A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a minor girl performs mi'un (refusal), does it cancel the original marriage (kiddushei rishon) retroactively or only the yavam's zikah? The shiur develops the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s approach that mi'un works lemafreia—it retroactively cancels the first marriage—making the co-wife muttar because they were never married together. The Ba'al HaMaor disagrees: mi'un to the yavam creates a new relationship and cannot undo the original marriage.
This shiur analyzes a complex discussion in Yevamos 12a regarding the mechanics of mi'un (the refusal of a minor girl to remain married) in the context of yibum (levirate marriage). The central question is whether mi'un, when performed after the husband's death, cancels the original marriage (kiddushei rishon) or only the yavam's relationship (zikah), and what implications this has for the co-wife (tzarah). The Rambam (רמב"ם), Rif, and Rosh hold that mi'un works retroactively (lemafreia) even when performed to the yavam. The mechanism is that through the yavam's standing zikah, the mi'un cancels the original marriage retroactively—as if she was never married to the deceased husband. This is permitted because the relationship still exists through the yavam. However, if she was a tzaras ervah (co-wife of a woman forbidden to the yavam), she remains forbidden even after mi'un, not because of the marriage itself but because of the issur tzaras ervah that applied during her lifetime. The chiddush is that the din of "meis achar meis" (once the husband is dead, you cannot perform mi'un) doesn't apply here because the yavam's zikah keeps the relationship alive for purposes of mi'un.
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!
Yevamos 12a
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.
