Kiddushei Kesef: Kinyan or Marriage Ritual?

The shiur opens by examining a fundamental tension in the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s writings. In Sefer HaMitzvos, the Rambam cites the pasuk "yotzei chinam ein kesef" (Shemos 21:11) to derive kiddushei kesef, suggesting a kinyan framework—if the maidservant leaves without payment, this implies that elsewhere (by a father's daughter) payment is required. In Yad Hachazaka, however, the Rambam brings "kichah" from the transaction between Avrohom and Efron (Bereishis 23), which emphasizes kinyan language. The Raavad challenges the Rambam, arguing that kiddushin is learned directly from "ha'isha tikanes hakodesh bekaspa" and calling the Rambam's formulation a "pirush meshubash" (distorted interpretation). The Kesef Mishna defends the Rambam by explaining that "divrei sofrim" doesn't mean rabbinic but rather refers to anything derived through the thirteen hermeneutical principles—it remains Torah (תורה) law. The shiur then turns to the sugya on Kiddushin 4b, which contrasts kesef (which cannot effect divorce) with shtar (which can). Rashi (רש"י) in multiple places (Eruvin, Sukkah, Gittin) learns that if kesef could effect divorce, the husband would give the wife money and declare "harei at megureshes li"—a ritual act, not a kinyan transaction. This is counterintuitive: normally, to undo a kinyan, the acquired party returns money. Rashi's reading implies that kiddushin itself is not a kinyan but a religious ceremony—a ritual in which the direction of the money transfer is secondary to the symbolic act.