A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Is bris milah the father's mitzvah (מצוה) or the son's? The Gemara (גמרא) in Kiddushin 29a lists both milah and pidyon haben as "mitzvah haben," yet the Rambam (רמב"ם) paskens different berachos—lemol for milah but al pidyon haben for redemption. The shiur develops a yesod distinguishing mitzvah aav (the father's direct obligation) from mitzvah haben (responsibility for the child's need), showing that milah has both dimensions while pidyon haben is purely mitzvah haben, which explains the berachos, shehecheyanu, and when beis din may act.
This shiur analyzes a fundamental sugya in Kiddushin 29a regarding the nature of a father's obligations toward his son, focusing on two primary mitzvos: bris milah and pidyon haben. The Gemara (גמרא) presents both as "mitzvah (מצוה) haben" (the son's mitzvah), yet the halachic parameters and berachos differ significantly. Rabbi Zweig explores why Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות) disagree on whether a pasuk is needed to exclude women from these mitzvos, given that both appear to be mitzvos asei she'hazman grama (time-bound positive commandments from which women are generally exempt). The shiur begins by examining Rashi's approach. Rashi asks why we need a pasuk to exclude women from pidyon haben, stating it is a mitzvah asei she'lo hazman grama (not time-bound), yet Rashi does not raise this question regarding bris milah, which clearly cannot be performed at night. Tosafos does ask this question by milah, suggesting that no pasuk should be necessary since it is clearly time-bound. The Kesef Mishneh addresses this by explaining that milah remains a mitzvah even after the eighth day, thus making it not strictly time-bound. However, this does not fully resolve why Rashi treats the two mitzvos differently.
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 29a
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.
