Is kiddushin a mitzva? What type of beracha is Birkat Eirusin? Who can recite it?
In Brief
Is kiddushin a mitzva?
Halachic authorities debate whether or not kiddushin is a mitzva at all. It might not be a mitzva, or it might be a first step in fulfilling a different mitzva—either procreation or marriage, or it might be a mitzva on its own.
Is it a mitzva or obligation for women?
Women are exempt from the mitzva of procreation. Even if we consider kiddushin to be the first stage of the mitzva of procreation, it might still apply to women. This is because a woman either: enables her husband to fulfill the mitzva of procreation, fulfills the mitzva of procreation herself voluntarily, or is obligated herself in shevet (populating the world).
Alternatively, kiddushin may be a mitzva for a woman because it’s her halachic path to relations and companionship.
There is halachic room for a woman to delay marriage or choose not to marry.
What is birkat eirusin?
A beracha recited prior to kiddushin that addresses when relations are prohibited and when they are permitted.
What type of beracha is it?
There are two main views:
- Birkat ha-mitzva, a beracha recited prior to performing a mitzva, in this case, kiddushin. Though Rambam restricts recitation to the chatan or his agent, some view it as potentially incumbent on the kalla as well, if kiddushin is a mitzva for her.
- Birkat Ha-shevach, a beracha of praise, in this case, praising God for the Jewish people’s sanctity, as expressed through observing sexual restrictions, kiddushin, and nissuin.
Who recites it?
- If it is a birkat ha-mitzva, then the chatan should recite it, because he performs the mitzva. A person reciting it should be subject to the obligation of kiddushin in order to discharge the chatan’s obligation, which may rule out a woman’s recitation.
- If it is a birkat ha-shevach, perhaps it is incumbent on anyone present at kiddushin, who could thus recite it. Or perhaps the enactment is for the chatan to recite it, because he both directly benefits from kiddushin and performs it.
In practice, in most communities, the mesader kiddushin (officiant) recites the beracha so as not to embarrass a chatan who’d have trouble, or so as to avoid the appearance of yuhara (spiritual showmanship) on the part of the chatan.
In Depth
Rav Ezra Bick, Shayna Goldberg, and Ilana Elzufon, eds.
Mitzva and Obligation
In our previous piece, we explored the concept of kiddushin. Now, we can ask whether it is obligatory. Can a woman—or a man—deliberately opt out of kiddushin and nissuin altogether?
In a discussion of a man or woman using an agent in kiddushin, the Talmud seems to assume that kiddushin is a mitzva for men and women:
קידושין מא.
מתני’ האיש מקדש בו ובשלוחו האשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה…גמ’ השתא בשלוחו מקדש בו מיבעיא אמר רב יוסף: מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו…”האשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה” השתא בשלוחה מיקדשא, בה מיבעיא? אמר רב יוסף: מצוה בה יותר מבשלוחה…
Kiddushin 41a
Mishna: A man performs kiddushin through himself [his action] or through his agent. A woman becomes mekudeshet through herself or through her agent…Gemara: Now, if a man can perform kiddushin through his agent, do we need [to stipulate] “through himself”? Rav Yosef said: It’s a mitzva through himself more than through his agent…“A woman becomes mekudeshet through herself or through her agent.” Now, if a woman becomes mekudeshet through her agent, do we need [to stipulate] “through herself”? Rav Yosef said: It’s a mitzva through herself more than through her agent…
The term “mitzva” can have a range of meanings in halachic literature. Early authorities discuss the question of whether and to what extent kiddushin is a mitzva, for women or men, in more detail.
I. Not a Mitzva With respect to men, a number of early halachic authorities maintain that kiddushin is not itself a mitzva. Rabbeinu Asher (Rosh) expresses this view as part of a discussion of why no beracha with the formula “Who has sanctified us through His mitzvot, and commanded us to betroth [le-kadesh] a woman” is recited prior to kiddushin:
רא”ש כתובות א:יב
למה אין מברכין אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לקדש את האשה…ונ”ל [=ונראה לי]…כי פריה ורביה היינו קיום המצוה…ולא דמי לשחיטה שאינו מחוייב לשחוט ולאכול ואפ”ה [=ואפילו הכי] כשהוא שוחט לאכול מברך דהתם אי אפשר לו לאכול בלא שחיטה אבל הכא אפשר לקיים פריה ורביה בלא קידושין וגם התם אפקיה קרא בלשון ציווי דכתיב וזבחת ואכלת אבל הכא כתיב כי יקח איש…
Rabbeinu Asher Ketubot 1:12
Why do we not recite the beracha “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to betroth [le-kadesh] a woman”…And it seems to me…that procreation is the fulfillment of the mitzva…and it is not similar to shechita, for one is not obligated to ritually slaughter and eat, and even so, when he slaughters in order to eat he recites the beracha, for there [in that case] it is impossible for him to eat [meat] without shechita, but here it is possible to fulfill the mitzva of procreation without kiddushin. And also there the verse expressed it in the language of command, as it is written, “and you shall slaughter and you shall eat,” but here it is written, “if a man takes”…
Since one could in theory procreate outside of marriage, Rosh does not consider kiddushin to be a mitzva. Furthermore, the Torah’s language in introducing kiddushin is “ki yikach,” which can be translated as “if a man takes,” and thus does not imply obligation (as ‘a man shall take’ would).
This view, which maintains that procreation is a mitzva while marriage is not, aligns with viewing marriage as creating a framework for procreation. We could then read the Talmud’s suggestion that a man has a mitzva of kiddushin as simply referring to its potential as a preliminary to procreation.
II. Mitzva of Procreation One could argue that procreation is the mitzva, but kiddushin is a first step in fulfilling it. Women, however, are exempt from the Torah-level mitzva of procreation:
משנה יבמות ו:ו
האיש מצווה על פריה ורביה אבל לא האשה
Mishna Yevamot 6:6
The man is commanded in procreation but not the woman.
How, according to the view that kiddushin is not an independent mitzva, could the Talmud imply that kiddushin is a mitzva for women? Ran suggests that the Talmud is referring to the way in which a woman’s accepting kiddushin enables her husband to fulfill the mitzva to procreate:
ר”ן על הרי”ף קידושין טז:
דאע”ג [=דאף על גב] דאשה אינה מצוה בפריה ורביה מ”מ [=מכל מקום] יש לה מצוה מפני שהיא מסייעת לבעל לקיים מצותו
Ran Kiddushin 16b, Rif Pagination
For even though a woman is not commanded in procreation, in any case she has a mitzva because she helps the husband to fulfill his mitzva.
The “help” that a woman provides here is substantial to the extreme. Even so, we usually do not consider enabling someone else to fulfill a mitzva as a distinct fulfillment of that mitzva or as an independent mitzva. It’s possible that Ran here is implicitly referring to a viewpoint that women are obligated in a mitzva related to procreation, shevet (based on Yeshayahu 45:18), populating the world. (We plan to discuss this in more detail in a future piece).
Along these lines, Rav Eliezer Waldenberg suggests that shevet might be the mitzva that a woman moves toward fulfilling through kiddushin.
שו”ת ציץ אליעזר ד טז:יב
…י”ל [=יש לומר] שכוונת הר”ן היא שמקיימת בזה המצוה של לשבת יצרה, שכוונת העשה היא לסייע ולהשתדל שהעולם יהא מיושב, ולכך כותב הר”ן שפיר שיש לה בכאן מצוה במה שהיא מסייעת לבעל לקיים מצותו, ואף על גב דלא אשכחן עיקר לזה, בשום מקום שהסיוע נחשב למצוה בפ”ע [=בפני עצמו], והיינו משום דבכאן איכא עשה ומצוה מיוחדת לסיוע, והיינו העשה דלשבת יצרה.
Responsa Tzitz Eliezer IV 16:12
…One can say that Ran means that through this she fulfills the mitzva of “la-shevet yetzarah” [He created it (the world) for settling], that the meaning of the positive injunction is to help and to make an effort that the world be settled. And, therefore, Ran writes correctly that here she has a mitzva in that that she helps the husband to fulfill his mitzva, and even though that we have not found a basis for this, in any place, that helping would be considered its own mitzva. This is because here there is a positive injunction and a special mitzva of helping, which is the positive injunction of “la-shevet yetzarah.”
Alternatively, perhaps the woman, though not obligated in procreation, still voluntarily fulfills the commandment to procreate when she has children:
שיטה לא נודע למי קידושין מא.
מצוה בה יותר מבשלוחה. ואף על גב דאתתא לא מפקדא בפריה ורביה מדרבנן מיהא מיחייבא, אי נמי דאית לה שכר כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה.
Unnamed Early Halachic Authority, Kiddushin 41a
A mitzva through herself more than through her agent. And even though a woman is not commanded in procreation, nevertheless, she is rabbinically obligated. Alternatively, because she has a reward as one who is not commanded and does [a mitzva].
According to these views, procreation is the essential mitzva that kiddushin and marriage can help achieve, and the question is how to evaluate a woman’s participation in it.
III. Mitzva of Marriage A third view of kiddushin, espoused by Rambam, understands kiddushin as an independent mitzva, an essential precondition for sexual relations:
ספר המצוות לרמב”ם מצות עשה ריג
והמצוה הרי”ג היא שצונו לבעול בקדושין…
Sefer Ha-mitzvot of Rambam, Positive Mitzva 213
The 213th mitzva is that we were commanded to have relations through kiddushin…
Rambam’s son, Rav Avraham, suggests a less straightforward reading of Rambam’s ruling, according to which kiddushin not only creates a permissible framework for relations, but also begins fulfillment of a broader mitzva of nissuin:
ברכת אברהם הלכות אישות א:ב
וזה שאמר “וליקוחין אלו מצות עשה” (הלכות אישות א:ב) לפי שהיא תחלת מצות הנשואין וכך אמר בתחלה יקנה אותה תחלה בפני עדים ואחר כך תהיה לו לאשה שנאמר כי יקח איש אשה ובא אליה אבל קידושין בלא נישואין ודאי לא השלים המצוה עדיין ומצות פריה ורביה מצוה אחרת היא שמצות פריה ורביה כשיהיה לו בן או בת קיים המצוה ומצות הקדושין והנשואין אפילו יש לו כמה בנים וכמה בנות ויש עמו כמה נשים כל אשה שירצה לישא אותה מצוה עליו שישא אותה בקדושין…
Birkat Avraham, Laws of Marriage 1:2
That which he [Rambam] said: “likuchin [kiddushin] is a positive mitzva” (Laws of Marriage 1:2)” is because it is the beginning of the mitzva of nissuin. And thus he said: at the beginning, he effects kinyan of her first in the presence of witnesses, and afterwards she will be his wife, as it is said, “when a man takes a woman and has relations with her.” But [with] kiddushin without nissuin he certainly has not yet completed the mitzva. And the mitzva of procreation is a different mitzva. For he has fulfilled the mitzva of procreation when he has a son or a daughter, and the mitzva of kiddushin and nissuin [apply] even if he already has several sons and several daughters and he has with him several wives, every wife that he wishes to marry, it is a mitzva upon him to marry her through kiddushin…
This conception of kiddushin as a mitzva culminating in marriage is reminiscent of Ramban’s statement cited in our first piece on kiddushin, that kiddushin is “half of the mitzva.” Rav Avraham specifies that the mitzva of marriage is distinct from the mitzva to procreate, given that a man who has already procreated can still fulfill it. 1
According to this view, does the mitzva of kiddushin apply to women? Rambam lists kiddushin as one of the mitzvot from which women are exempt:
ספר המצוות לרמב”ם סיום מצוות עשה
וזאת המאתים ושתים עשרה אין הנשים חייבות בה. והמאתים ושלש עשרה.
Rambam, Sefer Ha-mitzvot, End of Positive Commandments
…This 212th mitzva women are not obligated in it, and the 213th.
However, in the eighteenth century, Rav Pinchas Horvitz argues in terms similar to Rambam’s, extending his argument to women.
המקנה קידושין מא.
ותו נראה דאף שאינה מצווה על פרי[ה] ורבי[ה] מ”מ [=מכל מקום] כיון שהיא רוצה להנשא לאיש אסורה להיבעל לו בלא קידושין משום לא תהי[ה] קדשה וכמ”ש [=וכמו שכתב] הרמב”ם ז”ל בפ”א [=בפרק א] מהל[כות] אישות. א”כ [=אם כן] הוי הקידושין מצוה כמו מצות שחיטה והפרשת תרומה ושילוח הקן דאינו מצווה על השחיטה ועל הפרשת תרומה אלא אם רוצה לאכול אסור בלא שחיטה ובלא הפרשה…
Ha-makneh Kiddushin 41a
Further, it seems that even though she is not obligated in procreation, in any case, since she wants to be married to a man, she is prohibited to have relations with him without kiddushin because of “There shall not be a cult prostitute [from the daughters of Israel, Devarim 23:18]” and as Rambam wrote in Laws of Marriage chapter 1. If so, kiddushin is a mitzva like the mitzva of ritual slaughter and separating teruma and chasing off the mother bird, for one is not commanded to slaughter or to separate teruma, but if one wants to eat it is prohibited without shechita and without separating…
Rav Horvitz notes that if a woman wishes to experience relations and marriage, her only choice is through kiddushin. Thus, it is a mitzva for her, much as kiddushin is a mitzva for a man even if he has already fulfilled the mitzva of procreation.
Radach, Rav David Ha-Kohen of sixteenth century Padua, makes a more far-reaching assertion—that a woman must marry because she, too, is not permitted to remain alone:
שו”ת הרד”ך מהדורת קושטא בית יז
דאף על גב דהאשה עדיין לא נבראת היא בכלל האסור שכל הנקר[א] אדם לא טוב היותו לבדו
Responsa Rav David Cohen Mahadurat Kushta 17
For even though woman had not yet been created, she is included in the prohibition, for anyone who is called “adam” (a person), it is not good for him to be alone.
Women’s Obligation
Regardless of whether it is good for a woman to be alone, we can ask whether a woman need marry if she isn’t interested in doing so.2 Rambam rules that a woman is not obligated to marry:
רמב”ם הלכות איסורי ביאה כא:כו
…ורשות לאשה שלא תנשא לעולם
Rambam, Laws of Forbidden Relations 21:26
…A woman is permitted never to marry.
Elsewhere, however, he maintains that both women and men should endeavor to remain in a state of marriage. For a man, this is a rabbinic mitzva lest he come to have inappropriate sexual thoughts. A woman should marry, and remain married, out of concern for appearances, lest others come to suspect her of inappropriate sexual behavior.
רמב”ם הלכות אישות טו:טז
…מצות חכמים היא שלא ישב אדם בלא אשה שלא יבא לידי הרהור, ולא תשב אשה בלא איש שלא תחשד.
Rambam Laws of Marriage 15:16
…It is a rabbinic mitzva that a man not dwell without a woman, that he not come to have inappropriate [sexual] thoughts. A woman should not dwell without a man, that she not give appearances [lit., be suspected, of promiscuity].
Radach maintains that inappropriate thoughts are a concern for women as well:
שו”ת הרד”ך מהדורת קושטא בית יז
ואם כן ה”נ [=הכי נמי] אסור לה לאשה לעמוד בלא בעל משום הרהור דבאשה נמי שייך הרהור.
Responsa Rav David Cohen, Constantinople Edition, 17
If so, here, too, it is prohibited for her for a woman to remain without a husband on account of inappropriate [sexual] thoughts, for inappropriate thoughts are also relevant to a woman.
Rema cites Rambam regarding an unmarried woman becoming suspect.3 However, this concern can also be understood as a mere “eitza tova,” good advice:
באר היטב אה”ע א:כז
ויש ליישב דמ”ש [=דמה שכתב] הרמב”ם בה”א [=בהלכות אישות] דלא תעמוד בלא איש הוא מצד עצה טובה דלא תחשד. ושם בהלכות א”ב [=איסורי ביאה] ע”פ [=על פי] הדין דמצד הדין הרשות לאשה שלא תנשא לעולם דאפי[לו] איסור דרבנן ליכא גבה דידה…
Be’er Heitev EH 1:27
One can reconcile that what Rambam wrote in the Laws of Marriage, that she not remain without a man, is good advice, that she not be suspect. And there in the Laws of Forbidden Relations, he wrote that according to basic halacha a woman is permitted never to marry, for she does not have even a rabbinic prohibition …
Halacha thus seems to leave room for a woman to delay marriage or to choose never to marry, even in societies in which this might give the wrong appearance. By the eighteenth century, Rav Yaakov Reischer writes that there is no longer insistence that every woman marry.
שו”ת שבות יעקב ב:קנא
באשה שאינו מצוות כלל על מצות פ”ו [=פריה ורביה] ואף על גב דלא נשאת בזמנה אין כופין ע”ז [=על זה] שהרי בנות צלפחד יוכיח שנשאו ‘אפי[לו] הקטנה שבהן עד ארבעים שנה’ כדאיתא בב”ב [=בבבא בתרא] [קיט:] וכ”ש [=וכל שכן] בזמנים אלו שאין קפידא בזה.
Responsa Shevut Yaakov 2:151
Regarding a woman, who is not obligated at all in procreation, even if she does not marry at her time, we do not compel her over this. For [the case of] the daughters of Tzelofchad proves it, for even the youngest of them didn’t marry until age forty, as is brought in Bava Batra (119b) and how much more so in these days, when people are not particular about this.
Though women need not marry, our sages assume that a woman will wish to marry:
קידושין מא.
…דאמר ר”ל [=ריש לקיש] טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו:
Kiddushin 41a
…For Reish Lakish said: It is better to dwell as a twosome then to dwell as a widow.
רש”י שם
דאמר ר”ל [=ריש לקיש] טב למיתב טן דו – משל הוא שהנשים אומרות על בעל כל דהו שהוא טוב לשבת עם שני גופים משבת אלמנה.
Rashi ad loc,
For Reish Lakish said: It is better to dwell as a twosome – it is a parable, for women say regarding any husband whatsoever that it is better to dwell as two bodies than to dwell as a widow.
It’s not clear if this presumption is existential, that a woman needs companionship, or social, that she values the status of being an eishet ish. Either way, one wonders if it applies as widely today as it did in the eyes of Reish Lakish.
Birkat Eirusin
The beracha recited immediately prior to kiddushin is called birkat eirusin. We’ll look at its source, nature, and significance, in light of our discussion of the mitzva of kiddushin. Then we’ll turn to the halachic questions of how and where it is said and who says it.
Initially, kiddushin, and thus the recitation of birkat eirusin, was performed well in advance of the wedding day. Since at least the High Middle Ages, kiddushin takes place under the chuppa, so birkat eirusin is recited there as well. The Talmud notes the initial practice, and then presents the text of the beracha, which is nearly identical to what we currently recite:4
כתובות ז:
מברכין ברכת חתנים בבית חתנים וברכת אירוסין בבית האירוסין ברכת האירוסין מאי מברך רבין בר רב אדא ורבה בר רב אדא תרוייהו משמיה דרב יהודה אמרי בא”י אמ”ה [=ברוך אתה ה’ אלקינו מלך העולם] אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על העריות ואסר לנו את הארוסות והתיר לנו את הנשואות על ידי חופה וקדושין רב אחא בריה דרבא מסיים בה משמיה דרב יהודה בא”י [=ברוך אתה ה’ ] מקדש ישראל על ידי חופה וקדושין מאן דלא חתים מידי דהוה אברכת פירות ואברכת מצות ומאן דחתים מידי דהוה אקידושא
Ketubot 7b
We recite birkat chatanim in the house of chatanim [chuppa] and birkat eirusin in the house of eirusin. Birkat eirusin—what beracha does he recite? Rabin son of Rav Ada and Raba son of Rav Ada, both of them in the name of Rav Yehuda say: “Blessed are You Lord our God, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding arayot [illicit relations] and prohibited to us ha-arusot [betrothed women] and permitted to us ha-nessu’ot [married women] through chuppa and kiddushin.” Rav Acha son of Rava concludes [the beracha] in the name of Rav Yehuda: “Blessed are You Lord who sanctifies Israel through chuppa and kiddushin.” One who does not conclude [with a closing beracha formula] is because it is like berachot over fruits or berachot over mitzvot. One who does conclude [with a closing beracha formula] is because it is like kiddush.
Birkat eirusin opens with “…who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding”—the classic formula of a birkat ha-mitzva (beracha over a mitzva). It then goes on to address prohibited relations, including the prohibition of a betrothed couple having relations until after their chuppa, stated from a male perspective.
The focus on prohibited relations alludes to the heart of kiddushin, which prohibits a woman from having relations with anyone other than the man to whom she is mekudeshet. (See more here.) Still, the beracha seems to particularly emphasize that kiddushin alone does not suffice to permit a betrothed couple to have relations. This would have been especially significant at a kiddushin performed well in advance of chuppa.
Overall, the content of birkat eirusin is surprising. Typically, a beracha over a mitzva is brief, and concludes with language referring to the performance of the mitzva (e.g., “al netilat yadayim,” “on washing hands”). So, as Rosh noted, we might have expected something referring to the performance of kiddushin.
If birkat eirusin doesn’t follow the typical formula for a birkat ha-mitzva, is it a different type of beracha? Birkot ha-shevach, blessings of praise, (like she-hechiyyanu) vary widely in length and in content. Still, birkot ha-shevach do not usually take prohibitions as the subject of their praise to God, nor do they offer praise from a specifically male perspective. The language of birkat eirusin does not fit neatly into either category of berachot.
The Talmudic passage concludes with a debate as to whether the beracha needs a closing ‘Baruch ata Hashem’ (Blessed are you, Lord) formula at the end, like kiddush, or does not, like typical berachot over a mitzva (or over food). This discussion may reflect the difficulty of categorizing birkat eirusin, raising the question of whether it is a birkat ha-mitzva or something else.
Some early halachic authorities consider birkat eirusin to be a birkat ha-mitzva. Others categorize it as a birkat ha-shevach. We’ll explore both positions, including their rationales and practical implications.
Birkat Ha-mitzva
In a discussion of the timing of birkot ha-mitzva in general, the Talmud Yerushalmi seems to imply that we recite a birkat ha-mitzva over kiddushin.5 Indeed, Rambam categorizes birkat eirusin as a classic birkat ha-mitzva recited before kiddushin. He also adds that it is customary to recite this beracha over wine, presumably because wine intensifies the ritual significance of berachot.
רמב”ם הלכות אישות ג:כג-כד
כל המקדש אשה בין על ידי עצמו בין על ידי שליח צריך לברך קודם הקידושין הוא או שלוחו ואחר כך מקדש כדרך שמברכין קודם כל המצות… ונהגו העם להסדיר ברכה זו על כוס של יין או של שכר…
Rambam, Laws of Marriage 3:23-24
Whoever betroths [mekadesh] a woman, whether himself or through an agent, he or his agent must recite a beracha prior to kiddushin, and afterwards betroth, in the manner that we recite a beracha before any mitzva…The people are accustomed to set up this beracha over a cup of wine or an alcoholic beverage…
According to Rambam, only a chatan is obligated in the mitzva of kiddushin, so it follows that only the chatan or his agent would recite the birkat ha-mitzva over it. This could account for the male perspective of the beracha.
If birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva, is it incumbent on the kalla as well as the chatan? Earlier, we saw that Rambam views kiddushin as a mitzva specifically for a man, but that others suggest ways in which kiddushin could perhaps be considered a mitzva for a woman as well. According to these views, it is conceivable that birkat eirusin would also be a kalla’s beracha. In the seventeenth century, Rav Chaim Benvenishti mentions this possibility as something about which he is in doubt:
כנסת הגדולה אה”ע הלכות אישות לד
מספקא לי שמא אין הספק אלא בקטן שקדש קטנה דשניהם לאו מצוה נינהו אבל בקטן שקדש את הגדולה שפיר דמי לברך משום חיוב דידה דאיהי נמי מוזהר[ת] שלא להבעל בלא קידושין…ואעפ”י [=ואף על פי] שנוסח ברכת ארוסין הוא מדבר באיש ואין כך כלום…
Kenesset Ha-gedola EH Laws of Marriage 34
I am in doubt whether perhaps the doubt [about permissibility of reciting birkat eirusin] is only regarding a male minor who betrothed a female minor, where both of them are not commanded, but with a male minor who betroths a female of age it would be proper to recite the beracha on account of her obligation, for she, too, is cautioned not to have relations without kiddushin…and even though the language of birkat eirusin speaks of the man this is irrelevant …
Rav Benvenishti does not see the male-centered language of the beracha as an obstacle to its being a beracha for the kalla, but he still does not conclude definitively that the beracha is also made on her behalf. Similarly, Noda Bi-Yehuda raises the possibility of the beracha being the kalla’s birkat ha-mitzva as well as the chatan’s, without deciding in its favor. The context of his discussion is a consideration of whether birkat eirusin can be recited at the wedding of a chatan who is deaf and mute.
שו”ת נודע ביהודה מהדורא תניינא – אבן העזר סימן א
וידע מעלתו שגם בנישואי חרש אני מסופק בברכות כי ברכת אירוסין על החתן לברך…ועכ”פ [=ועל כל פנים] עיקר הברכה להוציא את החתן וכיון שהוא חרש שאינו שומע אינו יוצא בברכה זו ואיך יברך המסדר ואם היה מקום לומר שגם הכלה שייכא בברכת אירוסין ומוציא המסדר את הכלה, אמנם חרש שנשא חרשת ודאי לדעתי אין כאן ברכה…
Responsa Noda Bi-Yehuda Mahadura Tinyana – EH 1
His honor knows that regarding the marriage of a deaf [man], I am also in doubt regarding the berachot, since reciting birkat eirusin is incumbent on the chatan… And in any case, the essence of the beracha is to discharge the chatan’s obligation, and since he is a deaf person who cannot hear, he does not discharge his obligation with this beracha, and how can the mesader kiddushin recite the beracha? And whether there is room to say that birkat eirusin also applies to the kalla so that the mesader kiddushin discharges the kalla’s obligation. Indeed, for a deaf man who marries a deaf woman, in my opinion there is certainly no beracha here…
If birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva, and if it is obligatory for the kalla as well as for the chatan, then it would seem that she, or her agent to accept kiddushin, could recite it, though actual practice would depend on communal norms. However, it is not clear that it the beracha is obligatory for her.
What of someone else, man or woman, reciting it on the chatan’s (and perhaps kalla’s) behalf? Usually, one person does not recite a birkat ha-mitzva when someone else performs the mitzva. However, it is customary for someone other than the chatan to recite birkat eirusin, without performing the kiddushin as the chatan’s agent! We’ll explore the question of how to reconcile this practice with the view that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva after we’ve introduced a second way to view birkat eirusin, as a birkat ha-shevach.
Birkat Ha-shevach
Taking an intermediate view, Ramban suggests that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva couched in the language of a birkat ha-shevach. Birkat eirusin ought to be a classic birkat ha-mitzva over kiddushin and nissuin. However, kiddushin is only one stage in the marriage process. It does not complete the marriage or mitzva—certainly not when performed significantly prior to the chuppa. Birkat eirusin was thus enacted with language more comparable to that of a birkat ha-shevach, on the model of kiddush.
חדושי הרמב”ן כתובות ז:
כיון שהחופה והקידושין אינן נעשין בבת אחת וחצי המצוה נעשית בקידושין הוצרך לברך עליהם מקדש ישראל, שכל המצות מברך עליהם עובר לעשייתן ואילו היתה החופה נעשית עכשיו היו מברכין אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על הקידושין והחופה… ולא היו יכולים לומר אשר קדשנו על הקידושין שלא מצינו שיברך אדם על מצוה שאין עשייה זו גמר מלאכתה, לפיכך…כמי שמברך על קדושתן של ישראל ודמיא לקדושא כדאיתא בגמ’ (פסחים קי”ז ב’) שמברכין אשר בחר בישראל וקדשם בקדושת שבת ולא על איסור שבת אף זו על שבחר בישראל שקדשם באסור להן ובמותר להן.
Ramban Ketubot 7b
Since the chuppa and kiddushin aren’t done at the same time, and half the mitzva is done at kiddushin, it was necessary to recite over them the beracha of “who sanctifies Israel,” for one recites a beracha prior to performing any mitzva act. And if the chuppa were performed now, they would recite the beracha “who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding kiddushin and chuppa”…But they couldn’t say “who has sanctified us” over kiddushin [alone], for we have not found that a person recites a beracha over a mitzva whose [subsequent] act is not the completion of it. Therefore…it is like one who recites a beracha over the sanctity of Israel and it is similar to kiddush, as is [stated] in the Talmud (Pesachim 117b)—that we recite the beracha, that [God] has chosen Israel and sanctified them through the sanctity of Shabbat, and [we do] not [recite a beracha] over the prohibition of Shabbat. This [birkat eirusin] also is about how He has chosen Israel, for He has sanctified them with what is prohibited to them and what is permitted to them.
Birkat eirusin highlights the sanctity of the Jewish people, as manifested in refraining from prohibited relationships, and in requiring kiddushin and nissuin prior to relations.
Jerusalem-based teacher Sarah Yehudit Schneider expands on the comparison of kiddush and kiddushin:
Sarah Yehudit Schneider, The Still Small Voice Teaching Haggadah (Jerusalem: A Still Small Voice, 2022), 24.
We make Kiddush at the start of all our holidays as well as Shabbat. Yet the term “kiddush” is similar to the word for betrothal, kiddushin. As such, it hints to our “engagement” to HaShem when we came of age as a people…forging a covenantal bond of mutual devotion. In reciting Kiddush we step out of the secular and into the holy. It is as if we draw a circle around ourself that defines a sacred space.…Just as with the intimacy of husband and wife, the security of marital commitment (kiddushin) enables the vulnerability essential to the deeper work.
Rosh articulates these ideas as part of his argument that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-shevach. As we saw above, he differs from Ramban by arguing that kiddushin is not even a partial mitzva, but is merely a preliminary to the mitzva of procreation, and thus the beracha is in no way a birkat ha-mitzva:
רא”ש כתובות א:יב
….ונ”ל [=ונראה לי] כי ברכה זו אינה ברכה לעשיית המצוה כי פריה ורביה היינו קיום המצוה…וברכה זו נתקנה לתת שבח להקב”ה אשר קדשנו במצותיו והבדילנו מן העמים וצונו לקדש אשה המותרת לנו ולא אחת מן העריות…
Rosh Ketubot 1:12
It seems to me that this beracha is not a beracha over performing the mitzva, because the fulfillment of the mitzva is procreation…and this beracha was enacted to give praise to God, for He sanctified us with His commandments and separated us from the nations, and commanded us to betroth [le-kadesh] a woman who is permitted to us—and not one of the arayot [those prohibited]…
Ritva concurs that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-shevach and not a birkat ha-mitzva, and further develops the idea that it is modeled on kiddush. This can explain a few aspects of how birkat eirusin is recited: why it is recited over wine, why it is customary for the mesader kiddushin (officiant of the wedding) to recite it, and why its timing is flexible. Birkat eirusin can be recited after kiddushin, much as kiddush is recited after Shabbat has begun, or before kiddushin because it serves as a placeholder, a stand in for a birkat ha-mitzva over kiddushin.
ריטב”א כתובות ז:
ברכה זו אינה אלא כעין קידוש על מה שקדשנו הקדוש ברוך הוא…ומפני שהברכה היא כעין קדושה…לפיכך נהגו כל ישראל לאומרה על הכוס ואף על פי שאין זה מעכב…מעתה ראויה היא לאומרה אחר הקידושין שכן כל ברכה של קדושה מברכין אותה אחר שחלה הקדושה, וכן הדין נותן, אלא שבקצת מקומות נהגו לברך אותה קודם הקידושין, ויש לתת טעם לדבריהם כי אף על פי שאינה ברכת המצות כיון שעומדת במקום ברכת המצות מקדימין אותה להקדים ברכה למעשה, ואין מבטלין מנהג בדבר זה…ומה שכתב [הרמב”ם] “צריך לברך הוא או שלוחו” אזדא לטעמיה דס”ל [=דסבירא ליה] שזו ברכת המצוות, וכבר דחינו דברים אלו בידים, ומנהג פשוט הוא בכל הארצות שמברך אותה השליח צבור והוא הנכון.
Ritva Ketubot 7b
This beracha is none other than a sort of kiddush, on God’s having sanctified us…Since the beracha is a sort of sanctification…Therefore, all Israel are accustomed to recite it over a cup—even though this is not absolutely required…Thus, it is fitting to say it after the kiddushin, for we recite every beracha regarding sanctity after the sanctity has taken effect. And so logic would indicate, but in some places they are accustomed to recite the beracha prior to the kiddushin. And one can explain their practice, for even though it is not a birkat ha-mitzva, since it stands in place of a birkat ha-mitzva we move it forward and recite the beracha prior to the act. And we do not nullify a custom in this matter…That which [Rambam] wrote that “he [the chatan] or his agent must recite the beracha” follows his rationale, for he thinks that this is a birkat ha-mitzva. And we already directly refuted these words, and the simple custom is that in all lands the shaliach tzibbur recites it, and that is correct.
Ritva attests that the custom is for the shali’ach tzibbur (prayer leader) to recite birkat eirusin. Still, according to the view that it is a birkat ha-shevach, others at the wedding would seem to be allowed to recite it in his stead, since they, too, can give praise over the sanctification of the Jewish people.
Thus, in the early eighteenth century, Rav Alexander Schor writes that birkat eirusin was enacted for all present, not specifically for the chatan, as illustrated by the Talmud’s language “mevarechin,” which can be translated as “we recite a beracha” or “they recite a beracha.”
תבואות שור, שמלה חדשה א:נט
ולא נתקנה מעיקרא דוקא על החתן…רק נתקנה על הנועדים לבית האירוסין כדמשמע בגמ[רא] פ”ק [=פרק קמא] כתובות דגרסינן התם מברכין…בבית האירוסין.
Tevu’ot Shor, Simla Chadasha 1:59
It was not originally enacted specifically for the chatan…rather it was enacted for those present at the house of eirusin as is implied by the Talmud in the first chapter of Ketubot, for the text there is “we recite the beracha [mevarechin]…in the house of eirusin.”
According to this logic, a woman could recite the beracha, depending on communal norms.6
Others, however, maintain that even according to the view that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-shevach, the fundamental enactment is for the chatan to recite it. Still, the widespread custom in most communities is that the chatan does not recite the beracha.
Recitation by Another
A ge’onic responsum supports another person reciting birkat chatanim on behalf of a chatan, comparing this to a shali’ach tzibbur discharging one’s obligation in prayer.
תשובות הגאונים שערי צדק חלק ג שער א סימן מה
וברכת אירוסין…ולא צריך ארוס עצמו לברך, מידי דהוה אשליח צבור הפורס על שמע והיורד לפני התיבה, בכל מקום קאמרינן שלוחו של אדם כמותו, וכמאן דקא מברך ארוס דאמי (כתובות ח’)
Geonic Responsa. Sha’arei Tzedek III 1:45
Birkat eirusin…the chatan himself does not need to recite the beracha, since it is like a shali’ach tzibbur who recites a shortened version of Shema and its berachot and leads tefillot. Everywhere we say that a person’s agent is like himself, and he is like the chatan reciting the beracha.
The responsum seems to assume that the beracha is an obligation of the chatan, but does not clearly indicate whether the obligation of birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva or a birkat ha-shevach. It also does not explain why another would recite the beracha.
Early authorities provide explanations for why the chatan reciting the beracha might present a difficulty. One possible rationale is that we don’t want to embarrass chatanim who cannot recite it fluently.
אורחות חיים הלכות קידושין אות כא
שלא נהגו לברך אותה החתן עצמו כדי שלא לבייש שאינו בקי בה ומברך אותה אחר בשבילו
Orchot Chayyim Kiddushin 21
For they did not customarily have the chatan recite the beracha himself, in order not to embarrass one who isn’t fluent in it, and someone else recites it for him.
Alternatively, we may be concerned about having a chatan give the impression of spiritual showing off (learn more here) at a time when we’d expect him to be preoccupied.
מרדכי כתובות פרק בתולה נשאת רמז קלא
אם יש אחר לברך אל יברך החתן משום דמיחזי כיוהרא
Mordechai Ketubot 131
If there is another [person available] to recite the beracha, the chatan should not recite it because it appears like spiritual aggrandizement.
The need to present a rationale for why the chatan does not recite the beracha suggests that fundamentally, he ought to be reciting it. Let’s look now at how to understand the practice for someone other than the chatan to recite the beracha according to each perspective on the beracha.
Birkat Ha-shevach If we view birkat chatanim as a birkat ha-shevach incumbent on those present at eirusin, then there is no impediment to others reciting it. However, we still might expect a chatan to take the lead in giving praise at his own eirusin, since he is directly affected, and since he performs the act of kiddushin that occasions the praise.
Rav Moshe Feinstein adopts this idea to argue that even if birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-shevach, it is still incumbent on the chatan—and the kalla:
שו”ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק א סימן פז
ואפילו להרא”ש כתובות דף ז’ שאינה ברכה לעשיית המצוה אלא שהוא נתקן לתת שבח להקב”ה …שא”כ [=שאם כן] היה ראוי שיהיה עצם החיוב על כל אדם שישנם בשעת האירוסין, משמע נמי שסובר שעיקר התקנה הוא רק להמקדש אף שאינה ברכה לעשיית המצוה…ומה שמברך אחר הוא כששומעין החתן והכלה שיוצאין ידי הברכה.
Responsa Iggerot Moshe, EH 1:87
Even according to Rosh Ketubot 7, that this is not a beracha over performing a mitzva but was enacted to give praise to God…for if so, it would be fitting that the obligation itself fall on every person who is there at the time of eirusin, it is also implied that he thinks that the fundamental enactment is only for the one performing kiddushin [the chatan], even though it isn’t a beracha over performing a mitzva….And that another recites the beracha is when the chatan and kalla hear it, that they discharge the obligation in the beracha.
While Rav Moshe specifically includes the kalla in the obligation, he seems to take it for granted that the fundamental enactment was for the chatan, as the one who performs kiddushin, to recite the beracha, and not the kalla.
Birkat Ha-mitzva As we mentioned before, a person who recites a birkat ha-mitzva on behalf of someone else usually has to be subject to the same obligation and needs to perform the associated mitzva act. (See more here.) There is disagreement as to whether the practice of having a mesader kiddushin recite birkat eirusin can be reconciled with the view that it is a birkat ha-mitzva. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank maintains that this practice establishes that we do not view birkat eirusin as a birkat ha-mitzva:
שו”ת הר צבי אורח חיים א סימן מד
דלהרמב”ם אם אחר מברך הוי ברכה לבטלה, ומפני שלא לבייש נוהגין שאחר מברך, וכי מפני שלא לבייש התירו ברכה לבטלה
Responsa Har Tzevi OC I:44
For according to Rambam, if another [person] recites the beracha it is a beracha in vain. And in order not to embarrass the chatan the custom is for another to recite the beracha. And in order to avoid embarrassment, would they permit a beracha in vain?
In contrast, Rav Ovadya Yosef draws on the geonic responsum to argue that the custom for the mesader kiddushin to recite the birkat eirusin without performing the act of kiddushin can be reconciled with the view that it is a birkat ha-mitzva by employing the usual halachic mechanisms that allow one person to perform a verbal mitzva for another:
שו”ת יביע אומר חלק ז – אבן העזר סימן יז
…אם המברך מכוין להוציא את החתן ידי חובת הברכה, וגם החתן מתכוין לצאת בברכתו, שפיר דמי. וכמ”ש [=וכמו שכתוב] בתשו[בות] הגאונים שערי צדק (שער א’ סי’ מה) שאין צריך שהחתן עצמו יברך, מידי דהוה אשליח צבור….ע”ש [=עיין שם]. וכן המנהג פשוט אצלינו שהרב מרא דאתרא מברך ברכת אירוסין, ואין החתן מברך בעצמו כדי שלא לבייש למי שאינו יודע לברך.
Responsa Yabia Omer VII EH 17
If the one reciting the beracha intends to discharge the chatan’s obligation in the beracha, and the chatan also intends to discharge his obligation through his beracha, it is fine. As it is written in the responsa of the Ge’onim Sha’arei Tzedek (1:45) that it is not necessary for the chatan himself to recite the beracha, similar to the case of the shali’ach tzibbur…see there. And thus is the widespread custom among us, that the rabbi of the community recites birkat eirusin, and the chatan does not recite it himself…
According to the view that kiddushin is a mitzva only for men and that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva, it is possible that the person reciting the beracha would have to be subject to the obligation in order to discharge the chatan, and thus a woman could not recite the beracha.
In Practice
Shulchan Aruch’s ruling seems to follow Rambam, that birkat eirusin is a birkat ha-mitzva for the chatan, recited prior to kiddushin. Rema notes that others aside from the chatan can recite the beracha, and that this is customary, which might indicate a view of birkat eirusin as birkat ha-shevach.
שולחן ערוך אה”ע לד: א
כל המקדש אשה, בין ע”י [=על ידי] עצמו בין ע”י [=על ידי] שליח, מברך, [רמ”א] (הוא או השליח), (טור) וי”א [=ויש אומרים] דאחר מברך, (סמ”ג והגהות מיימוני) וכן נוהגין…[שולחן ערוך]…ואחר שיגמור הברכה, יקדש.
Shulchan Aruch EH 34:1
Whoever is mekadesh a woman, whether himself or through an agent, recites a beracha, Rema: (him or the agent). And there are those who say that another recites the beracha, and this is the custom…[Shulchan Aruch:] and after he finishes the beracha, he should perform kiddushin.
Widespread custom is for the mesader kiddushin to recite birkat eirusin. 7 (We look more closely at the role of the mesader kiddushin here.) In light of the different understandings of birkat eirusin, some mesaderei kiddushin instruct both chatan and kalla to have intention to discharge their obligation in the beracha through the recitation, while others instruct only the chatan, and still others do not make any statement of this sort.
The mesader kiddushin also recites the beracha over wine, although the chatan and kalla customarily drink the wine.
ערוך השולחן אה”ע לד: ט
ונותנים להחתן והכלה לשתות מעט והמברך יוצא בזה ואף על גב דברכת הנהנין המברך צריך שיטעום מ”מ [=מכל מקום] כיון שנתקנה על הכוס ה”ל [=הווה ליה] כקידושא ואבדלתא דמוציא אחרים בברכת היין…
Aruch Ha-shulchan EH 34:9
We give [the wine] to the chatan and kalla to drink a little, and the one who recites the beracha [over wine and birkat eirusin] discharges [his obligation to drink after reciting the beracha over wine] through this [their drinking]. Even though with a[n ordinary] birkat ha-nehenin [a beracha upon receiving enjoyment], the one who recites a beracha needs to partake, in any case, since it [birkat eirusin] was enacted over a cup, it is like kiddush and havdala, that he [the one reciting it] discharges others in the [accompanying] beracha over wine….
Finally, though a minyan should be present, birkat eirusin recited without one is still valid.8
שולחן ערוך אה”ע לד: ד
ברכת ארוסין צריכים עשרה, לכתחלה.
Shulchan Aruch EH 34:4
Birkat eirusin needs [a quorum of] ten, le-chat’chila [if possible].
As we have seen, kiddushin fundamentally requires only two witnesses, not a minyan. This is one of a few ways in which birkat eirusin differs from birkat chatanim, colloquially known as sheva berachot, the subject of our next piece.
Why is birkat eirusin written from a male perspective?
With the exception of the convention of referring to God in the masculine singular, berachot are generally gender neutral. (We discuss birkot ha-shachar here, and she-lo asani isha here).
Birkat eirusin opens neutrally, since all Jews are subject to the prohibition of illicit relations. It also ends neutrally, since the entire Jewish people is sanctified by adherence to the institutions of marriage and betrothal. Its middle section emphasizes an important halachic point, that even after betrothal, a couple are permitted to each other only after nissuin. However, this point is very clearly phrased from a man’s perspective, blessing God for prohibiting betrothed women and permitting married women to “us.” Women are clearly not the “us” that the beracha has in mind.
We can make some sense of this based on the different approaches we’ve seen to the beracha.
According to the view that the beracha is a birkat ha-mitzva for the chatan, recited over his mitzva of kiddushin or peru u-rvu, it is naturally written from the perspective of the chatan and other chatanim.
If it is a birkat ha-shevach, the language might reflect the convention for the chatan to recite it, which shifted to being a role of the mesader kiddushin (another male with the potential to marry). Still, despite Kenesset Ha-gedola’s insistence that the masculine language does not matter, the middle section of this beracha is not inclusive of the kalla’s perspective. This is the case even though kiddushin is a momentous change of status for the kalla.
Increasingly, kallot feel the absence of a birkat ha-shevach or prayer clearly designed for the kalla on the occasion of kiddushin itself. We discuss some possible ways to address this feeling here.
Notes
1. Mordechai suggests a version of this view which seems to see kiddushin, nissuin, and also procreation as one overarching mitzva:
מרדכי כתובות קלב
ומה שאין מברכין אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לקדש האשה משום דאין עשייתה גמר מצותה כדאיתא פרק התכלת ובשעת נשואין נמי אין מברכין [*על הנשואין]…דשמא לא יזכו להבנות יחד
Mordechai Ketubot 132
That we don’t recite the beracha “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to betroth [le-kadesh] a woman” is because its performance is not the completion of its mitzva, as is brought in Menachot ch. 4. And at the time of nissuin we also do not recite the beracha… for perhaps they will not merit to be built up [through progeny] together.
2. The two main manuscripts of the Tosefta disagree on this point:
תוספתא יבמות ח כתב יד וינה
ואשה אינה רשאה לישב שלא באיש
Tosefta Yevamot 8 ms. Vienna
And a woman is not permitted to dwell without a man…
תוספתא יבמות ח כתב יד ערפורט
והאשה רשאה לישב שלא איש
Tosefta Yevamot 8 ms. Ehrfurt
A woman is permitted to dwell without a man…
רמ”א שולחן ערוך אה”ע א:יג
יש אומרים דלא תעמוד בלא איש משום חשדא
Rema Shulchan Aruch EH 1:13
There are those who say that she [a woman] should not remain without a man on account of suspicion [of promiscuity].
4. For example, see slight variations in Shulchan Aruch and Rema:
שולחן ערוך אה”ע לד:א
אקב”ו ]= אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו[ על העריות ואסר לנו הארוסות והתיר לנו הנשואות ע”י [=על ידי] חופה בקידושין ברוך אתה ה’ מקדש ישראל.[רמ”א] וי”א [=ויש אומרים] נוסח הברכה בלשון אחר, כי אומרים: והתיר לנו הנשואות ע”י [=על ידי] חופה וקידושין (טור), וחותם: בא”י [=ברוך אתה ה’ ] מקדש עמו ישראל על ידי חופה וקידושין (כ”כ הרא”ש), וכן נוהגים במדינות אלו)…
Shulchan Aruch EH 34:1
“[Blessed are You Lord our God, King of the universe,] who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding illicit relations and prohibited to us ha-arusot [betrothed women] and permitted us ha-nessu’ot [married women] through chuppa with kiddushin. Blessed are You Lord who sanctifies Israel.” Rema: And there are those who say the text of the beracha with different wording, for they say: “and permitted us ha-nessu’ot [married women] through chuppa and kiddushin. Blessed are You Lord who sanctifies Israel through chuppa and kiddushin.” And thus is the practice in these lands…
5. With the exception of kiddushin effected through relations, where the implication is that the birkat-ha-mitzva comes afterwards:
תלמוד ירושלמי ברכות ט: ג
דאמר רבי יוסי בי ר’ בון בשם שמואל כל המצות טעונות ברכה בשעת עשייתן חוץ מתקיעה וטבילה. ויש אומרים קדושין בבעילה.
Yerushalmi Berachot 9:3
For Rabbi Yosei son of Rav Bun said in the name of Shemuel: All mitzvot require a beracha at the time of doing them, aside from blowing [shofar] and immersing. And there are those who say kiddushin through relations.
7. Responsa Be-Mareh Ha-bazak draws heavily on this point, and takes it as a given that a woman cannot be a mesader kiddushin. Available on page 31 of this file.
שו”ת במראה הבזק ו:יד
נהגו בכל ישראל שהרב מסדר הקידושין או החתן מברכים את ברכת האירוסין, ואין לשנות תהמנהג. נוסף לכך, קיים חשש ברכה לבטלה בברכת אירוסין על ידי אישה.
Responsa Be-mareh Ha-bazak 6:14
All Jews have the practice that the Rav mesader kiddushin or the chatan recites the beracha of birkat eirusin, and one should not change the custom. In addition to this, there is a concern of a beracha in vain with birkat eirusin by a woman.
8. This is a Ge’onic debate. We look at the rationale of comparing birkat eirusin to birkat chatanim in this respect in our piece on birkat chatanim:
רא”ש כתובות א:יב
כתב רב אחאי (פ’ חיי סי’ טז) דברכת אירוסין בי’. וה”ר [=והרב] שמואל הנגיד נחלק עליו ואמר שאין צריך י’ אלא לברכת חתנים בלבד שלא הוזכרו י’ אלא בה. ועוד הרי קידושין בפני ב’ ואתה מצריך עשרה. ול”נ [=ולי נראים] דברי רב אחאי
Rosh Ketubot 1:12
Rav Achai wrote that birkat eirusin is with ten. But Rav Shemuel Ha-nagid disputed this and said that one only needs ten for birkat chatanim, for they [our sages] only mentioned ten regarding it. And further, kiddushin is in the presence of two [witnesses], and you will require ten [for the beracha]? And to me the words of Rav Achai seem correct…
Sources
To view these sources in context on Sefaria, click here!
Mitzva and Obligation
קידושין מא.
מתני’ האיש מקדש בו ובשלוחו האשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה…גמ’ השתא בשלוחו מקדש בו מיבעיא אמר רב יוסף: מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו…”האשה מתקדשת בה ובשלוחה” השתא בשלוחה מיקדשא, בה מיבעיא? אמר רב יוסף: מצוה בה יותר מבשלוחה…
Kiddushin 41a
Mishna: A man performs kiddushin through himself [his action] or through his agent. A woman becomes mekudeshet through herself or through her agent…Gemara: Now, if a man can perform kiddushin through his agent, do we need [to stipulate] “through himself”? Rav Yosef said: It’s a mitzva through himself more than through his agent…“A woman becomes mekudeshet through herself or through her agent.” Now, if a woman becomes mekudeshet through her agent, do we need [to stipulate] “through herself”? Rav Yosef said: It’s a mitzva through herself more than through her agent…
רא”ש כתובות א:יב
למה אין מברכין אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לקדש את האשה…ונ”ל [=ונראה לי]…כי פריה ורביה היינו קיום המצוה…ולא דמי לשחיטה שאינו מחוייב לשחוט ולאכול ואפ”ה [=ואפילו הכי] כשהוא שוחט לאכול מברך דהתם אי אפשר לו לאכול בלא שחיטה אבל הכא אפשר לקיים פריה ורביה בלא קידושין וגם התם אפקיה קרא בלשון ציווי דכתיב וזבחת ואכלת אבל הכא כתיב כי יקח איש…
Rabbeinu Asher Ketubot 1:12
Why do we not recite the beracha “Who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us to betroth [le-kadesh] a woman”…And it seems to me…that procreation is the fulfillment of the mitzva…and it is not similar to shechita, for one is not obligated to ritually slaughter and eat, and even so, when he slaughters in order to eat he recites the beracha, for there [in that case] it is impossible for him to eat [meat] without shechita, but here it is possible to fulfill the mitzva of procreation without kiddushin. And also there the verse expressed it in the language of command, as it is written, “and you shall slaughter and you shall eat,” but here it is written, “if a man takes”…
משנה יבמות ו:ו
האיש מצווה על פריה ורביה אבל לא האשה
Mishna Yevamot 6:6
The man is commanded in procreation but not the woman.
ר”ן על הרי”ף קידושין טז:
דאע”ג [=דאף על גב] דאשה אינה מצוה בפריה ורביה מ”מ [=מכל מקום] יש לה מצוה מפני שהיא מסייעת לבעל לקיים מצותו
Ran Kiddushin 16b, Rif Pagination
For even though a woman is not commanded in procreation, in any case she has a mitzva because she helps the husband to fulfill his mitzva.
שו”ת ציץ אליעזר ד טז:יב
…י”ל [=יש לומר] שכוונת הר”ן היא שמקיימת בזה המצוה של לשבת יצרה, שכוונת העשה היא לסייע ולהשתדל שהעולם יהא מיושב, ולכך כותב הר”ן שפיר שיש לה בכאן מצוה במה שהיא מסייעת לבעל לקיים מצותו, ואף על גב דלא אשכחן עיקר לזה, בשום מקום שהסיוע נחשב למצוה בפ”ע [=בפני עצמו], והיינו משום דבכאן איכא עשה ומצוה מיוחדת לסיוע, והיינו העשה דלשבת יצרה.
Responsa Tzitz Eliezer IV 16:12
…One can say that Ran means that through this she fulfills the mitzva of “la-shevet yetzarah” [He created it (the world) for settling], that the meaning of the positive injunction is to help and to make an effort that the world be settled. And, therefore, Ran writes correctly that here she has a mitzva in that that she helps the husband to fulfill his mitzva, and even though that we have not found a basis for this, in any place, that helping would be considered its own mitzva. This is because here there is a positive injunction and a special mitzva of helping, which is the positive injunction of “la-shevet yetzarah.”
שיטה לא נודע למי קידושין מא.
מצוה בה יותר מבשלוחה. ואף על גב דאתתא לא מפקדא בפריה ורביה מדרבנן מיהא מיחייבא, אי נמי דאית לה שכר כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה.
Unnamed Early Halachic Authority, Kiddushin 41a
A mitzva through herself more than through her agent. And even though a woman is not commanded in procreation, nevertheless, she is rabbinically obligated. Alternatively, because she has a reward as one who is not commanded and does [a mitzva].
ספר המצוות לרמב”ם מצות עשה ריג
והמצוה הרי”ג היא שצונו לבעול בקדושין…
Sefer Ha-mitzvot of Rambam, Positive Mitzva 213
The 213th mitzva is that we were commanded to have relations through kiddushin…
ברכת אברהם הלכות אישות א:ב
וזה שאמר “וליקוחין אלו מצות עשה” (הלכות אישות א:ב) לפי שהיא תחלת מצות הנשואין וכך אמר בתחלה יקנה אותה תחלה בפני עדים ואחר כך תהיה לו לאשה שנאמר כי יקח איש אשה ובא אליה אבל קידושין בלא נישואין ודאי לא השלים המצוה עדיין ומצות פריה ורביה מצוה אחרת היא שמצות פריה ורביה כשיהיה לו בן או בת קיים המצוה ומצות הקדושין והנשואין אפילו יש לו כמה בנים וכמה בנות ויש עמו כמה נשים כל אשה שירצה לישא אותה מצוה עליו שישא אותה בקדושין…
Birkat Avraham, Laws of Marriage 1:2
That which he [Rambam] said: “likuchin [kiddushin] is a positive mitzva” (Laws of Marriage 1:2)” is because it is the beginning of the mitzva of nissuin. And thus he said: at the beginning, he effects kinyan of her first in the presence of witnesses, and afterwards she will be his wife, as it is said, “when a man takes a woman and has relations with her.” But [with] kiddushin without nissuin he certainly has not yet completed the mitzva. And the mitzva of procreation is a different mitzva. For he has fulfilled the mitzva of procreation when he has a son or a daughter, and the mitzva of kiddushin and nissuin [apply] even if he already has several sons and several daughters and he has with him several wives, every wife that he wishes to marry, it is a mitzva upon him to marry her through kiddushin…
ספר המצוות לרמב”ם סיום מצוות עשה
וזאת המאתים ושתים עשרה אין הנשים חייבות בה. והמאתים ושלש עשרה.
Rambam, Sefer Ha-mitzvot, End of Positive Commandments
…This 212th mitzva women are not obligated in it, and the 213th.
המקנה קידושין מא.
ותו נראה דאף שאינה מצווה על פרי[ה] ורבי[ה] מ”מ [=מכל מקום] כיון שהיא רוצה להנשא לאיש אסורה להיבעל לו בלא קידושין משום לא תהי[ה] קדשה וכמ”ש [=וכמו שכתב] הרמב”ם ז”ל בפ”א [=בפרק א] מהל[כות] אישות. א”כ [=אם כן] הוי הקידושין מצוה כמו מצות שחיטה והפרשת תרומה ושילוח הקן דאינו מצווה על השחיטה ועל הפרשת תרומה אלא אם רוצה לאכול אסור בלא שחיטה ובלא הפרשה…
Ha-makneh Kiddushin 41a
Further, it seems that even though she is not obligated in procreation, in any case, since she wants to be married to a man, she is prohibited to have relations with him without kiddushin because of “There shall not be a cult prostitute [from the daughters of Israel, Devarim 23:18]” and as Rambam wrote in Laws of Marriage chapter 1. If so, kiddushin is a mitzva like the mitzva of ritual slaughter and separating teruma and chasing off the mother bird, for one is not commanded to slaughter or to separate teruma, but if one wants to eat it is prohibited without shechita and without separating…
שו”ת הרד”ך מהדורת קושטא בית יז
דאף על גב דהאשה עדיין לא נבראת היא בכלל האסור שכל הנקר[א] אדם לא טוב היותו לבדו
Responsa Rav David Cohen Mahadurat Kushta 17
For even though woman had not yet been created, she is included in the prohibition, for anyone who is called “adam” (a person), it is not good for him to be alone.
רמב”ם הלכות איסורי ביאה כא:כו
…ורשות לאשה שלא תנשא לעולם
Rambam, Laws of Forbidden Relations 21:26
…A woman is permitted never to marry.
רמב”ם הלכות אישות טו:טז
…מצות חכמים היא שלא ישב אדם בלא אשה שלא יבא לידי הרהור, ולא תשב אשה בלא איש שלא תחשד.
Rambam Laws of Marriage 15:16
…It is a rabbinic mitzva that a man not dwell without a woman, that he not come to have inappropriate [sexual] thoughts. A woman should not dwell without a man, that she not give appearances [lit., be suspected, of promiscuity].
שו”ת הרד”ך מהדורת קושטא בית יז
ואם כן ה”נ [=הכי נמי] אסור לה לאשה לעמוד בלא בעל משום הרהור דבאשה נמי שייך הרהור.
Responsa Rav David Cohen, Constantinople Edition, 17
If so, here, too, it is prohibited for her for a woman to remain without a husband on account of inappropriate [sexual] thoughts, for inappropriate thoughts are also relevant to a woman.
באר היטב אה”ע א:כז
ויש ליישב דמ”ש [=דמה שכתב] הרמב”ם בה”א [=בהלכות אישות] דלא תעמוד בלא איש הוא מצד עצה טובה דלא תחשד. ושם בהלכות א”ב [=איסורי ביאה] ע”פ [=על פי] הדין דמצד הדין הרשות לאשה שלא תנשא לעולם דאפי[לו] איסור דרבנן ליכא גבה דידה…
Be’er Heitev EH 1:27
One can reconcile that what Rambam wrote in the Laws of Marriage, that she not remain without a man, is good advice, that she not be suspect. And there in the Laws of Forbidden Relations, he wrote that according to basic halacha a woman is permitted never to marry, for she does not have even a rabbinic prohibition …
שו”ת שבות יעקב ב:קנא
באשה שאינו מצוות כלל על מצות פ”ו [=פריה ורביה] ואף על גב דלא נשאת בזמנה אין כופין ע”ז [=על זה] שהרי בנות צלפחד יוכיח שנשאו ‘אפי[לו] הקטנה שבהן עד ארבעים שנה’ כדאיתא בב”ב [=בבבא בתרא] [קיט:] וכ”ש [=וכל שכן] בזמנים אלו שאין קפידא בזה.
Responsa Shevut Yaakov 2:151
Regarding a woman, who is not obligated at all in procreation, even if she does not marry at her time, we do not compel her over this. For [the case of] the daughters of Tzelofchad proves it, for even the youngest of them didn’t marry until age forty, as is brought in Bava Batra (119b) and how much more so in these days, when people are not particular about this.
קידושין מא.
…דאמר ר”ל [=ריש לקיש] טב למיתב טן דו מלמיתב ארמלו:
Kiddushin 41a
…For Reish Lakish said: It is better to dwell as a twosome then to dwell as a widow.
רש”י שם
דאמר ר”ל [=ריש לקיש] טב למיתב טן דו – משל הוא שהנשים אומרות על בעל כל דהו שהוא טוב לשבת עם שני גופים משבת אלמנה.
Rashi ad loc,
For Reish Lakish said: It is better to dwell as a twosome – it is a parable, for women say regarding any husband whatsoever that it is better to dwell as two bodies than to dwell as a widow.
Birkat Eirusin
כתובות ז:
מברכין ברכת חתנים בבית חתנים וברכת אירוסין בבית האירוסין ברכת האירוסין מאי מברך רבין בר רב אדא ורבה בר רב אדא תרוייהו משמיה דרב יהודה אמרי בא”י אמ”ה [=ברוך אתה ה’ אלקינו מלך העולם] אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על העריות ואסר לנו את הארוסות והתיר לנו את הנשואות על ידי חופה וקדושין רב אחא בריה דרבא מסיים בה משמיה דרב יהודה בא”י [=ברוך אתה ה’ ] מקדש ישראל על ידי חופה וקדושין מאן דלא חתים מידי דהוה אברכת פירות ואברכת מצות ומאן דחתים מידי דהוה אקידושא
Ketubot 7b
We recite birkat chatanim in the house of chatanim [chuppa] and birkat eirusin in the house of eirusin. Birkat eirusin—what beracha does he recite? Rabin son of Rav Ada and Raba son of Rav Ada, both of them in the name of Rav Yehuda say: “Blessed are You Lord our God, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding arayot [illicit relations] and prohibited to us ha-arusot [betrothed women] and permitted to us ha-nessu’ot [married women] through chuppa and kiddushin.” Rav Acha son of Rava concludes [the beracha] in the name of Rav Yehuda: “Blessed are You Lord who sanctifies Israel through chuppa and kiddushin.” One who does not conclude [with a closing beracha formula] is because it is like berachot over fruits or berachot over mitzvot. One who does conclude [with a closing beracha formula] is because it is like kiddush.
Birkat Ha-mitzva
רמב”ם הלכות אישות ג:כג-כד
כל המקדש אשה בין על ידי עצמו בין על ידי שליח צריך לברך קודם הקידושין הוא או שלוחו ואחר כך מקדש כדרך שמברכין קודם כל המצות… ונהגו העם להסדיר ברכה זו על כוס של יין או של שכר…
Rambam, Laws of Marriage 3:23-24
Whoever betroths [mekadesh] a woman, whether himself or through an agent, he or his agent must recite a beracha prior to kiddushin, and afterwards betroth, in the manner that we recite a beracha before any mitzva…The people are accustomed to set up this beracha over a cup of wine or an alcoholic beverage…
כנסת הגדולה אה”ע הלכות אישות לד
מספקא לי שמא אין הספק אלא בקטן שקדש קטנה דשניהם לאו מצוה נינהו אבל בקטן שקדש את הגדולה שפיר דמי לברך משום חיוב דידה דאיהי נמי מוזהר[ת] שלא להבעל בלא קידושין…ואעפ”י [=ואף על פי] שנוסח ברכת ארוסין הוא מדבר באיש ואין כך כלום…
Kenesset Ha-gedola EH Laws of Marriage 34
I am in doubt whether perhaps the doubt [about permissibility of reciting birkat eirusin] is only regarding a male minor who betrothed a female minor, where both of them are not commanded, but with a male minor who betroths a female of age it would be proper to recite the beracha on account of her obligation, for she, too, is cautioned not to have relations without kiddushin…and even though the language of birkat eirusin speaks of the man this is irrelevant …
שו”ת נודע ביהודה מהדורא תניינא – אבן העזר סימן א
וידע מעלתו שגם בנישואי חרש אני מסופק בברכות כי ברכת אירוסין על החתן לברך…ועכ”פ [=ועל כל פנים] עיקר הברכה להוציא את החתן וכיון שהוא חרש שאינו שומע אינו יוצא בברכה זו ואיך יברך המסדר ואם היה מקום לומר שגם הכלה שייכא בברכת אירוסין ומוציא המסדר את הכלה, אמנם חרש שנשא חרשת ודאי לדעתי אין כאן ברכה…
Responsa Noda Bi-Yehuda Mahadura Tinyana – EH 1
His honor knows that regarding the marriage of a deaf [man], I am also in doubt regarding the berachot, since reciting birkat eirusin is incumbent on the chatan… And in any case, the essence of the beracha is to discharge the chatan’s obligation, and since he is a deaf person who cannot hear, he does not discharge his obligation with this beracha, and how can the mesader kiddushin recite the beracha? And whether there is room to say that birkat eirusin also applies to the kalla so that the mesader kiddushin discharges the kalla’s obligation. Indeed, for a deaf man who marries a deaf woman, in my opinion there is certainly no beracha here…
Birkat Ha-shevach
חדושי הרמב”ן כתובות ז:
כיון שהחופה והקידושין אינן נעשין בבת אחת וחצי המצוה נעשית בקידושין הוצרך לברך עליהם מקדש ישראל, שכל המצות מברך עליהם עובר לעשייתן ואילו היתה החופה נעשית עכשיו היו מברכין אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על הקידושין והחופה… ולא היו יכולים לומר אשר קדשנו על הקידושין שלא מצינו שיברך אדם על מצוה שאין עשייה זו גמר מלאכתה, לפיכך…כמי שמברך על קדושתן של ישראל ודמיא לקדושא כדאיתא בגמ’ (פסחים קי”ז ב’) שמברכין אשר בחר בישראל וקדשם בקדושת שבת ולא על איסור שבת אף זו על שבחר בישראל שקדשם באסור להן ובמותר להן.
Ramban Ketubot 7b
Since the chuppa and kiddushin aren’t done at the same time, and half the mitzva is done at kiddushin, it was necessary to recite over them the beracha of “who sanctifies Israel,” for one recites a beracha prior to performing any mitzva act. And if the chuppa were performed now, they would recite the beracha “who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding kiddushin and chuppa”…But they couldn’t say “who has sanctified us” over kiddushin [alone], for we have not found that a person recites a beracha over a mitzva whose [subsequent] act is not the completion of it. Therefore…it is like one who recites a beracha over the sanctity of Israel and it is similar to kiddush, as is [stated] in the Talmud (Pesachim 117b)—that we recite the beracha, that [God] has chosen Israel and sanctified them through the sanctity of Shabbat, and [we do] not [recite a beracha] over the prohibition of Shabbat. This [birkat eirusin] also is about how He has chosen Israel, for He has sanctified them with what is prohibited to them and what is permitted to them.
Sarah Yehudit Schneider, The Still Small Voice Teaching Haggadah (Jerusalem: A Still Small Voice, 2022), 24.
We make Kiddush at the start of all our holidays as well as Shabbat. Yet the term “kiddush” is similar to the word for betrothal, kiddushin. As such, it hints to our “engagement” to HaShem when we came of age as a people…forging a covenantal bond of mutual devotion. In reciting Kiddush we step out of the secular and into the holy. It is as if we draw a circle around ourself that defines a sacred space.…Just as with the intimacy of husband and wife, the security of marital commitment (kiddushin) enables the vulnerability essential to the deeper work.
רא”ש כתובות א:יב
….ונ”ל [=ונראה לי] כי ברכה זו אינה ברכה לעשיית המצוה כי פריה ורביה היינו קיום המצוה…וברכה זו נתקנה לתת שבח להקב”ה אשר קדשנו במצותיו והבדילנו מן העמים וצונו לקדש אשה המותרת לנו ולא אחת מן העריות…
Rosh Ketubot 1:12
It seems to me that this beracha is not a beracha over performing the mitzva, because the fulfillment of the mitzva is procreation…and this beracha was enacted to give praise to God, for He sanctified us with His commandments and separated us from the nations, and commanded us to betroth [le-kadesh] a woman who is permitted to us—and not one of the arayot [those prohibited]…
ריטב”א כתובות ז:
ברכה זו אינה אלא כעין קידוש על מה שקדשנו הקדוש ברוך הוא…ומפני שהברכה היא כעין קדושה…לפיכך נהגו כל ישראל לאומרה על הכוס ואף על פי שאין זה מעכב…מעתה ראויה היא לאומרה אחר הקידושין שכן כל ברכה של קדושה מברכין אותה אחר שחלה הקדושה, וכן הדין נותן, אלא שבקצת מקומות נהגו לברך אותה קודם הקידושין, ויש לתת טעם לדבריהם כי אף על פי שאינה ברכת המצות כיון שעומדת במקום ברכת המצות מקדימין אותה להקדים ברכה למעשה, ואין מבטלין מנהג בדבר זה…ומה שכתב [הרמב”ם] “צריך לברך הוא או שלוחו” אזדא לטעמיה דס”ל [=דסבירא ליה] שזו ברכת המצוות, וכבר דחינו דברים אלו בידים, ומנהג פשוט הוא בכל הארצות שמברך אותה השליח צבור והוא הנכון.
Ritva Ketubot 7b
This beracha is none other than a sort of kiddush, on God’s having sanctified us…Since the beracha is a sort of sanctification…Therefore, all Israel are accustomed to recite it over a cup—even though this is not absolutely required…Thus, it is fitting to say it after the kiddushin, for we recite every beracha regarding sanctity after the sanctity has taken effect. And so logic would indicate, but in some places they are accustomed to recite the beracha prior to the kiddushin. And one can explain their practice, for even though it is not a birkat ha-mitzva, since it stands in place of a birkat ha-mitzva we move it forward and recite the beracha prior to the act. And we do not nullify a custom in this matter…That which [Rambam] wrote that “he [the chatan] or his agent must recite the beracha” follows his rationale, for he thinks that this is a birkat ha-mitzva. And we already directly refuted these words, and the simple custom is that in all lands the shaliach tzibbur recites it, and that is correct.
תבואות שור, שמלה חדשה א:נט
ולא נתקנה מעיקרא דוקא על החתן…רק נתקנה על הנועדים לבית האירוסין כדמשמע בגמ[רא] פ”ק [=פרק קמא] כתובות דגרסינן התם מברכין…בבית האירוסין.
Tevu’ot Shor, Simla Chadasha 1:59
It was not originally enacted specifically for the chatan…rather it was enacted for those present at the house of eirusin as is implied by the Talmud in the first chapter of Ketubot, for the text there is “we recite the beracha [mevarechin]…in the house of eirusin.”
Recitation by Another
תשובות הגאונים שערי צדק חלק ג שער א סימן מה
וברכת אירוסין…ולא צריך ארוס עצמו לברך, מידי דהוה אשליח צבור הפורס על שמע והיורד לפני התיבה, בכל מקום קאמרינן שלוחו של אדם כמותו, וכמאן דקא מברך ארוס דאמי (כתובות ח’)
Geonic Responsa. Sha’arei Tzedek III 1:45
Birkat eirusin…the chatan himself does not need to recite the beracha, since it is like a shali’ach tzibbur who recites a shortened version of Shema and its berachot and leads tefillot. Everywhere we say that a person’s agent is like himself, and he is like the chatan reciting the beracha.
אורחות חיים הלכות קידושין אות כא
שלא נהגו לברך אותה החתן עצמו כדי שלא לבייש שאינו בקי בה ומברך אותה אחר בשבילו
Orchot Chayyim Kiddushin 21
For they did not customarily have the chatan recite the beracha himself, in order not to embarrass one who isn’t fluent in it, and someone else recites it for him.
מרדכי כתובות פרק בתולה נשאת רמז קלא
אם יש אחר לברך אל יברך החתן משום דמיחזי כיוהרא
Mordechai Ketubot 131
If there is another [person available] to recite the beracha, the chatan should not recite it because it appears like spiritual aggrandizement.
שו”ת אגרות משה אבן העזר חלק א סימן פז
ואפילו להרא”ש כתובות דף ז’ שאינה ברכה לעשיית המצוה אלא שהוא נתקן לתת שבח להקב”ה …שא”כ [=שאם כן] היה ראוי שיהיה עצם החיוב על כל אדם שישנם בשעת האירוסין, משמע נמי שסובר שעיקר התקנה הוא רק להמקדש אף שאינה ברכה לעשיית המצוה…ומה שמברך אחר הוא כששומעין החתן והכלה שיוצאין ידי הברכה.
Responsa Iggerot Moshe, EH 1:87
Even according to Rosh Ketubot 7, that this is not a beracha over performing a mitzva but was enacted to give praise to God…for if so, it would be fitting that the obligation itself fall on every person who is there at the time of eirusin, it is also implied that he thinks that the fundamental enactment is only for the one performing kiddushin [the chatan], even though it isn’t a beracha over performing a mitzva….And that another recites the beracha is when the chatan and kalla hear it, that they discharge the obligation in the beracha.
שו”ת הר צבי אורח חיים א סימן מד
דלהרמב”ם אם אחר מברך הוי ברכה לבטלה, ומפני שלא לבייש נוהגין שאחר מברך, וכי מפני שלא לבייש התירו ברכה לבטלה
Responsa Har Tzevi OC I:44
For according to Rambam, if another [person] recites the beracha it is a beracha in vain. And in order not to embarrass the chatan the custom is for another to recite the beracha. And in order to avoid embarrassment, would they permit a beracha in vain?
שו”ת יביע אומר חלק ז – אבן העזר סימן יז
…אם המברך מכוין להוציא את החתן ידי חובת הברכה, וגם החתן מתכוין לצאת בברכתו, שפיר דמי. וכמ”ש [=וכמו שכתוב] בתשו[בות] הגאונים שערי צדק (שער א’ סי’ מה) שאין צריך שהחתן עצמו יברך, מידי דהוה אשליח צבור….ע”ש [=עיין שם]. וכן המנהג פשוט אצלינו שהרב מרא דאתרא מברך ברכת אירוסין, ואין החתן מברך בעצמו כדי שלא לבייש למי שאינו יודע לברך.
Responsa Yabia Omer VII EH 17
If the one reciting the beracha intends to discharge the chatan’s obligation in the beracha, and the chatan also intends to discharge his obligation through his beracha, it is fine. As it is written in the responsa of the Ge’onim Sha’arei Tzedek (1:45) that it is not necessary for the chatan himself to recite the beracha, similar to the case of the shali’ach tzibbur…see there. And thus is the widespread custom among us, that the rabbi of the community recites birkat eirusin, and the chatan does not recite it himself…
In Practice
שולחן ערוך אה”ע לד: א
כל המקדש אשה, בין ע”י [=על ידי] עצמו בין ע”י [=על ידי] שליח, מברך, [רמ”א] (הוא או השליח), (טור) וי”א [=ויש אומרים] דאחר מברך, (סמ”ג והגהות מיימוני) וכן נוהגין…[שולחן ערוך]…ואחר שיגמור הברכה, יקדש.
Shulchan Aruch EH 34:1
Whoever is mekadesh a woman, whether himself or through an agent, recites a beracha, Rema: (him or the agent). And there are those who say that another recites the beracha, and this is the custom…[Shulchan Aruch:] and after he finishes the beracha, he should perform kiddushin.
ערוך השולחן אה”ע לד: ט
ונותנים להחתן והכלה לשתות מעט והמברך יוצא בזה ואף על גב דברכת הנהנין המברך צריך שיטעום מ”מ [=מכל מקום] כיון שנתקנה על הכוס ה”ל [=הווה ליה] כקידושא ואבדלתא דמוציא אחרים בברכת היין…
Aruch Ha-shulchan EH 34:9
We give [the wine] to the chatan and kalla to drink a little, and the one who recites the beracha [over wine and birkat eirusin] discharges [his obligation to drink after reciting the beracha over wine] through this [their drinking]. Even though with a[n ordinary] birkat ha-nehenin [a beracha upon receiving enjoyment], the one who recites a beracha needs to partake, in any case, since it [birkat eirusin] was enacted over a cup, it is like kiddush and havdala, that he [the one reciting it] discharges others in the [accompanying] beracha over wine….
שולחן ערוך אה”ע לד: ד
ברכת ארוסין צריכים עשרה, לכתחלה.
Shulchan Aruch EH 34:4
Birkat eirusin needs [a quorum of] ten, le-chat’chila [if possible].
Q&A
Sometimes a quick exchange communicates more effectively, and more personally, than an article. Sometimes, just seeing that others share our questions can make us feel more connected.
Our posted questions and answers are an opportunity to learn from each other. To ask a question of your own, click here!
Hashkafic Q&A
Why is birkat eirusin written from a male perspective?
With the exception of the convention of referring to God in the masculine singular, berachot are generally gender neutral. (We discuss birkot ha-shachar here, and she-lo asani isha here).
Birkat eirusin opens neutrally, since all Jews are subject to the prohibition of illicit relations. It also ends neutrally, since the entire Jewish people is sanctified by adherence to the institutions of marriage and betrothal. Its middle section emphasizes an important halachic point, that even after betrothal, a couple are permitted to each other only after nissuin. However, this point is very clearly phrased from a man’s perspective, blessing God for prohibiting betrothed women and permitting married women to “us.” Women are clearly not the “us” that the beracha has in mind.
We can make some sense of this based on the different approaches we’ve seen to the beracha.
According to the view that the beracha is a birkat ha-mitzva for the chatan, recited over his mitzva of kiddushin or peru u-rvu, it is naturally written from the perspective of the chatan and other chatanim.
If it is a birkat ha-shevach, the language might reflect the convention for the chatan to recite it, which shifted to being a role of the mesader kiddushin (another male with the potential to marry). Still, despite Kenesset Ha-gedola’s insistence that the masculine language does not matter, the middle section of this beracha is not inclusive of the kalla’s perspective. This is the case even though kiddushin is a momentous change of status for the kalla.
Increasingly, kallot feel the absence of a birkat ha-shevach or prayer clearly designed for the kalla on the occasion of kiddushin itself. We’ll discuss some possible ways to address this feeling in our piece on the wedding ceremony.
Reader Q&A
Podcast
Click here to sponsor this episode!