## Kiddushin Daf 10a

###### Kiddushin 10a:1
[Kiddushin 10a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:1)

אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי לְעִנְיַן קְנָס דְּכוּלְּהוּ מְשַׁלְּמִי. מַאי שְׁנָא מִקְּטָלָא? שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״וּמֵת הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר שָׁכַב עִמָּהּ לְבַדּוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Zeira said: Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **concedes with regard to** the **fine** of a rapist and a seducer **that they all pay** this fine, and they are not exempt merely because their acts of intercourse were with a non-virgin. The Gemara asks: In **what** way **is** this case **different from** the **death** penalty? With respect to the death penalty they are punished as though they engaged in intercourse with a betrothed non-virgin, and yet concerning the fine, they pay as though they engaged in intercourse with a virgin. The Gemara answers: It **is different there,** with regard to capital punishment, **as the verse states: “Then the man only who lay with her shall die”** (Deuteronomy 22:25), which indicates that only one man is executed for having sexual intercourse with a virgin, and no more.


###### Kiddushin 10a:2
[Kiddushin 10a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:2)

וְרַבָּנַן הַאי ״לְבַדּוֹ״ מַאי עָבְדִי לֵיהּ? מִיבְּעֵי לְהוּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא, ״וּמֵתוּ גַּם שְׁנֵיהֶם״ – עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ שָׁוִין כְּאֶחָד, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא. רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן אוֹמֵר: ״וּמֵת הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר שָׁכַב עִמָּהּ לְבַדּוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the Rabbis, what do they do with this** term **“only”?** The Gemara answers: **They require it for that which is taught** in a *baraita*. The verse states: **“Then they shall both of them die”** (Deuteronomy 22:22). This indicates that this is not the case **unless** the two of them **are equal,** i.e., both deserve punishment. But if one of them cannot be punished, e.g., if he is a minor, the other is not executed either. This is **the statement of Rabbi Oshaya. Rabbi Yonatan says** that the verse: **“Then the man only who lay with her shall die,”** indicates that in some cases only one of them is liable to receive the death penalty.


###### Kiddushin 10a:3
[Kiddushin 10a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:3)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, הַאי סְבָרָא מְנָא לֵיהּ? אִם כֵּן נִכְתּוֹב קְרָא ״בְּעוּלַת אִישׁ״, מַאי ״בְּעוּלַת בַּעַל״ – שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ תַּרְתֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And Rabbi Yoḥanan, from where does he** derive **this conclusion** that only a woman’s husband can render her a non-virgin through intercourse in an atypical manner, if he uses this verse to derive the mode of betrothal by means of sexual intercourse? The Gemara answers: **If so,** that this verse is teaching only one *halakha*, **let the verse write:** If a man be found lying with **a *beulat ish*,** literally, a woman who engaged in sexual intercourse with a man. **What** is indicated by the term **“*beulat ba’al*,”** literally, who engaged in sexual intercourse with a husband? **Learn two** *halakhot* **from it:** First, that one can betroth a woman through intercourse, and second, that only a woman’s husband can render her a non-virgin by intercourse in an atypical manner.


###### Kiddushin 10a:4
[Kiddushin 10a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:4)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: תְּחִילַּת בִּיאָה קוֹנָה אוֹ סוֹף בִּיאָה קוֹנָה? נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ כְּגוֹן שֶׁהֶעֱרָה בָּהּ, וּפָשְׁטָה יָדָהּ וְקִבְּלָה קִדּוּשִׁין מֵאַחֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: Since intercourse is not a momentary act but has different stages, does **the beginning of intercourse effect acquisition or** does **the end of intercourse effect acquisition?** When exactly is the moment of betrothal? The Gemara comments: The **practical difference** resulting from this question is in a case **where** one **engaged in** only **the initial stage of intercourse with her and** in the meantime **she reached her hand out and accepted betrothal from another** man. If the beginning of sexual intercourse effects acquisition, the other man’s betrothal is meaningless. If the end of sexual intercourse effects acquisition, she is betrothed to the other man.


###### Kiddushin 10a:5
[Kiddushin 10a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:5)

אִי נָמֵי, לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל דְּקָא קָנֵי בְּתוּלָה בְּבִיאָה, מַאי? אָמַר אַמֵּימָר מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: כׇּל הַבּוֹעֵל – דַּעְתּוֹ עַל גְּמַר בִּיאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Alternatively,** there is a difference with regard **to a High Priest who acquires a virgin through sexual intercourse.** If only the end of intercourse effects acquisition, she is no longer a virgin at the time of the betrothal, which would mean that a High Priest cannot acquire a woman through intercourse, as it is prohibited for him to marry a non-virgin (Leviticus 21:14). **What,** then, is the *halakha*? **Ameimar said in the name of Rava: Anyone who engages in sexual intercourse has the completion of** the act of **intercourse in mind,** not the beginning. Therefore, the acquisition is complete only when the act has been completed.


###### Kiddushin 10a:6
[Kiddushin 10a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:6)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: בִּיאָה נִשּׂוּאִין עוֹשָׂה, אוֹ אֵירוּסִין עוֹשָׂה? נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ – לְיוֹרְשָׁהּ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Additionally, **a dilemma was raised before** the Sages: Does the **sexual intercourse** that is performed to effect betrothal **effect marriage** at the same time that it effects betrothal, **or** does it **effect** only **betrothal? The practical difference** that arises from this question concerns all cases where it matters whether a woman is betrothed or married. For example, one issue is whether the act allows him **to inherit** property from **her.** If he betroths her through intercourse, does he inherit her property when she dies as he would if they were married?


###### Kiddushin 10a:7
[Kiddushin 10a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:7)

וְלִיטַמֵּא לָהּ, וּלְהָפֵר נְדָרֶיהָ. אִי אָמְרַתְּ נִשּׂוּאִין עוֹשָׂה – יוֹרְשָׁהּ וּמִיטַּמֵּא לָהּ וּמֵיפֵר נְדָרֶיהָ, וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ אֵירוּסִין עוֹשָׂה – אֵינוֹ יוֹרְשָׁהּ וְאֵינוֹ מִיטַּמֵּא לָהּ וְאֵינוֹ מֵיפֵר נְדָרֶיהָ. מַאי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** if he is a priest, is he required **to become ritually impure to** bury **her,** as he must do for his wife? **And** similarly, does a betrothal through intercourse allow him **to nullify her vows** by himself, without her father’s participation? **If you say** that intercourse **effects marriage, he inherits** property from **her, and he becomes impure to** bury **her, and he nullifies her vows** alone. **And if you say** that **it effects** only **betrothal, he does not inherit** property from **her, and he does not become ritually impure to** bury **her, and he cannot nullify her vows** alone. **What,** then, is the *halakha*?


###### Kiddushin 10a:8
[Kiddushin 10a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:8)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: תָּא שְׁמַע: הָאָב זַכַּאי בְּבִתּוֹ בְּקִדּוּשֶׁיהָ בְּכֶסֶף בִּשְׁטָר וּבְבִיאָה, וְזַכַּאי בִּמְצִיאָתָהּ וּבְמַעֲשֵׂה יָדֶיהָ, וּבַהֲפָרַת נְדָרֶיהָ, וּמְקַבֵּל אֶת גִּיטָּהּ, וְאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת בְּחַיֶּיהָ. נִישֵּׂאת – יָתֵר עָלָיו הַבַּעַל שֶׁאוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת בְּחַיֶּיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said: Come** and **hear** a resolution from the following mishna (*Ketubot* 46b): **A father has authority** over **his daughter with regard to her betrothal,** whether it is **through money, through a document, or through sexual intercourse.** Likewise, a father **has a right to items she** has **found, and to her earnings, and to** effect **the nullification of her vows,** i.e., a father may nullify his daughter’s vows. **And he accepts her bill of divorce** on her behalf if she is divorced from betrothal before she becomes a grown woman. **And** although he inherits her property when she dies, e.g., property she inherited from her mother’s family, **he does not enjoy the profits** of her property **during her lifetime.** If the daughter **married, the husband has more** rights and obligations **than** her father had before the marriage, **as he enjoys the profits** of her property **during her lifetime.**


###### Kiddushin 10a:9
[Kiddushin 10a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:9)

קָתָנֵי ״בִּיאָה״, וְקָתָנֵי ״נִישֵּׂאת״! כִּי קָתָנֵי ״נִישֵּׂאת״ – אַשְּׁאָרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna **teaches** that a man has rights to his daughter’s betrothal through **sexual intercourse, and** it subsequently **teaches:** If the daughter **married.** This indicates that intercourse effects only betrothal. The Gemara rejects this claim: **When it teaches:** If the daughter **married,** that is referring **to the other** modes mentioned here, i.e., betrothal by means of money or a document. In these cases there is a difference between betrothal and marriage, while it is possible that betrothal through intercourse effects marriage as well.


###### Kiddushin 10a:10
[Kiddushin 10a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/10a:10)

אָמַר רָבָא: תָּא שְׁמַע: בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה, וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ יָבָם – קְנָאָהּ, וְחַיָּיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, וּמְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Come** and **hear** a resolution from a *baraita*: A girl who is **three years and one day old can be betrothed through intercourse, and if** her ***yavam* engaged in intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And** if she is married, **one is liable** if he engages in intercourse **with her, due to** her status as **a married woman. And** if she is impure as a menstruating woman, **she renders one who engages in intercourse with her ritually impure** for seven days.