What exactly is khupa (aka chupah)? Kiddushin 5

We know that there are two stages to marriage. The first stage is Kiddushin. We know already that Kiddushin can be effected by money, a document, or sexual intercourse. The second stage of marriage is Nesuin and it can be effected by khupah (חוּפָּה). Interestingly enough, the Gemara never defines what khupah is.

Rav Huna argues that khupah is a fourth way Kiddushin may be effected. “Rav Huna says: The ceremony of the wedding canopy effects acquisition of the woman, as is derived through an a fortiori inference…If money, which does not complete the acquisition of a woman, as a young woman remains under her father’s authority with regard to certain issues, nevertheless effects acquisition of her for the stage of betrothal, is it not logical that a wedding canopy, which completes the marriage, since it entirely removes a young woman from her father’s authority, can effect acquisition for betrothal on its own? ” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara goes on to show the weakness of Rav Huna’s position. The sugiyah ends with Rava’s attack on Rav Huna’s position and Abaye’s defense of it.

“Rava said: There are two refutations of this matter, i.e., it is possible to refute Rav Huna’s opinion in two ways. One opinion is that we learned in the mishna that a woman can be acquired through three modes of acquisition, and we did not learn that there are four modes. This indicates that there are no other ways to acquire a woman apart from the three listed in the mishna.

“And furthermore, Rava disagrees with the main point of the proof, which was based on the fact that a wedding canopy completes a marriage: Doesn’t entering a wedding canopy complete a marriage only by means of an act of betrothal, which precedes the wedding canopy? And can one derive that entering a wedding canopy effects acquisition without betrothal from the case of entering a wedding canopy that effects acquisition by means of betrothal? Consequently, entering a wedding canopy alone cannot effect a betrothal.

“Abaye said to Rava in response to his two claims: With regard to that which you said, that we learned in the mishna three modes and we did not learn that there are four modes, this is no proof, as the tanna teaches only a matter that is explicitly written in the Torah, and does not teach a matter that is not explicitly written in the Torah, such as a wedding canopy.

"And with regard to that which you said: Doesn’t entering a wedding canopy complete a marriage only by means of an act of betrothal, this is also what Rav Huna is saying, i.e., Rav Huna incorporates this claim into his reasoning: If money, which does not complete a marriage after money, i.e., after a woman has been betrothed through money an additional monetary gift cannot render her a fully married woman, effects acquisition of the woman in the form of betrothal, is it not logical that entering a wedding canopy, which is more powerful than money in that it completes a marriage after money, should effect acquisition and be used to perform betrothal by itself?”

The Rishonim provides three different definitions of khupah. The first is the one were most familiar with, a bridal canopy that the groom and bride stand underneath. A second possible definition is when the bride and groom are secluded together, but not having sexual intercourse. A third possible definition offered is the veiling ceremony which we call bedekin.

According to halakha khupah is not a method to enter into Kedushin rejecting Rav Huna’s position; nevertheless, Rebbeinu Hananiel argues that there’s a doubt whether khupah effects Kiddushin or not since Rav Huna’s position is never explicitly rejected in the Gemara.