A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a man remarries his divorced wife after she married someone else (machzir gerushto), does she become an eishes ach requiring chalitzah, or merely forbidden by lav? The shiur analyzes the machlokes between Rabi Yosi ben Kipa and the Chachamim, exploring whether the posuk's mention of "tumah" creates a din of eishes ach or merely an issur, and what implications this has for her tzarah and the nature of zikah l'chalitzah versus zikah l'yibum.
This shiur provides an extensive analysis of Yevamos 11b, focusing on the complex sugya of machzir gerushto (remarrying one's divorcee after she married someone else). The Gemara (גמרא) presents two fundamental approaches to understanding this case: whether the prohibition is rooted in "tumah" (creating an eishes ach status) or derives from a kal v'chomer (making it merely a lav prohibition). The shiur begins by establishing the basic machlokes between Rabi Yosi ben Kipa and the Chachamim regarding machzir gerushto. According to Rabi Yosi ben Kipa, the issur is written specifically on the original husband who remarries her, making it comparable to a regular lav where the tzarah would be muteres. The Chachamim hold that the issur applies to both the husband and the yavam, requiring chalitzah. The key question is whether she herself requires chalitzah, and whether the tzarah is choletzes or misyabemes.
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 11b
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.
