A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What makes a woman credible when she claims her child is kosher after witnesses saw her in yichud? The shiur analyzes why the Rambam (רמב"ם) requires two majorities to permit the mother to marry a kohen but only one majority to validate the child as kosher. The approach contrasts mainstream marriage eligibility versus kehunah restrictions.
This shiur examines a complex sugya in Kesubos 12b dealing with a woman's credibility (ne'emanus) regarding her child's lineage when witnesses observed her in yichud with a man. The Gemara (גמרא) discusses the dispute between Rav Gamaliel and Rabbi Yehoshua about whether to believe her claim that the encounter was with a kosher man rather than a pasul. Rabbi Zweig begins by analyzing the meaning of 'midaberes' in the Mishna, exploring whether it refers to inappropriate conversation that preceded intimacy or simply regular conversation that preceded yichud. He suggests that 'midaberes' indicates they were having a normal conversation about mundane topics before entering privacy, making Rabbi Yehoshua's stringent ruling (that she's still forbidden to a kohen) an extraordinary chiddush about the severity of yichud violations.
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 12b
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.
