A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can kiddushin be forced? The Gemara (גמרא) distinguishes between two requirements: the isha's ratzon to marry this specific man (a Torah (תורה)-level prerequisite without which kiddushin cannot take effect), and her agreement to the maaseh kiddushin itself (where ba'al korchah may work according to some opinions, though subject to afkinu rabbanan). The Rambam (רמב"ם), Rashba, Smag, and Ba'alei Tosafos (תוספות) present fundamentally different approaches to both the sugya in Bava Basra 48a and our Gemara in Kiddushin.
This shiur on Kiddushin 2b explores the fundamental question of whether kiddushin can be accomplished through coercion (ba'al korchah). Rabbi Zweig develops the Gemara (גמרא)'s distinction between two separate requirements for valid kiddushin, analyzing three major Rishonic approaches to the sugya. The Gemara asks: if the Mishna had said "ish koneh" (a man acquires), one might think ba'al korchah would work. The Gemara answers that the Mishna therefore teaches "isha niknes" (a woman is acquired) to emphasize "midaita ein, shelo midaita lo" — with her da'as yes, without her da'as no. This cryptic formulation requires explanation: why does the switch from "ish koneh" to "isha niknes" exclude ba'al korchah?
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 2b
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.
