A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What are the competing approaches of the Rambam (רמב"ם) versus Tosafot regarding whether a wife who was mezana requires witnesses (eidim) to be forbidden to her husband? The shiur develops the fundamental machloket between viewing this as a monetary-like din (requiring higher standards of proof) versus an isur-focused din, with practical ramifications for safek cases.
This advanced Gemara (גמרא) shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kesubos 9a dealing with the halachic status of a wife who was mezana (committed adultery) and the evidentiary standards required to prohibit her to her husband. Rabbi Zweig examines multiple approaches from Rishonim regarding the fundamental nature of this prohibition. The shiur begins with the core machloket between the Rambam (רמב"ם) and other Rishonim (particularly the Rosh and Rabbeinu Yonah) regarding whether such a woman is believed when she claims "mi she'asani nenasti" (I was forced) or "lav tachas" (it wasn't consensual). The Rambam holds she is not believed, while the Rosh disagrees, leading to fundamental questions about the underlying halachic framework.
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!
Kesubos 9a
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.
Why does the Gemara present a kal v'chomer for chuppah making kiddushin based on kesef not being maichel b'terumah, only to reject it? The shiur reveals that even the rejected kal v'chomer establishes a fundamental yesod: kiddushin is a kinyan for ishus (marital relationship), not merely a kinyan in hilchos kinyanim. The second kal v'chomer—from chuppah being gomeres—raises Tosafos's famous question.
Is the kesef used in kiddushin a true kinyan (acquisition), or merely a symbolic means of establishing marriage? The shiur analyzes multiple interpretations of the Gemara's derivation from ki yikach ki'ach mi'Sayeffron, exploring whether marriage constitutes ownership, and develops three fundamental approaches: (1) The Gemara proves ishus is a kinyan, (2) ishus is not a kinyan but uses kinyan-like means, or (3) ishus is a kinyan but the kesef may not be a ma'aseh kinyan. The Rambam's position—calling kesef "midivrei sofrim"—is explained as distinguishing between cross-referencing concepts versus borrowing terminology.
Why does the Mishna alternate between the language of "kinyan" (acquisition) and "kiddushin" (sanctification) when describing marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: marriage has two separate aspects—a kinyan dimension (ownership) and a kedusha dimension (sanctified relationship). Either aspect can initiate the bond, and understanding this dual nature resolves multiple textual and halachic questions throughout the sugya.
Does kiddushei shetar require a shevah pruta? The Ran presents two approaches to the Rif's position. The shiur develops the Ran's second pshat that shetar kiddushin functions as a hachnah (exchange) rather than a mere kinyan nesina. This reading has profound implications for isuri hana'ah, mechubar, and the relationship between kesef and shetar.
