וַיְדַבֵּ֨ר אֶל־עֶפְר֜וֹן בְּאָזְנֵ֤י עַם־הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר אַ֛ךְ אִם־אַתָּ֥ה ל֖וּ שְׁמָעֵ֑נִי נָתַ֜תִּי כֶּ֤סֶף הַשָּׂדֶה֙ קַ֣ח מִמֶּ֔נִּי וְאֶקְבְּרָ֥ה אֶת־מֵתִ֖י שָֽׁמָּה׃
Lalu ia berbicara kepada Efron sehingga didengar oleh penduduk negeri itu, katanya: “Tetapi, sekiranya engkau sudi mendengarkan aku! Aku memberikan harga ladang itu; terimalah dariku, supaya aku dapat menguburkan jenazahku di sana.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
כי יקח איש אשה ובעלה, When a man takes (marries) a woman and lives with her;” The Torah speaks of two methods of acquiring the woman; 1) money or equivalent. 2) marital intercourse. Whenever the Torah speaks of כי יקח, the meaning is not that someone simply “takes,” but that he acquires something with money (or equivalent). Examples of the relationship between קיחה and money are already found when Avraham wanted to purchase the cave of Machpelah (Genesis 23,13) נתתי כסף השדה קח ממני, “I have deposited the money for the field, take it from me.” There is yet a third way in which one can acquire a woman, i.e. by means of a document. The Torah alludes to this in the very next verse when a divorce is discussed. Just as a document is required to dissolve the husband-wife relationship, otherwise the woman cannot be remarried, so a marriage may be concluded by means of such a document. The words ויצאה והיתה, “she leaves and she remarries” next to one another are understood as comparing the process of leaving a marriage to that of entering a marriage (compare Kidushin 5). We therefore have three ways in which a woman can be acquired as pointed out at the beginning of Tractate Kidushin.
The exegetical tool known as גזרה שוה, “identical expressions comparing different subject matter” is so strong that it enables the sages to treat as a capital crime violation of a law derived at only by a comparison of such wording. If a girl who has not been betrothed engages in sexual relations she is not sentenced to death by the court. If she had been betrothed only by receiving the equivalent of some money, she is considered as legally married for the purpose of being sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, even though she never lived with her betrothed. This shows that the גזרה שוה is an extremely powerful exegetical tool (compare Maimonides Hilchot Ishut 1,2 and the Talmud Kritut 5,1.) [In the Talmud there it is pointed out that although the subject of פגול, faulty intentions concerning the consumption of sacrifices, is a major part of the Torah, the penalty is arrived at only by means of a גזרה שוה. Ed.] All these ways of acquiring a woman have to be witnessed by two valid witnesses in order to be legal, although if the woman wants out of the marriage she may require a bill of divorce because her status had been in doubt (Maimonides Hilchot Ishut 4,6). [Witnesses to consummation of a marriage mean witnesses who testify that both parties had secreted themselves long enough for such consummation to be capable of having taken place. Ed.]
The exegetical tool known as גזרה שוה, “identical expressions comparing different subject matter” is so strong that it enables the sages to treat as a capital crime violation of a law derived at only by a comparison of such wording. If a girl who has not been betrothed engages in sexual relations she is not sentenced to death by the court. If she had been betrothed only by receiving the equivalent of some money, she is considered as legally married for the purpose of being sentenced to death by stoning for adultery, even though she never lived with her betrothed. This shows that the גזרה שוה is an extremely powerful exegetical tool (compare Maimonides Hilchot Ishut 1,2 and the Talmud Kritut 5,1.) [In the Talmud there it is pointed out that although the subject of פגול, faulty intentions concerning the consumption of sacrifices, is a major part of the Torah, the penalty is arrived at only by means of a גזרה שוה. Ed.] All these ways of acquiring a woman have to be witnessed by two valid witnesses in order to be legal, although if the woman wants out of the marriage she may require a bill of divorce because her status had been in doubt (Maimonides Hilchot Ishut 4,6). [Witnesses to consummation of a marriage mean witnesses who testify that both parties had secreted themselves long enough for such consummation to be capable of having taken place. Ed.]
Bartenura
נקנית בכסף – We learn/derive [through an analogy – Gezarah Shavah – of the words] קיחה קיחה from the field of Ephron. It is written here (Deuteronomy 24:1): “A man takes a wife [and possesses her],” and it is written there (Genesis 23:13): “Let me pay the price of the land; accept it from me, [that I may bury my dead there].”
Rav Hirsch
כי יקח וגו׳. Wir haben schon zu Kap. 22, 13 angemerkt, wie die jüdische Ehe durch zwei getrennte Handlungen vollzogen wird, durch אירוסין) קידושין) und נשואין, wovon die erste das Verhältnis der persönlichen Angehörigkeit, die zweite die Aufnahme der Frau in das Haus des Mannes mit allen Konsequenzen begründet. Dieser erste Akt, קידושין, ist hier durch כי יקח bezeichnet, es ist die persönliche Aneignung der Frau durch den Mann. Wie der Ausdruck לקח enthält und durch קיחה קיחה ,ג׳׳ש von שדה עפרון (Bereschit 23, 13. – siehe daselbst 23, 19 Ende; –) Kiduschin 2a näher erläutert wird, geschieht diese Aneignung in der Form eines Erwerbaktes. Der Mann gibt der Frau vor Zeugen einen Perutawert mit den Worten הרי את מקודשת לי usw. und indem die Frau dieses Wertobjekt in diesem Sinne vor Zeugen hinnimmt, gibt sie sich dem Manne hin, wird sie ihm מקודשת, geheiligt und wie הקדש für jeden andern unnahbar, דאסר לה אכל עלמא כהקדש (Kiduschin 2b). Diese Eheschließungsform heißt קידושי כסף. An dem ׳ויצאה וגו׳ והיתה וגו des Vers 2 lehrt die Halacha noch eine zweite Form: קידושי שטר, durch Übergabe und Entgegennahme einer die קידושיןFormel enthaltenden und zu diesem Zweck speziell verfassten Schrift. Es wird nämlich (V. 2) die Aneignung an einen anderen Mann, והיתה לאיש אחר, mit dem Scheiden aus dem Hause des ersten, ויצאה מביתו zusammengestellt und damit auch für die קידושיןAneignung der schriftlichen Form eine Gültigkeit erteilt, wie dies für die Scheidung die einzige gesetzliche Weise ist. מקיש הויה ליציאה מה יציאה בשטר אף הזיה בשטר (Kiduschin 5a und 9b).
Bartenura
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumRabbeinu Bahya
Hanya tersedia untuk anggota PremiumRashi
לו ישטמנו means PERHAPS HE WILL HATE US. The word has many different meanings. There are examples of לו used to denote a petition, having the meaning of “Oh that!” as for instance: (Genesis 30:34) “Would (לו) it might be according to thy word”; (Genesis 23:13) “Oh that thou wouldst (לו) only hear me”; (Joshua 7:7) “Would that (לו) we had been content”; (Numbers 14:2) “Would that (לו) we had died”. ,There are examples of לו used in the sense of “if” and “אולי” as, (Deuteronomy 32:29) “If (לו) they were wise [they would understand this]”; (Isaiah 48:18) “If (לוא) thou wouldst hearken to my commandments, [then would thy peace be as a river]”; (2 Samuel 18:12) “If (לו) I would receive [a thousand pieces of silver] in my hands, [yet would I not put forth my hand etc.]”. There is an example of לו used in the sense of “perhaps”, — in our verse — “Perhaps he will hate us”, but there is no other example of its usage in this sense in Scripture. Here it corresponds in sense with the word אולי, “perhaps”, as for example in (Genesis 24:5) “אולי the woman will not be willing to follow me” which means “perhaps she will not etc.” As a matter of fact אולי has all the meanings of לו, for there are examples of אולי denoting a petition as for instance (2 Samuel 16:12) “Perhaps (אולי) the Lord will look upon mine eye”, (where the context shows that this involves a kind of petition that God should do this); (Joshua 14:12) “Perhaps (אולי) the Lord will be with me [and I shall drive them out]”, (involving also a petition that God should do this), where אולי has a similar meaning to לו in (Genesis 30:34) “Would (לו) it might be according to thy word”. Then again the word אולי has the meaning of “if”; for example, (Genesis 18:24) “Perhaps (אולי) there are fifty righteous [wilt Thou destroy etc.]” (which is equivalent to “if there are fifty… wilt thou destroy?”.)