Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

July 13, 2022 | 讬状讚 讘转诪讜讝 转砖驻状讘

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the Refuah Shlemah of Naama bat Yael Esther.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Ketubot 7

Today’s daf is sponsored by Nina Black for the refuah shleima of Devorah bat Layah.

Today’s daf is sponsored by David and Mitzi Geffen in loving memory of Azriel Geffen, Azriel ben Avraham z”l on his 69th yahrzeit.

After having discussed the issue extensively, the Gemara brings the decision of various rabbis who either forbade or permitted having relations for the first time on Shabbat. Is there a reason to distinguish between Yom Tov and Shabbat? There are seven blessings recited at a wedding ceremony and at meals during the seven days of celebration. What are the differences if the bride or groom is a widow/er? The brachot require a kehilla, the presence of ten. From where is this derived? Two different verses are suggested by different rabbis. What does each one do with the other’s verse? There is a debate whether the seven blessings are recited at the chuppah or at the betrothal. How does Abaye explain this debate? What is the betrothal blessing? Does it begin and end with a blessing (like Kiddush) or is it like a blessing on fruits or on a mitzva?

 

驻讟讜专 讛转诐 驻拽讬讚 讜注拽讬专 讛讻讗 驻拽讬讚 讜诇讗 注拽讬专

he is exempt. In this case, exempt means permitted ab initio. Ostensibly, intercourse with a virgin is comparable to creating an opening in an abscess. Why then, would intercourse with a virgin be forbidden on Shabbat? The Gemara rejects the proof: There, the pus in the abscess is pooled in one place and completely removed from the vessels in the flesh. In creating the opening, he creates nothing enduring. Here, however, in the case of the ruptured hymen, even according to the opinion that the blood is pooled, it is not completely removed from the blood vessels in the flesh. Through intercourse, the blood is removed from its place, which constitutes an aspect of a prohibited labor.

专讘讬 讗诪讬 砖专讗 诇诪讬讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 讜讛讗 诇讗 讻转讬讘讗 讻转讜讘转讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗转驻住讜讛 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉

The Gemara relates: Rav Ami permitted one to engage in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat. The Sages said to him: But her marriage contract is not yet written. Engaging in conjugal relations with one鈥檚 wife without a marriage contract is considered an act of promiscuity. He said to them: Have her seize a portion of her husband鈥檚 movable property equivalent to the value of her marriage contract, and that will serve as a deposit until he writes the marriage contract. He may then engage in sexual relations with her.

专讘 讝讘讬讚 砖专讗 诇诪讬讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 专讘 讝讘讬讚 讙讜驻讬讛 讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转

The Gemara relates: Rav Zevid permitted one to engage in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat. There are those who say: Rav Zevid himself engaged in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat.

专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 砖专讗 诇诪讬讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讬 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚砖专讬 讛讗 讘砖讘转 讗住讜专 讚讛讜讗 讛讚讬谉 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖讘转 谞诪讬 砖专讬 讜诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛 讻讱 讛讬讛

It was further related: Rav Yehuda permitted one to engage in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on a Festival. Rav Pappi said in the name of Rava: Do not infer and say: It is on a Festival that it is permitted, but on Shabbat it is prohibited, similar to actions involving food preparation, which are permitted on Festivals and prohibited on Shabbat, as the same is true that even on Shabbat it is permitted. And the reason Rav Yehuda issued his ruling with regard to a Festival is due to the fact that the incident that took place, took place in this way.

专讘 驻驻讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗诪专 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 砖专讬 讘砖讘转 讗住讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 驻驻讬 诇专讘 驻驻讗 诪讗讬 讚注转讬讱 诪转讜讱 砖讛讜转专讛 讞讘讜专讛 诇爪讜专讱 讛讜转专讛 谞诪讬 砖诇讗 诇爪讜专讱 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 诪讜转专 诇注砖讜转 诪讜讙诪专 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚诪转讜讱 砖讛讜转专讛 讛讘注专讛 诇爪讜专讱 讛讜转专讛 谞诪讬 砖诇讗 诇爪讜专讱

Rav Pappa said in the name of Rava: According to Rav Yehuda, on a Festival it is permitted, on Shabbat it is prohibited. Rav Pappi said to Rav Pappa: What is your thinking? Is it: Since causing a wound was permitted on a Festival when performed for the purpose of food preparation, it was also permitted when not performed for the purpose of food preparation? If that is so, it would be permitted to prepare incense [mugmar] on a Festival due to the following reason: Since kindling a fire was permitted on a Festival when performed for the purpose of food preparation, it was also permitted when not performed for the purpose of food preparation.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诇讬讱 讗诪专 拽专讗 讗讱 讗砖专 讬讗讻诇 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 讚讘专 讛砖讜讛 诇讻诇 谞驻砖

Rav Pappa said to him: It is about your assertion that the verse states with regard to a Festival: 鈥淪ave that which every person must eat, that alone may be done by you鈥 (Exodus 12:16), indicating a matter that is equal for every person. Incense is burned only by those who are particularly delicate. It is not equally utilized by everyone, and therefore it is not permitted. Intercourse, on the other hand, is universally practiced.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 谞讝讚诪谉 诇讜 爪讘讬 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讛讜讗讬诇 讜讗讬谞讜 砖讜讛 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚讗住讜专 诇诪砖讞讟讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞讗 讚讘专 讛爪讜专讱 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 拽讗诪讬谞讗 爪讘讬 爪专讬讱 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 讛讜讗

Rav A岣, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: If that is so, if a deer happened to come into his possession on a Festival, since it is not a food that is equal for every person, would the ruling also be that it is prohibited to slaughter it? Rav Ashi said to him: I said a matter that is a need for every person, and deer meat is a matter that although difficult to acquire, is a need for every person. Incense, even when available, is not universally utilized.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讛讜专讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘爪讬讬讚谉 讗住讜专 诇讘注讜诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讜诪讬 讗讬讻讗 讛讜专讗讛 诇讗讬住讜专

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi said: Rabbi Yo岣nan issued a ruling in the city of Tzaidan: It is prohibited to engage in intercourse with one鈥檚 virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: And is there a ruling issued to prohibit an action? Typically, that language is utilized in reference to a firmly established ruling. A stringent ruling can be issued even based on uncertainty. In contrast, a lenient ruling can be issued only if the matter is clearly established by means of tradition or the reasoning of the Sage issuing the ruling.

讗讬谉 讜讛转谞谉 讛讜专讜讛 讘讬转 讛诇诇 砖转讛讗 谞讝讬专讛 注讜讚 砖讘注 砖谞讬诐 讗讞专讜转

The Gemara answers: Yes, that language is used with regard to a stringent ruling, as didn鈥檛 we learn the following in a mishna (Nazir 19b): When Queen Helene鈥檚 son went to war, she took a vow to be a nazirite for seven years, and she fulfilled that vow for the duration of her stay in the Diaspora? When she immigrated to Eretz Yisrael, Beit Hillel issued a ruling that she shall be a nazirite for seven additional years. Apparently, rulings are issued to prohibit an action as well.

讜讗讬 谞诪讬 讻讬 讛讗 讚转谞讬讗 讞讜讟 讛砖讚专讛 砖谞驻住拽 讘专讜讘讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗讜诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 谞讬拽讘 讛讜专讛 专讘讬 讻专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬注拽讘

And alternatively, this is similar to that which is taught in a baraita: If a majority of the spinal cord of an animal is severed, the animal is a tereifa; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov says: Even if the spinal cord is perforated but otherwise intact, the animal is a tereifa. The baraita continues: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi issued a ruling in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov. Here too, the term: Issue a ruling, is employed with regard to a stringent ruling. Rav Huna said: Despite the fact that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi ruled in accordance with his opinion, the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov, but rather it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. This is one version of this discussion.

专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诪转谞讬 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 砖讗诇 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘谉 讬注拽讘 讚诪谉 爪讜专 讗转 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘爪讬讬讚谉 讜讗谞讗 砖诪注讬 诪讛讜 诇讘注讜诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讜讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗住讜专 讜讛诇讻转讗 诪讜转专 诇讘注讜诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转

Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k taught this alternative version of the ruling of Rabbi Yo岣nan. Rav Abbahu said: Rabbi Yishmael ben Ya鈥檃kov, who is from Tyre, asked Rabbi Yo岣nan in Tzaidan, and I heard the exchange: What is the halakha with regard to engaging in intercourse with one鈥檚 virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat? And he said to him: It is prohibited. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that it is permitted to engage in intercourse with one鈥檚 virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat, and one need not be concerned lest he cause a wound, create an opening, or initiate bleeding.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞转 讘转讜诇讛 讜讗讞转 讗诇诪谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讗讬谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讘讞讜专 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讻讗谉 讘讗诇诪讜谉 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛

Rabbi 岣lbo said that Rav Huna said that Rabbi Abba bar Rav Zavda said that Rav said: Both a virgin and a widow who marry require that the benediction of the grooms be recited. The Gemara asks: Did Rav Huna say that? But didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say: A widow does not require that a benediction be recited? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where Rav Huna said that a widow requires a benediction, it is with regard to a bachelor who married a widow. There, where Rav Huna said she does not require a benediction, it is with regard to a widower who married a widow.

讜讗诇诪讜谉 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛 诇讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 诇讬 讛讜谞讗 讘专 谞转谉 转谞讗 诪谞讬谉 诇讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘注砖专讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽讞 注砖专讛 讗谞砖讬诐 诪讝拽谞讬 讛注讬专 讜讬讗诪专 砖讘讜 驻讛 讜讬砖讘讜 讜讘讜注讝 讗诇诪讜谉 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讛讜讛

The Gemara asks: And does a widower who married a widow not require a benediction to be recited? But didn鈥檛 Rav Na岣an say: Huna bar Natan said to me that it was taught: From where is it derived that the benediction of the grooms is recited in a quorum of ten men? It is as it is stated with regard to Boaz, who married Ruth: 鈥淎nd he took ten men of the Elders of the city and said: Sit you here, and they sat鈥 (Ruth 4:2). And when Boaz married Ruth, he was a widower marrying a widow. As that is the primary source for the obligation to recite the benediction, apparently the benediction is recited even in that case.

诪讗讬 讗讬谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗讬谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讗讘诇 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛

The Gemara answers: What is the meaning of: Does not require a benediction, that Rav Huna stated? It means that she does not require a benediction all seven days of the wedding celebration, but everyone agrees that for one day, she requires that a benediction be recited.

讗诇讗 讛讗 讚转谞讬讗 砖拽讚讜 讞讻诪讬诐 注诇 转拽谞转 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 砖讬讛讗 砖诪讞 注诪讛 砖诇砖讛 讬诪讬诐 讘诪讗讬 讗讬 讘讘讞讜专 讛讗诪专转 砖讘注讛 讗讬 讘讗诇诪讜谉 讛讗诪专转 讬讜诐 讗讞讚

The Gemara asks: However, that which is taught in a baraita, that the Sages were assiduous in seeing to the well-being of Jewish women, ensuring that the groom will rejoice with her three days, and that is why they established that a widow is married on Thursday, with regard to what circumstance is the baraita speaking? If it is with regard to a bachelor who marries a widow, didn鈥檛 you say he celebrates seven days; why then did the Sages see to a mere three-day celebration? If it is with regard to a widower who marries a widow, didn鈥檛 you say he celebrates for one day? Why then did the Sages see to a three-day celebration?

讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讗诇诪讜谉 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 诇讘专讻讛 讜砖诇砖讛 诇砖诪讞讛 讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讘讞讜专 砖讘注讛 诇讘专讻讛 讜砖诇砖讛 诇砖诪讞讛

The Gemara answers that this can be resolved in several manners. If you wish, say: In the case of a widower marrying a widow, there is one day for benediction and three days for celebration. The wedding is scheduled on Thursday to facilitate a three-day celebration. And if you wish, say instead: In the case of a bachelor marrying a widow, there are seven days for benediction and there are three days for celebration, during which he must refrain from going to work.

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪讘专讻讬谉 诇讘转讜诇讛 砖讘注讛 讜诇讗诇诪谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讗驻讬诇讜 讗诇诪谞讛 砖谞砖讗转 诇讘讞讜专 诇讗 诇讗诇诪讜谉 讗讘诇 诇讘讞讜专 诪讗讬 砖讘注讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 诇讬转谞讬 诪讘专讻讬谉 诇讘转讜诇讛 砖讘注讛 讜诇讗诇诪谞讛 砖谞砖讗转 诇讘讞讜专 砖讘注讛 讜诇讗诇诪谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: One recites a benediction for a virgin who marries for seven days and for a widow who marries for one day. What, is it not even in the case of a widow who is married to a bachelor, that one recites the benediction for one day? The Gemara answers: No, it is only in the case of a widow who is married to a widower that the benediction is recited for one day. The Gemara asks: However, one may then infer that in the case of a widow who is married to a bachelor, what is the halakha? The blessing is recited seven days? If so, let the tanna teach the baraita: One recites a benediction for a virgin who marries for seven days, and for a widow who marries a bachelor seven days, and for a widow marrying a widower for one day. Why was the middle case omitted?

诪讬诇转讗 驻住讬拽转讗 拽转谞讬 讚诇讬讻讗 讘转讜诇讛 讚讘爪专讛 诪砖讘注讛 讜诇讬讻讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讚讘爪专讛 诪讬讜诐 讗讞讚

Although the tanna could have included that case in the baraita, he taught categorical matters. He preferred to avoid entering into detail, as there is no virgin for whom the benediction is recited fewer than seven days, and there is no widow for whom the benediction is recited for less than one day. However, there are circumstances where even for a widow the benediction is recited for more than one day.

讙讜驻讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 诇讬 讛讜谞讗 讘专 谞转谉 转谞讗 诪谞讬谉 诇讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘注砖专讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽讞 注砖专讛 讗谞砖讬诐 诪讝拽谞讬 讛注讬专 讜讬讗诪专 砖讘讜 驻讛 讜专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讗诪专 诪讛讻讗 讘诪拽讛诇讜转 讘专讻讜 讗诇讛讬诐 讛壮 诪诪拽讜专 讬砖专讗诇

搂 Apropos the source for the benediction of the grooms, the Gemara discusses the matter itself. Rav Na岣an said: Huna bar Natan said to me that it was taught: From where is it derived that the benediction of the grooms is recited in a quorum of ten men? It is as it is stated: 鈥淎nd he took ten men of the Elders of the city and said: Sit you here, and they sat鈥 (Ruth 4:2). And Rabbi Abbahu said that the source is from here: 鈥淚n assemblies [mak鈥檋elot], bless God, the Lord, from the source of Israel鈥 (Psalms 68:27). This verse indicates that a congregation [kahal], which contains at least ten men, blesses God when reciting a benediction related to the source of Israel, i.e., conjugal relations, which will lead to the birth of Jewish children.

讜专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘讛讗讬 拽专讗 讚专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 诪讗讬 讚专讬砖 讘讬讛 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇讻讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 诪谞讬谉 砖讗驻讬诇讜 注讜讘专讬诐 砖讘诪注讬 讗诪谉 讗诪专讜 砖讬专讛 注诇 讛讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讘诪拽讛诇讜转 讘专讻讜 讗诇讛讬诐 讛壮 诪诪拽讜专 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗讬讚讱 讗诐 讻谉 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 诪讘讟谉 诪讗讬 诪诪拽讜专 注诇 注住拽讬 诪拽讜专

And what does Rav Na岣an derive from this verse from which Rabbi Abbahu derived that halakha? He requires the verse to derive that which is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: From where is it derived that even fetuses in their mother鈥檚 womb recited the song at the Red Sea? It is as it is stated in the chapter of Psalms that describes the exodus from Egypt: 鈥淚n assemblies, bless God, the Lord, from the source of Israel.鈥 Even those fetuses that were still in the source, i.e., the womb, joined the assemblies in blessing God. And the other Sage, Rabbi Abbahu says: If that is the meaning, let the verse say: From the belly of Israel. What is the meaning of the term 鈥渟ource鈥? Clearly, it is referring to matters related to the source of Israel, i.e., the benediction of the grooms, which must be recited in a congregation, a quorum of ten.

讜专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讘讛讗讬 拽专讗 讚专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪讗讬 讚专讬砖 讘讬讛 讛讛讜讗 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇诪讬讚专砖 注诪讜谞讬 讜诇讗 注诪讜谞讬转 诪讜讗讘讬 讜诇讗 诪讜讗讘讬转 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇讘专讻讛 诇讗 住讙讬讗 讚诇讗讜 讝拽谞讬诐

And what does Rabbi Abbahu derive from this verse from which Rav Na岣an derived his halakha? He requires the verse stating that Boaz assembled ten men in order to teach that the Torah prohibition with regard to marrying members of the nations of Ammon and Moab is limited to a male Ammonite and not a female Ammonite, and to a male Moabite and not a female Moabite, as, if it would enter your mind that Boaz gathered the men only to recite a benediction, would it not have been sufficient if they were not Elders? From the fact that he convened a quorum of Elders, apparently it was to engage in halakhic discourse and to issue a halakhic ruling.

讜讗讬讚讱 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇诪讬讚专砖 诇讗 住讙讬讗 讚诇讗讜 注砖专讛 讗讬谉 诇驻专住讜诪讬 诪讬诇转讗 讜讻讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖诪讜讗诇 诇专讘 讞谞讗 讘讙讚转讗讛 驻讜拽 讜讗讬讬转讬 诇讬 讘讬 注砖专讛 讜讗讬诪讗 诇讱 讘讗谞驻讬讬讛讜 讛诪讝讻讛 诇注讜讘专 拽谞讛 讜讛诇讻转讗 讛诪讝讻讛 诇注讜讘专 诇讗 拽谞讛

And the other Sage, Rav Na岣an, would reject that proof. If it would enter your mind that he gathered the men in order to teach a halakha, would it not have been sufficient if they were not ten? The Gemara answers: Yes, in fact a quorum of ten is not necessary to issue a halakhic ruling. Nevertheless, Boaz convened ten Elders to publicize the matter, as Shmuel said to Rav 岣na of Baghdad: Go and bring me an assembly of ten men and I will say to you before them a halakha that I seek to disseminate: With regard to one who transfers ownership of an object to a fetus, the fetus acquires it, although it has not yet entered the world. Boaz too assembled ten Elders to publicize the matter. Apropos the halakha that Shmuel publicized, the Gemara rules: And the halakha is: With regard to one who transfers ownership of an object to a fetus, the fetus does not acquire it.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讘专讻讬谉 讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘讘讬转 讞转谞讬诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗祝 讘讘讬转 讛讗专讜住讬谉 诪讘专讻讬谉 讗讜转讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: One recites the benediction of the grooms in the house of the grooms, when the bride enters into the wedding canopy. Rabbi Yehuda said: One recites it even in the house of the betrothal, at the time of the betrothal.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讜讘讬讛讜讚讛 砖谞讜 诪驻谞讬 砖诪转讬讬讞讚 注诪讛

Abaye said: And the Sages taught the statement of Rabbi Yehuda in Judea because there the custom was that the groom be secluded with his betrothed, leading to the concern lest he engage in conjugal relations with her. Therefore, the blessing is recited already at that stage.

转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪讘专讻讬谉 讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘讘讬转 讞转谞讬诐 讜讘专讻转 讗专讜住讬谉 讘讘讬转 讛讗专讜住讬谉 讘专讻转 讛讗专讜住讬谉 诪讗讬 诪讘专讱 专讘讬谉 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讜专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专讬 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 讛注专讬讜转 讜讗住专 诇谞讜 讗转 讛讗专讜住讜转 讜讛转讬专 诇谞讜 讗转 讛谞砖讜讗讜转 注诇 讬讚讬 讞讜驻讛 讜拽讚讜砖讬谉 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪住讬讬诐 讘讛 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 诪拽讚砖 讬砖专讗诇 注诇 讬讚讬 讞讜驻讛 讜拽讚讜砖讬谉

It is taught in another baraita: One recites the benediction of the grooms in the house of the grooms, and the benediction of the betrothal in the house of the betrothal. With regard to the benediction of the betrothal, what formula does one recite? Ravin bar Rav Adda and Rabba bar Rav Adda both said in the name of Rav Yehuda: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who sanctified us through His mitzvot, and commanded us concerning the forbidden relatives, and prohibited to us those women who are betrothed, and permitted to us those women who are married by means of the wedding canopy and betrothal. Rav A岣, son of Rava, concludes the blessing in the name of Rav Yehuda: Blessed are You, Lord, Who sanctifies Israel by means of the wedding canopy and betrothal.

诪讗谉 讚诇讗 讞转讬诐 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗讘专讻转 驻专讜转 讜讗讘专讻转 诪爪讜转 讜诪讗谉 讚讞转讬诐 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗拽讬讚讜砖讗

One who does not conclude the benediction of the betrothal in accordance with the opinion of Rav A岣, but instead recites it without a concluding blessing, deems the formula of this blessing just as the formula is in the blessing recited over fruits and the blessing recited over mitzvot, in which the words: Blessed are You, Lord, appear only at the beginning of the blessing. And one who concludes the benediction of the betrothal in accordance with the opinion of Rav A岣, deems the formula of this blessing just as the formula is in the blessing of kiddush, in which the words: Blessed are You, Lord, appears both at the beginning and the conclusion of the blessing.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讘专讻讬谉 讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘注砖专讛 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛讜讗 砖讘讗讜 驻谞讬诐 讞讚砖讜转

The Sages taught: One recites the benediction of the grooms in a quorum of ten men all seven days of the wedding celebration. Rav Yehuda said: And that is the case only when new faces who did not previously participate in the festivities came to join the celebration.

诪讗讬 诪讘专讱 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐

The Gemara asks: What blessings does one recite? Rav Yehuda said that these are the seven blessings: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe,

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the Refuah Shlemah of Naama bat Yael Esther.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Ketubot: 7-13 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we will learn about the seven blessings, Sheva Brachot, recited at the wedding and for a week after...
talking talmud_square

Ketubot 7: The Universal Practice of… Sex

The prohibition against the wedding night for a virgin to be on Shabbat, and permitted on a festival. But why...
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni

When and Why Do We Marry? Gefet 40

The first pages of Tractate Ketubot deal with the question of when to get married. In today's Gefet we will...
WhatsApp Image 2022-07-06 at 7.23.39 PM

Introduction to Masechet Ketubot

This shiur is sponsored by Valerie Adler. "Delighted to dedicate this introduction in honor of Ayelet and Adi Libson who...

Ketubot 7

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Ketubot 7

驻讟讜专 讛转诐 驻拽讬讚 讜注拽讬专 讛讻讗 驻拽讬讚 讜诇讗 注拽讬专

he is exempt. In this case, exempt means permitted ab initio. Ostensibly, intercourse with a virgin is comparable to creating an opening in an abscess. Why then, would intercourse with a virgin be forbidden on Shabbat? The Gemara rejects the proof: There, the pus in the abscess is pooled in one place and completely removed from the vessels in the flesh. In creating the opening, he creates nothing enduring. Here, however, in the case of the ruptured hymen, even according to the opinion that the blood is pooled, it is not completely removed from the blood vessels in the flesh. Through intercourse, the blood is removed from its place, which constitutes an aspect of a prohibited labor.

专讘讬 讗诪讬 砖专讗 诇诪讬讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讗诪专讬 诇讬讛 专讘谞谉 讜讛讗 诇讗 讻转讬讘讗 讻转讜讘转讛 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗转驻住讜讛 诪讟诇讟诇讬谉

The Gemara relates: Rav Ami permitted one to engage in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat. The Sages said to him: But her marriage contract is not yet written. Engaging in conjugal relations with one鈥檚 wife without a marriage contract is considered an act of promiscuity. He said to them: Have her seize a portion of her husband鈥檚 movable property equivalent to the value of her marriage contract, and that will serve as a deposit until he writes the marriage contract. He may then engage in sexual relations with her.

专讘 讝讘讬讚 砖专讗 诇诪讬讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 专讘 讝讘讬讚 讙讜驻讬讛 讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转

The Gemara relates: Rav Zevid permitted one to engage in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat. There are those who say: Rav Zevid himself engaged in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat.

专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 砖专讗 诇诪讬讘注诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讬 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇讗 转讬诪讗 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚砖专讬 讛讗 讘砖讘转 讗住讜专 讚讛讜讗 讛讚讬谉 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖讘转 谞诪讬 砖专讬 讜诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛 讻讱 讛讬讛

It was further related: Rav Yehuda permitted one to engage in intercourse with his virgin wife for the first time on a Festival. Rav Pappi said in the name of Rava: Do not infer and say: It is on a Festival that it is permitted, but on Shabbat it is prohibited, similar to actions involving food preparation, which are permitted on Festivals and prohibited on Shabbat, as the same is true that even on Shabbat it is permitted. And the reason Rav Yehuda issued his ruling with regard to a Festival is due to the fact that the incident that took place, took place in this way.

专讘 驻驻讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 讗诪专 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 砖专讬 讘砖讘转 讗住讜专 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 驻驻讬 诇专讘 驻驻讗 诪讗讬 讚注转讬讱 诪转讜讱 砖讛讜转专讛 讞讘讜专讛 诇爪讜专讱 讛讜转专讛 谞诪讬 砖诇讗 诇爪讜专讱 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 诪讜转专 诇注砖讜转 诪讜讙诪专 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讚诪转讜讱 砖讛讜转专讛 讛讘注专讛 诇爪讜专讱 讛讜转专讛 谞诪讬 砖诇讗 诇爪讜专讱

Rav Pappa said in the name of Rava: According to Rav Yehuda, on a Festival it is permitted, on Shabbat it is prohibited. Rav Pappi said to Rav Pappa: What is your thinking? Is it: Since causing a wound was permitted on a Festival when performed for the purpose of food preparation, it was also permitted when not performed for the purpose of food preparation? If that is so, it would be permitted to prepare incense [mugmar] on a Festival due to the following reason: Since kindling a fire was permitted on a Festival when performed for the purpose of food preparation, it was also permitted when not performed for the purpose of food preparation.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诇讬讱 讗诪专 拽专讗 讗讱 讗砖专 讬讗讻诇 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 讚讘专 讛砖讜讛 诇讻诇 谞驻砖

Rav Pappa said to him: It is about your assertion that the verse states with regard to a Festival: 鈥淪ave that which every person must eat, that alone may be done by you鈥 (Exodus 12:16), indicating a matter that is equal for every person. Incense is burned only by those who are particularly delicate. It is not equally utilized by everyone, and therefore it is not permitted. Intercourse, on the other hand, is universally practiced.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讗诇讗 诪注转讛 谞讝讚诪谉 诇讜 爪讘讬 讘讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讛讜讗讬诇 讜讗讬谞讜 砖讜讛 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讚讗住讜专 诇诪砖讞讟讬讛 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗谞讗 讚讘专 讛爪讜专讱 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 拽讗诪讬谞讗 爪讘讬 爪专讬讱 诇讻诇 谞驻砖 讛讜讗

Rav A岣, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: If that is so, if a deer happened to come into his possession on a Festival, since it is not a food that is equal for every person, would the ruling also be that it is prohibited to slaughter it? Rav Ashi said to him: I said a matter that is a need for every person, and deer meat is a matter that although difficult to acquire, is a need for every person. Incense, even when available, is not universally utilized.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讛讜专讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘爪讬讬讚谉 讗住讜专 诇讘注讜诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讜诪讬 讗讬讻讗 讛讜专讗讛 诇讗讬住讜专

Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov bar Idi said: Rabbi Yo岣nan issued a ruling in the city of Tzaidan: It is prohibited to engage in intercourse with one鈥檚 virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: And is there a ruling issued to prohibit an action? Typically, that language is utilized in reference to a firmly established ruling. A stringent ruling can be issued even based on uncertainty. In contrast, a lenient ruling can be issued only if the matter is clearly established by means of tradition or the reasoning of the Sage issuing the ruling.

讗讬谉 讜讛转谞谉 讛讜专讜讛 讘讬转 讛诇诇 砖转讛讗 谞讝讬专讛 注讜讚 砖讘注 砖谞讬诐 讗讞专讜转

The Gemara answers: Yes, that language is used with regard to a stringent ruling, as didn鈥檛 we learn the following in a mishna (Nazir 19b): When Queen Helene鈥檚 son went to war, she took a vow to be a nazirite for seven years, and she fulfilled that vow for the duration of her stay in the Diaspora? When she immigrated to Eretz Yisrael, Beit Hillel issued a ruling that she shall be a nazirite for seven additional years. Apparently, rulings are issued to prohibit an action as well.

讜讗讬 谞诪讬 讻讬 讛讗 讚转谞讬讗 讞讜讟 讛砖讚专讛 砖谞驻住拽 讘专讜讘讜 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗讜诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 谞讬拽讘 讛讜专讛 专讘讬 讻专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬注拽讘

And alternatively, this is similar to that which is taught in a baraita: If a majority of the spinal cord of an animal is severed, the animal is a tereifa; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov says: Even if the spinal cord is perforated but otherwise intact, the animal is a tereifa. The baraita continues: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi issued a ruling in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov. Here too, the term: Issue a ruling, is employed with regard to a stringent ruling. Rav Huna said: Despite the fact that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi ruled in accordance with his opinion, the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ya鈥檃kov, but rather it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. This is one version of this discussion.

专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诪转谞讬 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 砖讗诇 专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘谉 讬注拽讘 讚诪谉 爪讜专 讗转 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讘爪讬讬讚谉 讜讗谞讗 砖诪注讬 诪讛讜 诇讘注讜诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转 讜讗诪专 诇讬讛 讗住讜专 讜讛诇讻转讗 诪讜转专 诇讘注讜诇 讘转讞诇讛 讘砖讘转

Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k taught this alternative version of the ruling of Rabbi Yo岣nan. Rav Abbahu said: Rabbi Yishmael ben Ya鈥檃kov, who is from Tyre, asked Rabbi Yo岣nan in Tzaidan, and I heard the exchange: What is the halakha with regard to engaging in intercourse with one鈥檚 virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat? And he said to him: It is prohibited. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that it is permitted to engage in intercourse with one鈥檚 virgin wife for the first time on Shabbat, and one need not be concerned lest he cause a wound, create an opening, or initiate bleeding.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讝讘讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗讞转 讘转讜诇讛 讜讗讞转 讗诇诪谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 讜诪讬 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讗讬谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讘讞讜专 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讻讗谉 讘讗诇诪讜谉 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛

Rabbi 岣lbo said that Rav Huna said that Rabbi Abba bar Rav Zavda said that Rav said: Both a virgin and a widow who marry require that the benediction of the grooms be recited. The Gemara asks: Did Rav Huna say that? But didn鈥檛 Rav Huna say: A widow does not require that a benediction be recited? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where Rav Huna said that a widow requires a benediction, it is with regard to a bachelor who married a widow. There, where Rav Huna said she does not require a benediction, it is with regard to a widower who married a widow.

讜讗诇诪讜谉 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛 诇讗 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 诇讬 讛讜谞讗 讘专 谞转谉 转谞讗 诪谞讬谉 诇讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘注砖专讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽讞 注砖专讛 讗谞砖讬诐 诪讝拽谞讬 讛注讬专 讜讬讗诪专 砖讘讜 驻讛 讜讬砖讘讜 讜讘讜注讝 讗诇诪讜谉 砖谞砖讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讛讜讛

The Gemara asks: And does a widower who married a widow not require a benediction to be recited? But didn鈥檛 Rav Na岣an say: Huna bar Natan said to me that it was taught: From where is it derived that the benediction of the grooms is recited in a quorum of ten men? It is as it is stated with regard to Boaz, who married Ruth: 鈥淎nd he took ten men of the Elders of the city and said: Sit you here, and they sat鈥 (Ruth 4:2). And when Boaz married Ruth, he was a widower marrying a widow. As that is the primary source for the obligation to recite the benediction, apparently the benediction is recited even in that case.

诪讗讬 讗讬谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 讚讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讗讬谞讛 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讗讘诇 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讟注讜谞讛 讘专讻讛

The Gemara answers: What is the meaning of: Does not require a benediction, that Rav Huna stated? It means that she does not require a benediction all seven days of the wedding celebration, but everyone agrees that for one day, she requires that a benediction be recited.

讗诇讗 讛讗 讚转谞讬讗 砖拽讚讜 讞讻诪讬诐 注诇 转拽谞转 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 砖讬讛讗 砖诪讞 注诪讛 砖诇砖讛 讬诪讬诐 讘诪讗讬 讗讬 讘讘讞讜专 讛讗诪专转 砖讘注讛 讗讬 讘讗诇诪讜谉 讛讗诪专转 讬讜诐 讗讞讚

The Gemara asks: However, that which is taught in a baraita, that the Sages were assiduous in seeing to the well-being of Jewish women, ensuring that the groom will rejoice with her three days, and that is why they established that a widow is married on Thursday, with regard to what circumstance is the baraita speaking? If it is with regard to a bachelor who marries a widow, didn鈥檛 you say he celebrates seven days; why then did the Sages see to a mere three-day celebration? If it is with regard to a widower who marries a widow, didn鈥檛 you say he celebrates for one day? Why then did the Sages see to a three-day celebration?

讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讗诇诪讜谉 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 诇讘专讻讛 讜砖诇砖讛 诇砖诪讞讛 讜讗讬讘注讬转 讗讬诪讗 讘讘讞讜专 砖讘注讛 诇讘专讻讛 讜砖诇砖讛 诇砖诪讞讛

The Gemara answers that this can be resolved in several manners. If you wish, say: In the case of a widower marrying a widow, there is one day for benediction and three days for celebration. The wedding is scheduled on Thursday to facilitate a three-day celebration. And if you wish, say instead: In the case of a bachelor marrying a widow, there are seven days for benediction and there are three days for celebration, during which he must refrain from going to work.

诪讬转讬讘讬 诪讘专讻讬谉 诇讘转讜诇讛 砖讘注讛 讜诇讗诇诪谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 讗驻讬诇讜 讗诇诪谞讛 砖谞砖讗转 诇讘讞讜专 诇讗 诇讗诇诪讜谉 讗讘诇 诇讘讞讜专 诪讗讬 砖讘注讛 讗讬 讛讻讬 诇讬转谞讬 诪讘专讻讬谉 诇讘转讜诇讛 砖讘注讛 讜诇讗诇诪谞讛 砖谞砖讗转 诇讘讞讜专 砖讘注讛 讜诇讗诇诪谞讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: One recites a benediction for a virgin who marries for seven days and for a widow who marries for one day. What, is it not even in the case of a widow who is married to a bachelor, that one recites the benediction for one day? The Gemara answers: No, it is only in the case of a widow who is married to a widower that the benediction is recited for one day. The Gemara asks: However, one may then infer that in the case of a widow who is married to a bachelor, what is the halakha? The blessing is recited seven days? If so, let the tanna teach the baraita: One recites a benediction for a virgin who marries for seven days, and for a widow who marries a bachelor seven days, and for a widow marrying a widower for one day. Why was the middle case omitted?

诪讬诇转讗 驻住讬拽转讗 拽转谞讬 讚诇讬讻讗 讘转讜诇讛 讚讘爪专讛 诪砖讘注讛 讜诇讬讻讗 讗诇诪谞讛 讚讘爪专讛 诪讬讜诐 讗讞讚

Although the tanna could have included that case in the baraita, he taught categorical matters. He preferred to avoid entering into detail, as there is no virgin for whom the benediction is recited fewer than seven days, and there is no widow for whom the benediction is recited for less than one day. However, there are circumstances where even for a widow the benediction is recited for more than one day.

讙讜驻讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 诇讬 讛讜谞讗 讘专 谞转谉 转谞讗 诪谞讬谉 诇讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘注砖专讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽讞 注砖专讛 讗谞砖讬诐 诪讝拽谞讬 讛注讬专 讜讬讗诪专 砖讘讜 驻讛 讜专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讗诪专 诪讛讻讗 讘诪拽讛诇讜转 讘专讻讜 讗诇讛讬诐 讛壮 诪诪拽讜专 讬砖专讗诇

搂 Apropos the source for the benediction of the grooms, the Gemara discusses the matter itself. Rav Na岣an said: Huna bar Natan said to me that it was taught: From where is it derived that the benediction of the grooms is recited in a quorum of ten men? It is as it is stated: 鈥淎nd he took ten men of the Elders of the city and said: Sit you here, and they sat鈥 (Ruth 4:2). And Rabbi Abbahu said that the source is from here: 鈥淚n assemblies [mak鈥檋elot], bless God, the Lord, from the source of Israel鈥 (Psalms 68:27). This verse indicates that a congregation [kahal], which contains at least ten men, blesses God when reciting a benediction related to the source of Israel, i.e., conjugal relations, which will lead to the birth of Jewish children.

讜专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘讛讗讬 拽专讗 讚专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 诪讗讬 讚专讬砖 讘讬讛 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇讻讚转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 诪谞讬谉 砖讗驻讬诇讜 注讜讘专讬诐 砖讘诪注讬 讗诪谉 讗诪专讜 砖讬专讛 注诇 讛讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讘诪拽讛诇讜转 讘专讻讜 讗诇讛讬诐 讛壮 诪诪拽讜专 讬砖专讗诇 讜讗讬讚讱 讗诐 讻谉 诇讬诪讗 拽专讗 诪讘讟谉 诪讗讬 诪诪拽讜专 注诇 注住拽讬 诪拽讜专

And what does Rav Na岣an derive from this verse from which Rabbi Abbahu derived that halakha? He requires the verse to derive that which is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: From where is it derived that even fetuses in their mother鈥檚 womb recited the song at the Red Sea? It is as it is stated in the chapter of Psalms that describes the exodus from Egypt: 鈥淚n assemblies, bless God, the Lord, from the source of Israel.鈥 Even those fetuses that were still in the source, i.e., the womb, joined the assemblies in blessing God. And the other Sage, Rabbi Abbahu says: If that is the meaning, let the verse say: From the belly of Israel. What is the meaning of the term 鈥渟ource鈥? Clearly, it is referring to matters related to the source of Israel, i.e., the benediction of the grooms, which must be recited in a congregation, a quorum of ten.

讜专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讘讛讗讬 拽专讗 讚专讘 谞讞诪谉 诪讗讬 讚专讬砖 讘讬讛 讛讛讜讗 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 诇诪讬讚专砖 注诪讜谞讬 讜诇讗 注诪讜谞讬转 诪讜讗讘讬 讜诇讗 诪讜讗讘讬转 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇讘专讻讛 诇讗 住讙讬讗 讚诇讗讜 讝拽谞讬诐

And what does Rabbi Abbahu derive from this verse from which Rav Na岣an derived his halakha? He requires the verse stating that Boaz assembled ten men in order to teach that the Torah prohibition with regard to marrying members of the nations of Ammon and Moab is limited to a male Ammonite and not a female Ammonite, and to a male Moabite and not a female Moabite, as, if it would enter your mind that Boaz gathered the men only to recite a benediction, would it not have been sufficient if they were not Elders? From the fact that he convened a quorum of Elders, apparently it was to engage in halakhic discourse and to issue a halakhic ruling.

讜讗讬讚讱 讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇诪讬讚专砖 诇讗 住讙讬讗 讚诇讗讜 注砖专讛 讗讬谉 诇驻专住讜诪讬 诪讬诇转讗 讜讻讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖诪讜讗诇 诇专讘 讞谞讗 讘讙讚转讗讛 驻讜拽 讜讗讬讬转讬 诇讬 讘讬 注砖专讛 讜讗讬诪讗 诇讱 讘讗谞驻讬讬讛讜 讛诪讝讻讛 诇注讜讘专 拽谞讛 讜讛诇讻转讗 讛诪讝讻讛 诇注讜讘专 诇讗 拽谞讛

And the other Sage, Rav Na岣an, would reject that proof. If it would enter your mind that he gathered the men in order to teach a halakha, would it not have been sufficient if they were not ten? The Gemara answers: Yes, in fact a quorum of ten is not necessary to issue a halakhic ruling. Nevertheless, Boaz convened ten Elders to publicize the matter, as Shmuel said to Rav 岣na of Baghdad: Go and bring me an assembly of ten men and I will say to you before them a halakha that I seek to disseminate: With regard to one who transfers ownership of an object to a fetus, the fetus acquires it, although it has not yet entered the world. Boaz too assembled ten Elders to publicize the matter. Apropos the halakha that Shmuel publicized, the Gemara rules: And the halakha is: With regard to one who transfers ownership of an object to a fetus, the fetus does not acquire it.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讘专讻讬谉 讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘讘讬转 讞转谞讬诐 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗祝 讘讘讬转 讛讗专讜住讬谉 诪讘专讻讬谉 讗讜转讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: One recites the benediction of the grooms in the house of the grooms, when the bride enters into the wedding canopy. Rabbi Yehuda said: One recites it even in the house of the betrothal, at the time of the betrothal.

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讜讘讬讛讜讚讛 砖谞讜 诪驻谞讬 砖诪转讬讬讞讚 注诪讛

Abaye said: And the Sages taught the statement of Rabbi Yehuda in Judea because there the custom was that the groom be secluded with his betrothed, leading to the concern lest he engage in conjugal relations with her. Therefore, the blessing is recited already at that stage.

转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪讘专讻讬谉 讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘讘讬转 讞转谞讬诐 讜讘专讻转 讗专讜住讬谉 讘讘讬转 讛讗专讜住讬谉 讘专讻转 讛讗专讜住讬谉 诪讗讬 诪讘专讱 专讘讬谉 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讜专讘讛 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专讬 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜 注诇 讛注专讬讜转 讜讗住专 诇谞讜 讗转 讛讗专讜住讜转 讜讛转讬专 诇谞讜 讗转 讛谞砖讜讗讜转 注诇 讬讚讬 讞讜驻讛 讜拽讚讜砖讬谉 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪住讬讬诐 讘讛 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 诪拽讚砖 讬砖专讗诇 注诇 讬讚讬 讞讜驻讛 讜拽讚讜砖讬谉

It is taught in another baraita: One recites the benediction of the grooms in the house of the grooms, and the benediction of the betrothal in the house of the betrothal. With regard to the benediction of the betrothal, what formula does one recite? Ravin bar Rav Adda and Rabba bar Rav Adda both said in the name of Rav Yehuda: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who sanctified us through His mitzvot, and commanded us concerning the forbidden relatives, and prohibited to us those women who are betrothed, and permitted to us those women who are married by means of the wedding canopy and betrothal. Rav A岣, son of Rava, concludes the blessing in the name of Rav Yehuda: Blessed are You, Lord, Who sanctifies Israel by means of the wedding canopy and betrothal.

诪讗谉 讚诇讗 讞转讬诐 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗讘专讻转 驻专讜转 讜讗讘专讻转 诪爪讜转 讜诪讗谉 讚讞转讬诐 诪讬讚讬 讚讛讜讛 讗拽讬讚讜砖讗

One who does not conclude the benediction of the betrothal in accordance with the opinion of Rav A岣, but instead recites it without a concluding blessing, deems the formula of this blessing just as the formula is in the blessing recited over fruits and the blessing recited over mitzvot, in which the words: Blessed are You, Lord, appear only at the beginning of the blessing. And one who concludes the benediction of the betrothal in accordance with the opinion of Rav A岣, deems the formula of this blessing just as the formula is in the blessing of kiddush, in which the words: Blessed are You, Lord, appears both at the beginning and the conclusion of the blessing.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 诪讘专讻讬谉 讘专讻转 讞转谞讬诐 讘注砖专讛 讻诇 砖讘注讛 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讛讜讗 砖讘讗讜 驻谞讬诐 讞讚砖讜转

The Sages taught: One recites the benediction of the grooms in a quorum of ten men all seven days of the wedding celebration. Rav Yehuda said: And that is the case only when new faces who did not previously participate in the festivities came to join the celebration.

诪讗讬 诪讘专讱 讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讜讱 讗转讛 讛壮 讗诇讛讬谞讜 诪诇讱 讛注讜诇诐

The Gemara asks: What blessings does one recite? Rav Yehuda said that these are the seven blessings: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe,

Scroll To Top