12
  • Do premarital sexual relations effect Kiddushin (betrothal/first step of Jewish marriage) if there is no intention of getting married?
    • If so, is the physical act itself determinative of whether or not there is a kinyan (transaction effecting Kiddushin)? (Let's say they would instead be just hugging and kissing: would that effect a kinyan also?)
  • Does the Yichud (seclusion) that the couple is having effect Nisuin? What if there are no kosher witnesses around?
Baal Shemot Tovot
  • 3,129
  • 32
  • 50
Dani
  • 121
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
    Dani, welcome to Mi Yodeya, and thank you for your question! If you haven't yet, I hope you will consider registering your account so that you can gain all the benefits of membership. Please remember that we are not here to provide practical Halachic advice. Please CYLOR for practical guidance. – Seth J Jun 13 '12 at 14:29
  • Dani, because of what @SethJ wrote (that this site is not for personal guidance), I've depersonalized your question, making it more about general rules and less about the specific situation you described in the earlier version of the question. – msh210 Jun 13 '12 at 16:04
  • 1
    Related: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/14146/if-a-jewish-couple-is-married-through-a-civil-ceremony-alone-do-jewish-marriage – SAH Dec 09 '15 at 00:34

1 Answers1

14

Premarital sexual intercourse is not a kinyan unless it is done with the intention of being koneh. Not only that, but the man must say as much. Rambam Hil Ishus 3:5 (my own translation):

ואם קידש בביאה אומר לה הרי את מקודשת לי או הרי את מאורסת לי או הרי את לי לאשה בבעילה זו וכל כיוצא בזה. ומתייחד עמה בפני שני עדים ובועלה

If he betroths (mekadesh) with sexual relations, he says "Behold, you are betrothed (mekudeshet) to me", or "Behold, you are married (me'ureset) to me", or "Behold, you are a wife to me with this intercourse", or anything of that sort. He secludes himself with her before two witnesses and copulates with her.

Now, the seclusion works because there are witnesses and because they know that his intention is for marriage. (See Maggid Mishna.) If there's no witnesses, there's no kiddushin.

As a side note, there is a separate prohibition against premarital sex. See Rambam Hil. Ishus 1:4.

Community
  • 1
jake
  • 28,533
  • 2
  • 72
  • 159
  • 3
    What about ain adam ose beilaso beilas zenus? – YDK Jun 13 '12 at 17:16
  • 3
    @YDK, If there is reasonable doubt as to his intentions, then I think we apply that rule. Nowadays, though, I would say that the average premarital relationship is not l'shem kiddushin. I'm no posek, though, of course. – jake Jun 13 '12 at 17:21
  • 1
    @jake I wonder though how specific the intent has to be, as they are clearly planning on having this be part of a long term relationship. – Double AA Jun 13 '12 at 18:18
  • @DoubleAA, I'm not sure I understand. Either he has intent to be koneh or he does not. Are you saying that maybe he has intent that at some point in the future he might be koneh her (albeit probably with kesef instead of biah)? I very much doubt that's relevant. – jake Jun 13 '12 at 18:33
  • @YDK: Rambam (Hil. Gerushin 10:19) states that this applies only if they had been otherwise at least potentially married (his examples are if they were divorced, or if he had performed conditional kiddushin). – Alex Jun 13 '12 at 20:59
  • @Alex, looks like it's a big machlokes rishonim. – YDK Jun 13 '12 at 22:28
  • In theory, if it is clear to everyone that the intent is marriage, saying so is not essential. In your ordinary marriage case (which this clearly isn't), if a groom gave a bride a ring and said nothing, and she accepts it, they are married. Not sure how to work that in a biah case. – Ze'ev misses Monica Nov 12 '12 at 22:22
  • 1
    @jake What I meant was if his intention is "this should symbolize the start of a long term committed relationship" (given that the person doesn't understand the word koneh) that might be enough intention. It's certainly different from "this is a one-night-stand because I'm a hedonistic pig". – Double AA Jul 07 '13 at 11:23
  • @Jake: Seems that you're misinterpreting the Rambam in Rambam Hil. Ishus 1:4, as said Rambam clearly states that a man would meet a woman in the marketplace. If he "want's" her and her him, he "pays" her her reward (perhaps money), has "beila" (some interpret as sex) with her and goes on his way; and she is what is considered a "kedesha". To be precise one can read from that passage that at least 2 factors are necessary for a woman to be considered a "kedesha": 1. She gets paid 2. She has sex. 3rd. Seemingly one can argue that they just met. 4th. They depart after sex If factoring the first tw –  Jan 08 '16 at 04:32
  • The מגיד משנה understands the Rambam as Jake said. However, there are opinions (such as that of the Ra'avad) that disagree with the Rambam and say that a Jewish woman is only considered a קדשה when she makes herself available to any man. But if she only has monogamous relations with a particular man, as casual and short-lived as that relationship may be, the Ra'avad does not consider that to be a violation of קדשה. On the other hand, the Ra'avad holds that that woman becomes the man's pilegesh, and she may require a divorce. Otherwise, subsequent relations could be adultery. – Fred Jan 08 '16 at 04:57
  • 1
    "some interpret as sex" Well there goes your credibility... – Double AA Jan 08 '16 at 05:45
  • Need clarification.. Is the דיבור definitely essential for the קנין קידושין to be חל? Does anyone argue with the Rambam on this? (I.e even w/o outright דיבור he can be מקדש her מן התורה? – El Shteiger Jun 06 '17 at 01:43
  • Any updates ? As i'm with this doubt also. – eeerrrttt Oct 17 '19 at 18:41