No community start suggestion yet.
Why can kinyan kesef create kiddushin when it's a weaker acquisition than eved ivri, whose kinyan doesn't allow eating terumah? The shiur works through multiple approaches: perhaps an arusah eats only because of the zikah to future nisu'in (not the erusin itself), or because nisu'in creates an eternal connection (le'olam). The Gemara (גמרא)'s kal vachomer from kesef to chuppah then breaks down into a complex tzad hashaveh requiring kesef, biyah, and shtar.
Rabbi Zweig opens by revisiting a complex Gemara (גמרא) on Kiddushin 5a that analyzes how different kinyanim (forms of acquisition) work for kiddushin (marriage). The fundamental question is why kinyan kesef creates kiddushin when, in the hierarchy of kinyanim, a wife acquired through kesef should be considered a lesser acquisition than an eved ivri (Hebrew servant) or even a toshav sacher (hired laborer), neither of whom eats terumah despite their stronger kinyan status. The shiur first addresses why the Gemara needs the pasuk of "ki yikneh nefesh kinyan kaspo" to teach that an arusah (betrothed woman) eats terumah. The question is particularly acute given that in the structure of Masechta Kiddushin itself—which progresses from kinyan isha to eved to eved ivri to eved kena'ani to property—the wife represents a lesser acquisition in pure kinyan terms. She doesn't provide ma'aseh yadayim (wages of her labor) by Torah (תורה) law, unlike an eved. How then can she eat terumah based on kinyan kesef when toshav sacher, who has a stronger kinyan relationship with his employer, cannot eat?
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
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.
