## Kiddushin Daf 9b

###### Kiddushin 9b:1
[Kiddushin 9b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:1)

יְצִיאָה בָּעֵינַן לִשְׁמָהּ – אַף הֲוָיָיה בָּעֵינַן לִשְׁמָהּ, אוֹ דִלְמָא הֲוָיוֹת לַהֲדָדֵי מַקְּשִׁינַן, מָה הֲוָיָיה דְכֶסֶף לָא בָּעֵינַן לִשְׁמָהּ – אַף הֲוָיָיה דִשְׁטָר לָא בָּעֵינַן לִשְׁמָהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**we require** that the document of **leaving,** i.e., a bill of divorce, must be written specifically **for her sake, so too, we require** that the document of **becoming** betrothed be written **for her sake. Or perhaps we juxtapose** the different **modes of becoming** betrothed **to each other** and say: **Just as we do not require** that **becoming** betrothed **with money** must be carried out with coins minted **for her sake, so too, we do not require** that **becoming** betrothed **with a document** must be with a document written **for her sake.**


###### Kiddushin 9b:2
[Kiddushin 9b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:2)

בָּתַר דְּבַעְיָא הֲדַר פַּשְׁטַהּ: הֲוָיָיה לִיצִיאָה מַקְּשִׁינַן, דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״וְיָצְאָה״ ״וְהָיְתָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**After he raised the dilemma,** Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish **then resolved it. We juxtapose becoming** betrothed **to leaving** a marriage, **as the verse states: “And she departs** out of his house, and goes **and becomes”** (Deuteronomy 24:2). This shows that the *halakhot* of a betrothal document are derived from those of a bill of divorce, and therefore a document of betrothal must also be written for her sake.


###### Kiddushin 9b:3
[Kiddushin 9b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:3)

אִיתְּמַר: כְּתָבוֹ לִשְׁמָהּ, וְשֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתָּהּ – רָבָא וְרָבִינָא אָמְרִי: מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. רַב פָּפָּא וְרַב שֵׁרֵבְיָא אָמְרִי: אֵינָהּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: אֵימָא טַעְמָא דִידְהוּ וְאֵימָא טַעְמָא דִידִי. אֵימָא טַעְמָא דִידְהוּ – דִּכְתִיב: ״וְיָצְאָה״ ״וְהָיְתָה״ – מַקִּישׁ הֲוָיָיה לִיצִיאָה, מָה יְצִיאָה לִשְׁמָהּ וְשֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתָּהּ, אַף הֲוָיָיה נָמֵי לִשְׁמָהּ וְשֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It was stated** that *amora’im* disagreed with regard to the following issue: If a man **wrote** a document of betrothal **for her sake but without her consent,** i.e., she did not know at the time that they were writing it but accepted it afterward, **Rava and Ravina say: She is betrothed. Rav Pappa and Rav Sherevya say: She is not betrothed. Rav Pappa said: I will say their reason and I will say my reason. I will state their reason, as it is written: “And she departs** out of his house, and goes **and becomes,”** by which the verse **juxtaposes becoming** betrothed **to leaving** a marriage. **Just as** a bill of divorce, written for **leaving** a marriage must be written **for her own sake but** can be written **without her consent, so too,** a document written for **becoming** betrothed must be written **for her own sake and** can even be **without her consent.**


###### Kiddushin 9b:4
[Kiddushin 9b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:4)

וְאֵימָא טַעְמָא דִידִי: ״וְיָצְאָה״ ״וְהָיְתָה״ – מַקִּישׁ הֲוָיָיה לִיצִיאָה, מָה יְצִיאָה בָּעֵינַן דַּעַת מַקְנֶה, אַף הֲוָיָיה בָּעֵינַן דַּעַת מַקְנֶה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And I will say my reason:** The verse says: **“And she departs** out of his house, and goes **and becomes.”** The verse **juxtaposes becoming** betrothed **to leaving** a marriage. **Just as** with regard to a bill of divorce, written for **leaving** a marriage, **we require the consent of the one transferring** ownership, i.e., the man, as he divorces and transfers authority of the woman to herself, **so too,** with regard to a document written for **becoming** betrothed, **we require the consent of the one transferring** ownership, which in this case is the woman, who must agree to the marriage.


###### Kiddushin 9b:5
[Kiddushin 9b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:5)

מֵיתִיבִי: אֵין כּוֹתְבִין שְׁטָרֵי אֵירוּסִין וְנִשּׂוּאִין אֶלָּא מִדַּעַת שְׁנֵיהֶן. מַאי לָאו שְׁטָרֵי אֵירוּסִין וְנִשּׂוּאִין מַמָּשׁ! לָא, שְׁטָרֵי פְּסִיקָתָא. וְכִדְרַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a mishna (*Bava Batra* 167b) against the opinion that she is betrothed if the document was written without her consent. **One writes documents of betrothal and marriage only with the consent of both** the man and woman. **What, is** the mishna **not** referring to **actual documents of betrothal and marriage,** which indicates that the document must be written with the woman’s consent? The Gemara rejects this proof: **No,** this is referring to **documents of stipulation,** which contain the details of the dowry. **And** this statement is **in accordance with** that which **Rav Giddel** says that **Rav says.**


###### Kiddushin 9b:6
[Kiddushin 9b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:6)

דְּאָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב: ״כַּמָּה אַתָּה נוֹתֵן לְבִנְךָ״? – ״כָּךְ וְכָךְ״, ״לְבִתְּךָ״? – ״כָּךְ וְכָךְ״, עָמְדוּ וְקִדְּשׁוּ – קָנוּ, הֵן הֵן הַדְּבָרִים הַנִּקְנִים בַּאֲמִירָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As Rav Giddel says** that **Rav says:** If the father of one member of the couple says to the father of the other: **How much are you giving to your son?** And he answers: **Such and such,** and adds: How much are you giving **to your daughter?** And the other responds: **Such and such,** then if **they,** the couple, subsequently **arose and** became **betrothed, they acquire** everything that was promised. **These are the matters that are acquired through speech,** and they do not require an act of acquisition. The documents of betrothal mentioned here that require the woman’s consent are those which contain this type of monetary obligation, not actual documents of betrothal.


###### Kiddushin 9b:7
[Kiddushin 9b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:7)

וּבְבִיאָה. מְנָא לַן? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״בְּעֻלַת בַּעַל״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁנַּעֲשֶׂה לָהּ בַּעַל עַל יְדֵי בְעִילָה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא לְרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ וְאָמְרִי לַהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּעוּרָה זוֹ שֶׁשָּׁנָה רַבִּי ״וּבְעָלָהּ״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁנִּקְנֵית בְּבִיאָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that a woman can be betrothed **through sexual intercourse.** The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive this? **Rabbi Abbahu said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said** that **the verse states:** “If a man be found lying with **a married woman [*beulat ba’al*]”** (Deuteronomy 22:22). This **teaches that he becomes her husband [*ba’al*] by means of sexual intercourse [*be’ila*]. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Abbahu, and some say** it was **Reish Lakish** who said this **to Rabbi Yoḥanan:** Is **this** other proof, **taught by Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **unacceptable:** “When a man takes a woman **and engages in sexual intercourse with her”** (Deuteronomy 24:1)? This verse **teaches** that **she can be acquired through intercourse.**


###### Kiddushin 9b:8
[Kiddushin 9b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:8)

אִי מֵהָתָם, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא עַד דִּמְקַדֵּשׁ וַהֲדַר בָּעֵיל, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that the verse cited by Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is insufficient proof that a woman can be betrothed via intercourse, as, **if** this *halakha* were derived only **from there, I would say** that she is not considered his wife **unless he** first **betroths** her through money, indicated by the phrase “takes a woman,” **and then engages in intercourse** with her. This is the only valid mode of betrothal, and intercourse alone is not enough. Therefore, the verse states “a married woman [*beulat ba’al*]” and **teaches us** that intercourse by itself is a valid means of betrothal.


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

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר מֶמֶל: אִם כֵּן, נַעֲרָה הַמְאוֹרָסָה, דְּאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא בִּסְקִילָה, הֵיכִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Abba bar Memel objects to this:** The above suggestion, that both money and sexual intercourse are required for betrothal, cannot be the correct interpretation of the verse: “When a man takes a woman and engages in sexual intercourse with her.” This is because, **if** it is **so,** that a woman can be acquired only through both betrothal money and intercourse, the case of one who engages in intercourse with **a betrothed young woman,** concerning which **the Merciful One states** in the Torah that he is punished **by stoning** (see Deuteronomy 22:23–24)**, how can you find** a case where he is liable to be punished in this manner?


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

אִי דְּאקַדֵּישׁ וַהֲדַר בְּעֵיל בְּעוּלָה הִיא, אִי דְּאקַדֵּישׁ וְלָא בְּעֵיל לָאו כְּלוּם הוּא! אַמְרוּהָ רַבָּנַן קַמֵּיהּ דְּאַבָּיֵי: מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ, כְּגוֹן שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ אָרוּס שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Abba bar Memel elaborates: **If** this is referring to a case **where he betrothed** her with money **and then engaged in sexual intercourse** with her, **she is a non-virgin,** and the punishment of stoning applies only to one who engages in intercourse with a betrothed young virgin. **If** it is referring to a case **where he betrothed** her with money **and did not engage in intercourse** with her, this **is nothing,** as the betrothal has not been completed. **The Rabbis said before Abaye: You find it** in a case **where** he betrothed her with money and then the **betrothed man engaged in intercourse with her in an atypical manner,** i.e., anal intercourse. Despite the fact that she is still a virgin, the betrothal has taken effect by means of this type of sexual intercourse.


###### Kiddushin 9b:11
[Kiddushin 9b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:11)

אֲמַר לְהוּ אַבָּיֵי: עַד כָּאן לָא פְּלִיגִי רַבִּי וְרַבָּנַן אֶלָּא בְּאַחֵר, אֲבָל בַּעַל – דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ – עֲשָׂאָהּ בְּעוּלָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Abaye said to** those Sages: The verse cannot be explained in that manner, as **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **and the Rabbis disagree only with regard to another** man, i.e., whether a woman is considered to be a virgin after engaging in anal intercourse with another man. **But** with regard to her **husband, everyone agrees** that **if he engages in intercourse in an atypical manner with her he has rendered her a non-virgin.** If so, she is no longer considered a virgin with regard to the *halakha* of a betrothed young woman.


###### Kiddushin 9b:12
[Kiddushin 9b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:12)

מַאי הִיא? דְּתַנְיָא: בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ עֲשָׂרָה אֲנָשִׁים, וַעֲדַיִין הִיא בְּתוּלָה – כּוּלָּן בִּסְקִילָה. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אוֹמֵר אֲנִי: הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּסְקִילָה, וְכוּלָּן בְּחֶנֶק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara clarifies: **What is** the dispute to which Abaye refers? **As it is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta*, *Sanhedrin* 10:4): If **ten men engaged in sexual intercourse with** a betrothed young woman, **and she is still a virgin,** as they engaged in anal intercourse with her, **they are all** punished **by stoning. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: I say** that **the first** one is punished **by stoning,** as he engaged in intercourse with a virgin young woman, **but all** the others are punished **by strangulation.** Once the first man engages in intercourse with her she is no longer considered a virgin, even if he engaged in anal intercourse with her.


###### Kiddushin 9b:13
[Kiddushin 9b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:13)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ כְּגוֹן שֶׁקִּדְּשָׁהּ בִּשְׁטָר, הוֹאִיל וְגוֹמֵר וּמוֹצִיא, גּוֹמֵר וּמַכְנִיס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said** a different answer to Rabbi Abba bar Memel’s question: **You find** a situation where a man who engages in intercourse with a betrothed young woman is punished by stoning in a case **where he betrothed her with a document.** Everyone agrees that **since** a document, i.e., a bill of divorce, **completely removes** a woman from her husband, without the need for an additional act, it also **completely brings** her into the state of betrothal. If a young woman is betrothed by means of a document, she can be a betrothed young woman while remaining a virgin.


###### Kiddushin 9b:14
[Kiddushin 9b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:14)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, הַאי ״וּבְעָלָהּ״, מַאי עָבֵיד לֵיהּ? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ – זוֹ נִקְנֵית בְּבִיאָה, וְאֵין אָמָה הָעִבְרִיָּה נִקְנֵית בְּבִיאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to the different derivations of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Yoḥanan. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan,** who maintains that the mode of betrothal through intercourse is derived from the verse: “If a man be found lying with a married woman [*beulat ba’al*]” (Deuteronomy 22:22), what does he **do with this** verse: “When a man takes a woman **and engages in sexual intercourse with her”** (Deuteronomy 24:1)? The Gemara answers: **He requires that** verse for a different *halakha*, as he maintains that it teaches that **this** woman **can be acquired through intercourse, but a Hebrew maidservant cannot be acquired through intercourse.**


###### Kiddushin 9b:15
[Kiddushin 9b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:15)

סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא תֵּיתֵי בְּקַל וָחוֹמֶר מִיבָמָה: וּמָה יְבָמָהּ שֶׁאֵין נִקְנֵית בְּכֶסֶף, נִקְנֵית בְּבִיאָה, זוֹ, שֶׁנִּקְנֵית בְּכֶסֶף, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנִּקְנֵית בְּבִיאָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
As it might **enter your mind to say: Let** the *halakha* of a Hebrew maidservant **be derived through an *a fortiori*** inference **from** the *halakha* of **a *yevama*: Just as a *yevama*, who cannot be acquired through money** at all, nevertheless **can be acquired through intercourse,** which indicates that the ability of an act of sexual intercourse to effect acquisition is greater than that of money, **is it not logical that this** Hebrew maidservant, **who can be acquired through money, can** also **be acquired through intercourse?**


###### Kiddushin 9b:16
[Kiddushin 9b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:16)

מָה לִיבָמָה, שֶׁכֵּן זְקוּקָה וְעוֹמֶדֶת. סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא: הוֹאִיל וּכְתִב ״אִם אַחֶרֶת יִקַּח לוֹ״, הִקִּישָׁהּ הַכָּתוּב לְאַחֶרֶת. מָה אַחֶרֶת מִיקַּנְיָא בְּבִיאָה – אַף אָמָה הָעִבְרִיָּה מִיקַּנְיָא בְּבִיאָה, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this opinion: **What** is unique **about a *yevama* is that she is bound and standing** waiting for the *yavam*, i.e., there is already a connection between them. Perhaps it is for this reason that intercourse enables a *yavam* to acquire a *yevama*, and the same cannot be said of a maidservant. Rather, it might **enter your mind to say** a different claim: **Since it is written** with regard to a the master of a Hebrew maidservant: **“If he take himself another** wife” (Exodus 21:10), this **verse juxtaposes** a Hebrew maidservant **with another** woman that a master marries: **Just as another** woman that a master marries **can be acquired through intercourse, so too, a Hebrew maidservant can be acquired through intercourse. Therefore,** the verse **teaches us,** with the phrase “and engages in sexual intercourse with her,” that this is not the case.


###### Kiddushin 9b:17
[Kiddushin 9b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:17)

וְרַבִּי, הַאי סְבָרָא מְנָא לֵיהּ? אִם כֵּן לִכְתּוֹב רַחֲמָנָא ״וּבָעַל״, מַאי ״וּבְעָלָהּ״ – שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ תַּרְתֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, who learns that betrothal can be effected through sexual intercourse from this verse, **from where does he** derive **this conclusion** that a Hebrew maidservant cannot be acquired through intercourse? The Gemara answers: **If so,** that this verse is teaching only one *halakha*, **let the Merciful One write** simply: **And he engages in sexual intercourse. What** is the meaning of the phrase **“And he engages in sexual intercourse with her”? Learn two** *halakhot* **from it.** One can learn from this verse both that a woman can be acquired through intercourse, and that an ordinary woman can be betrothed through intercourse but a Hebrew maidservant cannot be acquired through intercourse.


###### Kiddushin 9b:18
[Kiddushin 9b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:18)

וּלְרָבָא דְּאָמַר: בַּר אֲהִינָא אַסְבְּרַהּ לִי: ״כִּי יִקַּח אִישׁ אִשָּׁה וּבְעָלָהּ״ – קִידּוּשִׁין הַמְסוּרִין לְבִיאָה הָווּ קִידּוּשִׁין, קִידּוּשִׁין שֶׁאֵין מְסוּרִין לְבִיאָה לָא הָווּ קִידּוּשִׁין. מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And according to** the opinion of **Rava, who said: Bar Ahina explained this to me** by citing a proof from the following verse: **“When a man takes a woman and engages in sexual intercourse with her”** (Deuteronomy 24:1), which teaches that **betrothal that is given to consummation,** i.e., betrothal when it is permitted for the man and woman to engage in intercourse, **is a betrothal,** but **betrothal that is not given to consummation is not** a valid **betrothal, what is there to say?** Since he uses this verse for a different purpose, from where does Rava derive that a woman can be betrothed through intercourse and that a Hebrew maidservant cannot be acquired in this manner?


###### Kiddushin 9b:19
[Kiddushin 9b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:19)

אִם כֵּן נִכְתּוֹב קְרָא ״אוֹ בְעָלָהּ״, מַאי ״וּבְעָלָהּ״ – שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ כּוּלְּהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **If so,** that a woman cannot be betrothed through intercourse, **let the verse write:** When a man takes a woman **or engages in intercourse with her. What is** indicated by the phrase: **“And engages in sexual intercourse with her”?** One can **learn from** the verse **all** these *halakhot*, that intercourse is a valid mode of betrothing a woman but not acquiring a maidservant, and betrothal is effective only when it is given to consummation.


###### Kiddushin 9b:20
[Kiddushin 9b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:20)

וְרַבִּי, הַאי ״בְּעֻלַת בַּעַל״, מַאי עָבֵיד לֵיהּ? הַאי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ – בַּעַל עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ בְּעוּלָה שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ, וְאֵין אַחֵר עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ בְּעוּלָה שֶׁלֹּא כְּדַרְכָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **what does he do with this** verse: “If a man be found lying with **a married woman [*beulat ba’al*]”** (Deuteronomy 22:22), from which Rabbi Yoḥanan derives that intercourse is a valid means of betrothal? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **requires this** verse for the *halakha* that **the husband renders her a non-virgin** even if he engages **in intercourse** with her **in an atypical manner, but no other** man **renders her a non-virgin** by engaging **in intercourse** with her **in an atypical manner.**


###### Kiddushin 9b:21
[Kiddushin 9b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kiddushin/r/9b:21)

וּמִי אִית לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי הַאי סְבָרָא? וְהָתַנְיָא: בָּאוּ עָלֶיהָ עֲשָׂרָה אֲנָשִׁים וַעֲדַיִין הִיא בְּתוּלָה – כּוּלָּם בִּסְקִילָה. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אוֹמֵר אֲנִי הָרִאשׁוֹן בִּסְקִילָה, וְכוּלָּם בְּחֶנֶק!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **accept this opinion? But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: If **ten men engaged in intercourse with** a betrothed young woman, **and she is still a virgin, they are all** punished **by stoning. Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: I say** that **the first** one is punished **by stoning, but** the others are **all** punished **by strangulation.** This proves that in the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, even one who is not her husband can render a woman a non-virgin by engaging in anal intercourse with her.