No community start suggestion yet.
Why does kesef create kiddushin for a ketana when an eved Ivri, a stronger kinyan, doesn't allow eating terumah? The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s kal v'chomer that chuppah should create erusin, exploring whether kiddushin works through kinyan (ownership) or through creating the status of ishus (marriage relationship), with detailed analysis of Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות).
The shiur examines a fundamental question in Kiddushin 5b: the Gemara (גמרא) attempts a kal v'chomer to prove that chuppah should be able to create erusin (betrothal). The kal v'chomer argues that if kesef (money), which is not gomer (does not complete the marriage process), can create kiddushin, then chuppah, which is gomer, should certainly be able to create kiddushin. However, the Gemara faces a challenge from Ulla's teaching that a bas Yisrael married to a kohen eats terumah based on "kinyan kaspo" - the fact that he owns her through the kesef of kiddushin. Rabbi Zweig develops the Rashba's fundamental question: why didn't the Gemara bring proof from the Mishna's case of a giyores who converted while already mekudeshes, where she eats terumah immediately? The Rashba answers that this proves the eating comes not from the kinyan of kesef itself, but from being an omedes l'nisu'in (standing ready for marriage). This means a woman eats terumah not because her husband owns her like an eved, but because she is in a status of ishus - already positioned for the full marital relationship.
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 5b
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.
