A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can chuppah alone create erusin? The Gemara (גמרא)'s kal v'chomer from kesef to chuppah faces a fundamental challenge: all kinyanei kiddushin work ba'al korach, but chuppah doesn't. Rashi (רש"י)'s approach distinguishes between chuppah of a ketana (which is a kinyan ba'al korach) and chuppah of a gedola (which establishes ishus/relationship but not ba'al korach).
This shiur presents an in-depth analysis of the Gemara (גמרא)'s kal v'chomer argument at the beginning of Masechta Kiddushin regarding whether chuppah should be able to create erusin, not just nisuin. Rabbi Zweig develops a novel reading of Rashi (רש"י) that fundamentally reframes the entire sugya. The Gemara begins with a kal v'chomer: if kesef, which is not ma'achal b'trumah (doesn't enable the arusa to eat terumah), can nevertheless create kiddushin, then chuppah, which is ma'achal b'trumah (does enable eating terumah), should certainly be able to create kiddushin. The Gemara challenges this: all the kinyanim of erusin (kesef, shtar, bi'ah) work ba'al korach (against the will of the girl), whereas chuppah does not work ba'al korach. Rav Huna responds that kesef is indeed ma'achal b'trumah.
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 5a-b
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.
