A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a man gives a woman a dinar toward a larger sum, is she mekudeshes immediately or only when he completes payment? The Gemara (גמרא) distinguishes between "mona stam" (unspecified money) and "mona zu" (this specific money), and between cases where he's "mona v'holech" (counting out money). The shiur explores Rav Ashi's position that intent is determined by the method of giving, raising profound questions about how we assess a person's daas and why we'd assume someone would enter an arrangement contrary to their interests.
This shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kiddushin 8a dealing with the dynamics of kiddushin when a man gives a woman money in installments or promises to give more than what he initially gives. The core question is: when does the kiddushin take effect—immediately upon giving the first dinar, or only when the full amount is given? The Gemara (גמרא) presents a case where a man says "harei at mekudeshes li b'mona" (you are betrothed to me with money) and gives her a dinar, but promises to give more later (mona v'holech). According to Rav, she is mekudeshes immediately with the dinar, and the rest is treated as a tanai (condition). The question arises: how do we know he means to be mekadesh her miyad (immediately) rather than waiting until he completes the full payment?
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 8a
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.
