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.
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.
