moment together, away from guests. The Sephardic custom is to eschew yichud, as it is viewed as immodest.

What model of marriage do you see expressed in the passage above?

What appears problematic about peoples' marriage practices in the generation of the Flood, and before the giving of the Torah? Why is this so, and how does Torah/Jewish practice potentially come to rectify some/all of these issues?

1) What models/paradigms for marriage do you see expressed in the stories of Abraham/Sarah, Isaac/Rebecca, and Jacob/Rachel?

2) Compare/contrast with the previous section regarding marriage practices before the giving of the Torah. What innovations or developments do you see, if any?

1) Through which paradigm(s) does the Talmud view marriage? Is it kinyan,kiddushin, or both?

2) Do you see any movement on the Talmud's thinking on the topic? Where and how so?

1) What is each source's perspective on marriage re: kinyan vs. partnership? How does obligation play a role in their thinking?

2) How do you see the questions of kinyan and kiddushin playing out and evolving over the course of the centuries?

On the ___ day of the week, the ___ day of ___, in the year ___, corresponding to the ___ day of ___, in the year ___, ___, son of ___, and ___, daughter of ___, join each other in ___, before family and friends to make a mutual covenant as husband and wife, partners in marriage. The groom, ___, promises ___, the bride: "You are my wife according to the tradition of Moses and Israel. I shall cherish you and honor you as is customary among the sons of Israel who have cherished and honored their wives in faithfulness and in integrity." The bride, ___, promises ___, the groom: "You are my husband according to the tradition of Moses and Israel. I shall cherish you and honor you as is customary among the daughters of Israel who have cherished and honored their husbands in faithfulness and in integrity." "We, as beloveds and friends, promise each other to strive throughout our lives together to achieve an openness which will enable us to share our thoughts, our feelings, and our experiences. We promise to try always to bring out in ourselves and in each other qualities of forgiveness, compassion, and integrity. We, as beloveds and friends, will cherish each other's uniqueness; comfort and challenge each other through life's sorrow and joy; share our intuition and insight with one another; and above all do everything within our power to permit each of us to become the persons we are yet to be. All this we take upon ourselves to uphold to the best of our abilities." All is valid and binding.

Bride ____________ Groom ____________
Witness ____________ Witness ____________
Rabbi ____________

1. What important distinctions do you see between these two Ketuba texts? What does the Traditional text prioritize and what does the Reform text prioritize?

2. What benefit or strength do you see in the Traditional text? Is it absent or present in the Reform text?

3. What benefit or strength do you see to the Reform text? Is it absent or present in the Traditional text?

Kiddushin: Acquisition or Partnership? (January 22, 2010)

Rabbi Dov Linzer, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT)

When studying kiddushei kesef – kiddushin through the giving of an object of value – one must ask: is kiddushin [i.e. betrothal] an actual kinyan, act of acquisition, or not?

The two sides of this question can be seen in the development of the practice of giving a ring. There is no early evidence to this practice. It does not appear in either the Bavli or the Yerushalmi, or in any external record through the time of the Talmud. Cases of kiddushei kesef are mentioned with great frequency in the Talmud, but they are always done with other objects – cups, fruit, baskets, silk, and the like. The first record of a ring is in the early works from the time of the Geonim, the Sefer HaChilukim, which records different practices between Babylonian Jewry and the Jewish community in the Land of Israel. There it is recorded that in Babylon they would not use a ring for kiddushin, but in the Land of Israel they would. Rav Reuven Margoliot [1889-1971], in his notes on this work, explains that in Babylon, men would marry girls who were still young, and the money would be given to the father, so a ring was not significant. In the Land of Israel, however, they would marry women who were older, and give them the object directly, and thus they wanted to use a more romantic item – a ring. [He also notes the practice to use a ring was common in the Roman Empire, and might have thus spread to the Land of Israel which was then under Roman rule.]

Giving of money to the father for the sake of marrying an underage girl is characteristic of an act of acquisition. The focus is on the money, and the woman is not a direct partner to the transaction – she is the object of the transaction. This actually parallels another act, which is clearly about acquisition - the father selling his underage girl as a Hebrew slave [read: indentured servitude, hopefully leading to marriage, as a means of upward social mobility]. On the other hand, if the woman is an adult, and she is receiving the money, it is harder to see this as an acquisition, since she is a direct partner in the transaction. The use of a ring underscores the symbolic nature of this transaction, and characterizes it as something different from kinyan. It characterizes it as kiddushin.

The use of terms – kinyan or kiddushin – is significant. The earliest mishna relating to kiddushin (Kiddushin 1:1) refers to the act as one of kinyan. However, in the entire remainder of Tractace Kiddushin the act is referred to as kiddushin. Indeed, when this first mishna was paraphrased and rewritten in a later mishna (Edyot 4:7), the term kinyan had been transformed into the term kiddushin. The Talmud itself (Kiddushin 2a) recognizes this evolution, and states that kinyan is a Biblical term, whereas kiddushin is a rabbinic term. What had happened to effect this change?

It seems that the shift came as a result of another shift: the moving of the mohar payment, a large sum of money given up front from the groom to the bride’s father, and characterized either as a bridal gift or a bridal price. In the time of the Rabbis, the mohar moved from money given at the beginning of the marriage to becoming the ketubah to be paid at the end of the marriage (see Mishna Ketuvot 8:8, Tosefta 12:1, and Yerushalmi 8:11). This transformation of mohar to ketubah was done at an early stage in the Tannaitic period, by Shimon ben Shetach (early first century BCE), and was done to protect the interests of the woman – so that the husband would not capriciously divorce her.

This act in itself made the woman less of an object – to be disposed of at will – and more of a subject and protected person in the marital relationship. [The other stipulations of the ketubah – the tenai ketubah – further protected the woman’s rights during the marriage.] Moreover, as regards to the act of kiddushin, this shift transformed how the act of kiddushin was perceived. With a large sum of money no longer part of the act, the money for kiddushin stopped being a payment, and transformed into a small, symbolic amount. Thus, it is Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai, who lived after Shimon ben Shetach, who state that it is sufficient to use a minimal amount of money for this act (a dinar or a p’rutah). Thus, in all later mishnayot, once the mohar had become the ketubah, and the kiddushin money had become a symbolic amount, the very act of marriage was now referred to as kiddushin, and the use of the term of kinyan ceased.

This transition continued over the centuries. Together with the use of a ring, which started in the Land of Israel, the early ketubot that were written with the Eretz-Yisrael style reflected a concept of marriage that was one of partnership. As studied by Mordechai Friedman, and recorded in his masterful two-volume “Jewish Marriage in Palestine,” these ketubot used such terms as “partnership” to refer to the marriage and “wife of my covenant” to refer to the bride. Furthermore, they reflect the existence of a practice of the bride’s verbal acceptance of the kiddushin. As Dr. Friedman notes, there were probably few legal differences between Eretz Yisrael and Bavel [Babylon] in this regard, but what is clear is that there was a different conception of the nature of kiddushin and marriage itself.

Also paralleling these changes are differing attitudes towards polygamy. Polygamy was accepted in Bavel, whereas strongly discouraged in the Land of Israel, and finally prohibited in Ashkenaz through cheremRabbeinu Gershon, the ban of Rabbeinu Gershon (10th Century). The prohibiting of adultery, together with the other cherem [i.e. bans] prohibiting a husband to divorce his wife against her will, combined to strengthen the wife’s position in marriage and to make her more of a subject, more of an equal partner.

This shift from kinyan to kiddushin is reflected in halakhic writings as well. While Neziv states that a husband owns his wife as sexual property, Hatam Sofer states that in kiddushin there is no purchaser and no object being purchased, but – echoing an earlier statement by Rashba – both husband and wife are reciprocally and in parallel obligating themselves to one another.

Thus, it is in the use of a ring for kiddushin, and in our very use of the term kiddushin, that we symbolize our understanding of kiddushin to not be the acquisition of the woman by the man, but rather the sanctification of the union of the bride and the groom in the partnership of marriage.

Kiddushin as a Speech Act (January 29, 2010)

Rabbi Dov Linzer, Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT)

The act of kiddushin, the giving of the ring, is accompanied by a verbal statement – harei at mekudeshet li bi’taba’at zo ki’dat Moshe vi’Yisrael, “behold you are betrothed to me with this ring, according to the laws of Moshe and Israel.”

...Clearly, if the statement is nothing more than an expression of intent, either party can make it. Why, then, for kiddushin must it be made only by the man? It seems clear that what we are dealing with here is something more – not just an expression of intent, but a speech act. The words are themselves part of the kiddushin act and, jointly with the giving of the ring, create the status of kiddushin.Since, according to the Talmud, the entire kiddushin act has to be done by the man, the speech act, as a part of this act, must be done by him as well.

...A similar debate exists regarding whether the kallah [i.e. bride] can also make a statement, such as “hareini mikabelet ta’ba’at zo u’mi’kudeshet likha ki’dat Moshe vi’Yisrael,” “Behold I accept this ring and am betrothed to you according to the laws of Moshe and Israel.” ...Once the groom has done both components of the kiddushin – the giving of the ring and the speech acts, it is fully acceptable for the bride to say hareini mekudeshet as well.

As we have seen, this debate over the nature of the statement harei at, can be understood to be a debate over the basic nature of the act – as one of kinyan or one of kiddushin. It is thus significant that, in our practice, we have made the speech act a formal part of the act of the act of kiddushin, insisting on a very precise formula, and reflecting our embracing of the kiddushin model over the kinyan model. Our embracing of this model is further borne out by the growing practice in Modern Orthodox circles of the bride making a hareini mekudeshet statement, and for an exploration of opportunities for greater participation of the bride in the ceremony itself, an issue I have discussed elsewhere. The tension between kinyan and kiddushin continues throughout the sources and our halakhic tradition, and our affirmation of the kiddushin model began over 2000 years ago, and continues until today.

Jewish Virtual Library

Issues in Jewish Ethics: Marriage

YCT Torah Library

Rabbi Dov Linzer - series on Marriage