A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why can the Chachamim dissolve a marriage created through kidushei kesef when they lack authority over Torah (תורה)-level marriage bonds? The shiur develops a novel approach distinguishing monetary ownership rights from the issur relationship itself. While the Rabbanan can nullify property ownership in a wife, the issur dimension requires their prospective prohibition making cohabitation forbidden going forward.
This shiur presents a comprehensive analysis of the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion regarding the Chachamim's authority to dissolve marriages created through kidushei kesef (monetary betrothal). The central question revolves around how the Rabbanan can effectively nullify a marriage when they seemingly lack the power to uproot Torah (תורה)-level matrimonial bonds. Rabbi Zweig examines multiple Rishonic approaches, beginning with Rashi (רש"י)'s interpretation that kidushei kesef works al menas she-yirtzu Rabbanan (conditional on Rabbinic approval), allowing retroactive nullification. However, this approach faces significant difficulties, including how to explain the Gemara's discussion of na'ar me'urasah and the gezeirah shavah that equates kidushei kesef to Torah law.
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 3a
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.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
