No community start suggestion yet.
Is kiddushei kesef (betrothal with money) a kinyan (legal acquisition) or a religious marriage ritual? The shiur analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s divergent formulations in Yad Hachazaka and Sefer HaMitzvos, exploring whether giving money transfers ownership or creates marital intimacy, and examines Rashi (רש"י)'s position that kiddushin is purely ritual—not kinyan—which explains why money cannot effect divorce.
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.
Looking for the full summary?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Kiddushin 4b
Looking for the full transcript?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Dedicate a Shiur in Gemara
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
