Eirusin in Today’s Times
At present, eirusin and nisuin immediately follow each other during the wedding ceremony. This is unlike former times when eirusin would take place months, and sometimes as long as a year, prior to nisuin.
The long delay between these two stages of matrimony in earlier times resulted from the need to properly prepare for the primary and central event in the lives of husband and wife: their marriage to each other.
During the period of eirusin there exists no physical connection between husband and wife, for they have yet to live under the same roof. It is therefore much easier to reveal and emphasize the spiritual and soul connection between the couple, that they truly become one. (In the words of the Zohar:1 “When the two halves unite, they become one entity, and they are then called ‘one.’”)
Were the physical bond and relationship between husband and wife to exist from the very outset, this connection would conceal their spiritual soul connection, for the physical dimension of the relationship (and its concurrent bodily desires) would dim and obscure their soul connection.
In other words, the very fact that there is as of yet no physical relationship aids in the revelation of their spiritual and soul relationship, for by nature, the physical world masks one’s spiritual perception and awareness. Only after being separated from the world’s physicality and corporeality is it possible for the Divine soul powers to be revealed.
This is why eirusin comes first. Only afterwards, after they have sensed and contemplated their spiritual connection (in the time following the eirusin) does nisuin take place, at which time the physical aspect of their relationship transpires as well.
This being so, we must understand why this has changed during present times:
Why do eirusin and nisuin currently take place at the same time? Seemingly, the physical connection between bride and groom at the time of nisuin will conceal their spiritual connection and will not provide it with an opportunity to be revealed.
Why the Duration of Eirusin Was Changed
We may say that the explanation is the following:2
With each passing generation, there is a descent in the degree of holiness that is manifest within the world as a whole and within individuals in particular. This is known as yeridas hadoros, “the descent of the generations.” There is absolutely no comparison between the degree of closeness to G‑d that existed in generations past to the degree of closeness to G‑d that presently exists. In the words of our Sages:3 “If the first generations were like angels, then we are mere mortals; if they were as mortals, then we are like donkeys.”
In present generations it is most difficult to separate and disconnect from the world’s corporeal sentiments and desires, and feel the Divine spiritual powers of our souls. Therefore there is no earlier period of eirusin and separation; rather, eirusin and nisuin follow one right after the other.
This means that during present times, even if the original waiting period between eirusin and nisuin were to be observed and the couple would not be physically together for a period of time, this would not manage to bring about a feeling of separation from corporeality and physicality and a feeling of closeness to the Divine soul. It is therefore completely unnecessary for there to be an interim period between eirusin and nisuin. This waiting period was therefore nullified and nisuin is implemented immediately after eirusin.
Since it is, nevertheless, of great import for the couple to feel their spiritual and soul connection, in our day, the newly married couple must make a special effort soon after their marriage to reveal their spiritual soul connection.
We must, however, understand how this can be accomplished. What special energy do we now possess that enables us to reveal this soul connection even after the physical and corporeal aspect of marriage has taken place?
This will be understood by prefacing with the simple meaning of eirusin:
In its most simple sense, eirusin denotes the woman’s separation from all other men. This is why eirusin would ordinarily precede nisuin, for in order to forge a strong and mighty bond between husband and wife, there first has to be an absolute degree of separation and dissociation of the betrothed from all other men. Only then can a true degree of intimacy exist between husband and wife.
This is a precise parallel to the inner and deeper meaning of eirusin: separating oneself from the physical and attaching oneself to the spiritual.
In order for husband and wife to be able to form a spiritual and soul bond between themselves, they must first divest and separate themselves from their physical feelings of closeness. Only then can they reveal their spiritual and soul bond and connection. This matter is patently obvious: A person cannot possibly draw close to G‑d while still immersed in physical pleasures and desires.
At present, however, since it is most difficult [in the latter generations] to first accomplish a feeling of “separation” — both in the simple sense of feeling apart from all others, and surely “separation” from physical matters — to achieve a spiritual bond with G‑d, the order in which this “separation” is accomplished has undergone a change:
[Instead of a prolonged period of separation in which the future husband and wife are immersed in spiritual contemplation,] there is first the intimacy of marriage, both the physical intimacy between husband and wife as well as the spiritual intimacy which takes place with the recognition of their soul connection. Only later does this result in the spiritual level of the “separation” of eirusin.
Each and every Jew is presently endowed with profound spiritual powers that enable him or her to attain the lofty spiritual state of nisuin even when it lacked the prior long-term spiritual preparatory state of eirusin. In other words, it is possible for a Jew to draw close to G‑d (the inner aspect of nisuin) even when he is not completely sundered from material matters. Similarly, there can be a complete union with one’s husband (the simple aspect of nisuin) although the emotional and psychological severance from all others brought about by a prolonged period of eirusin has not occurred.
In light of the “descent of the generations” that now prevails, the order is reversed: Through one’s general connection and attachment to G‑d, the individual receives the spiritual powers necessary to detach himself from physical and corporeal matters. The same is true regarding the relationship between husband and wife as well as the simple circumstances of eirusin and nisuin: In this situation, the intimacy of husband and wife itself brings about detachment and separation from all others.
This results in a rearranged state of affairs:
Under ordinary circumstances, it is impossible for the wife to truly bond with her husband without the precedent of eirusin — absolute detachment and separation from all other men. Presently, however, the very opposite is true: The wife’s friendship with, and love of, her husband — the aspect of nisuin — will be the thing that leads to her absolute detachment from all others — the aspect of eirusin.
In other words, as soon as bride and groom are married, the positive connection and unification of nisuin ensues; there is no prior endeavor of separating from everyone else that would serve as a precursor to nisuin. This total sense of separation is only realized at a later stage, after the bond of nisuin has taken place. For, as stated above, the intimacy of nisuin empowers them to completely detach themselves from all others, reflecting the aspect of eirusin.
Superiority of the Negative Over the Positive
On a more profound level, we may say the following:
The exclusive bond of intimacy between husband and wife is, after all, always subject to improvement.
Even when eirusintakes place long before nisuin, i.e., the person labored mightily to negate any involvement with other men as a preparation for the state of nisuin, one can still increase one’s level of separation from all others following marriage. One can even say that the act of separating oneself in eirusin can be accomplished anew — this time on a much loftier level — after nisuin.4
The explanation of this concept is as follows:
There are two ways in which two things may be connected:
a) A practical connection, in which the two matters are indeed connected at present, but nothing says that they must remain so. Theoretically, each could exist quite well on its own, their only connection being that they are now connected.
b) A loftier manner of connection, wherein the two matters are so mightily connected that it is impossible to even conceivetheoretically that one could exist without the other.
An example of this are the two different effects a mitzvah can have on the entity used to perform that mitzvah.
a) The entity now becomes a “mitzvah object”: G‑d’s Divine will was fulfilled by its being used for a mitzvah. Theoretically, however, it was also possible that this object would not be used for a mitzvah; it just so happens that in actuality this was the object one chose to be used for the performance of the mitzvah.
b) The entity is so transformed by its utilization in the performance of the mitzvah that it is virtually impossible for it to revert to its previous state, as will be explained.
These two levels are termed a “positive connection” and a “negative connection”:
A positive connection. The object and its connection to Divinity through its use in performing a mitzvah is merely by “chance.” This is termed merely a “positive connection,” for the connection derives only from the fact that the object became connected to G‑d through its use in a mitzvah. Theoretically, however, a situation could have easily existed where the object was not so connected.
An example is an animal’s hide used in the making of a Sefer Torah. This particular animal hide could of course have not been chosen, and there would then have been no connection between that hide and G‑dliness. Since it was so chosen, it underwent a “positive connection,” making the hide part of a Sefer Torah and therefore sacred.
A negative connection. The connection between the entity and the Divine is so complete and absolute that there is no possibility for this connection not to exist. It is therefore termed a “negative connection,” i.e., this entity could never have been rejected, not even theoretically, from having had this connection. This is because the entity intrinsically demands that it be transformed into something sacred and holy. [For example, once the two halves of the soul come together through marriage and thus reveal their intrinsic unity, it would be impossible to revert to the illusion of separateness.]
The following is an example as applied to the mitzvah of emunah, belief in G‑d:5
Two Levels of Emunah: Positive and Negative
The first stage of emunah is when a person believes that G‑d is the actual Creator of the world.
The second and loftier stage of emunah is not only that G‑d is the Creator of the world, but that it is simply impossible that it be otherwise. If G‑d had not created the world, creation would simply be inconceivable. The world would then be an absolute impossibility. For inasmuch as no force exists other than G‑d’s, creation would be utterly impossible.
This is seen in the Rambam’s wording:6 “The foundation of all foundations and the pillar of all wisdom is to know that there is a Primary Existence Who brings into being all existence,” i.e., that G‑d is responsible for all of creation. The Rambam then goes on to say: “Should it arise in one’s mind that He does not exist, then nothing else could possibly exist.”
Why does the Rambam find it necessary to negate the position that “He does not exist”? Will those people who deny G‑d’s existence study the Rambam and with these words become convinced that G‑d does indeed exist?
“Should It Arise in One’s Mind”
We must also understand: By stating “Should it arise in one’s mind that He does not exist,” the Rambam seems to lend credence to those who say “He does not exist.” Is it then necessary for the Rambam to address himself to such individuals and repudiate such outlandish thoughts?
There is no doubt that the Rambam’s words are directed to the believer, and that the Rambam desires to teach us that belief in G‑d consists of two stages:
a) G‑d is the actual Creator of the world and “brings into being all existence,” which is the “positive connection”; and b) If G‑d had not created the world, then “nothing else could possibly exist,” inasmuch as there is no force and energy other than Him; this being the “negative connection.”
[The Rambam’s intent in stating “Should it arise in one’s mind that He does not exist” is not, Heaven forbid, that one can possibly deny G‑d’s existence. Rather, G‑d’s manner of existence is unlike our physical and tangible existence that can be verified with one’s sense of touch; G‑d’s existence is a wholly spiritual form of existence, infinitely beyond that which we are accustomed to consider as “existing.”]
Perfect Unity Between Husband and Wife
This twofold connection, “positive” and “negative,” also exists in marriage, regarding both the Jewish people’s marriage to G‑d and the marriage of husband and wife:
Regarding the Jewish people’s marriage to G‑d:
A positive connection: The Jews’ bond and unity with G‑d only exists practically—they are in fact united with Him. Theoretically, however, the possibility exists for them not to be so united, G‑d forbid.
A negative connection: The Jews’ bond and marriage with G‑d is intrinsic to, and part and parcel of, their very existence. It is an utter impossibility for it not to be so, for Jews are G‑d’s people and to be separate and disconnected from Him is utterly inconceivable.
Regarding the marriage of husband and wife:
A positive connection: The connection and bond between husband and wife results from their physical intimacy, wherein husband and wife live their lives together in love, peace and harmony. It is possible, however, for this blissful state of affairs to cease, resulting in their divorce.
A negative connection: The connection between husband and wife results from their spiritual intimacy; the fact that they are truly one soul. Since this aspect of their bond is intrinsic to their very existence, nothing can ever sunder this aspect of their marriage and relationship.
How Does the Acquisition of Kiddushin Take Place?
The point mentioned earlier, that the effect of eirusin can come about even after nisuin, is alluded to in the revealed portion of Torah as well:7
Rabbi Yosef Rosen, known as the Rogatchover Gaon, poses the following question regarding the essential character of the acquisition of kiddushin that is accomplished through giving money or an object of value to the bride:8
Do we say that the woman is first acquired by her husband, and the husband’s acquisition becomes the “cause,” which results in the “effect” of her acquiring the ring? Or do we say the opposite: The woman first acquires the ring (the “cause”), producing the “effect” of her husband acquiring her.
This means the following. At the time of kiddushin, two distinct things are occurring: a) the husband acquires his wife; and b) the woman acquires the object (e.g., the ring). The question is, which event precedes the other and which event causes the other?
[To explain this more clearly:
“Kiddushin by means of ‘money,’” kiddushei kessef, means that the woman receives an object of value, such as a ring. However, with regard to kiddushei kessef, it is possible that although the woman has already acquired the ring, it only becomes hers after her husband acquires her. Thus, her acquisition must be preceded by her husband’s acquisition. Kiddushin thus consists of three stages: a) The ring is placed on her finger; b) her husband acquires her; c) she then acquires and owns the ring.
“Kiddushin by means of ‘money,’” can also be considered to occur in another manner: The woman acquires the ring as soon as it is placed on her finger, and her husband acquires her immediately afterwards.]
The above question is not merely theoretical; it possesses practical implications. Among them:
a) One of the ways a person acquires an object is by its entering that person’s domain — either his domicile or the person’s adjacent four cubits (daled amos)— [as our Sages say]: “A person’s adjacent four cubits acquires the object for him in all locations”9 (i.e., even in a reshus harabim).However, if the object is farther than four cubits from him, he is unable to acquire it.
This is not so, however, with the money or object with which one achieves kiddushin. There are those Rishonim (early commentators) who maintain that even if the object is a distance of one hundred cubits from the woman, she still obtains the object.10 But how is this possible?
The reason the woman can obtain the object from even such a great distance serves as proof that her husband first acquires her through kiddushin. Only afterwards and because of this does she acquire the object. Since her acquisition of the object is a result of her husband’s prior acquisition of her through kiddushin, the ring becomes hers even if it is at a distance of one hundred cubits from her.
b) There is a principle that applies almost uniformly throughout the Torah that one may retract his words if he is still in the midst of his declaration (toch kedei dibbur kedibbur dami).11
Kiddushin is an exception to this general rule. The speaker cannot nullify his words of kiddushin, “You are consecrated...,” even while in the midst of his declaration. The reason is that since kiddushin is also accomplished through the kiddushinbeing performed in the presence of the witnesses, the speaker cannot nullify his original words. For a person can only nullify (in the midst of his declaration) an act that he accomplishes entirely by himself. He cannot, however, nullify acquisitions that are accomplished together with the assistance of others.
According to the Rashbam,12 however, if the person nullifies the acquisition by immediately requesting that the money or the ring be returned to him, the kiddushin is nullified.
What is the difference between the man retracting his words of kiddushin (which he is not allowed to do)or retracting that which he has given to her (which he is allowed to do)? Why is the kiddushin still valid in the first instance and not in the latter?
This proves that the Rashbam maintains that the main means of acquisition is the money, i.e., the woman first acquires the ring and then she is acquired by her husband. For if it were the other way around — that the woman acquires the ring only after her husband acquires her through the kiddushin — how could the husband possibly take back the ring? Just as he cannot nullify the kiddushin itself (since it also comes about through the witnesses), so, too, can he not nullify that which transpired as a result of this kiddushin — the ring that was acquired by his wife.
If, however, the act of kiddushinis accomplished by having previously given her an object of monetary value, it is understandable that he may withdraw from this transaction. For just as a person can withdraw from any monetary action while still in midst of his declaration — resulting as it does from his action (and not because of witnesses) — so, too, can he retract from the monetary transaction of giving the ring to the woman. For the role of the witnesses only applies to the actual kiddushin, while the monetary acquisition is wholly achieved by the man. He is therefore able, according to the Rashbam, to nullify the kiddushin.
Kessef, Hebrew for Money,
Also Translates as Yearning and Longing
The two sides of this question are connected to our discussion of whether eirusin precedes or follows nisuin:
Kessef, Hebrew for money, is the aspect of nisuin, marriage. For just as money is physical, so does there exist a physical connection between husband and wife. Moreover, kessef also translates as longing, yearning and desire, alluding to the love and yearning that husband and wife have for each other.
Kiddushin, on the other hand, means “separate and apart,” similar to the situation that exists between husband and wife during the period of eirusin when there is no physical intimacy between them. On the contrary, during eirusin they are completely separate and apart from each other, forbidden as they are to be together.
The inner dimension of the debate over whether kessef precedes kiddushin, or kiddushin precedes kessef, hinges on whether the spiritual state of eirusin must precede nisuin, or whether it is possible for the spiritual state of eirusin to also follow nisuin.
The opinion that maintains that kessef precedes kiddushin contendsthat the foundation of marriage is the state of nisuin, i.e., intimacy between husband and wife (kessef meaning attachment and longing). Consequently, this will result in the aspect of “kiddushin” and eirusin — their being separate and apart from everyone else.
Those who maintain that kiddushin precedes kessef hold that the basis of marriage is to be separate and apart from everyone else first — the aspect of eirusin. This will result in the love, intimacy and union (kessef) between husband and wife — the aspect of nisuin.
Tena’im — “Conditions” During Present Times
Presently, the prevailing Jewish custom is that after the couple has decided to get married, the two sides get together to formalize the tena’im (“conditions” and “assurances”) regarding financial matters, establishment of the wedding date, the dowry, and the like.
[Regarding the particular details, see Volume II, the section entitled “Chassidic Customs.”]
Since the tena’im and eirusin have a completely different status according to Jewish law, it is most important that the term eirusin, or betrothal, not be verbalized or written by anyone in describing the engaged couple.
Additionally, since eirusin serves as a time of preparation for nisuin (as explained earlier at length), and at present, eirusin and nisuin immediately follow each other, the spiritual service of separation and apartness that used to accompany eirusin is now accomplished after nisuin.
Therefore, presently, the period following the engagement has some semblance to the time of eirusin. It is therefore very important to utilize this time in making spiritual preparations for the wedding so that the marriage will be as ideal as possible.
We thus understand that the time preceding a wedding is as precious as time can be, since the preparations made then affect one’s entire life.
For the spiritual preparations necessary for marriage, one’s time is to be used wisely and well so that when the couple are married, they genuinely feel the true and inner dimension of marriage: the unification of the two halves of their one soul.
They then merit to build an eternal edifice, a faithful house in Israel, built on the foundation of Torah and mitzvos.13