No community start suggestion yet.
Can two brothers give one pruta together to marry two sisters? The shiur distinguishes between maase kiddushin (sanctification ceremony) and kinyan kesef (monetary transaction). Unlike kinyanim which cannot be combined, maase kiddushin can be shared—explaining why bus'ar mekabel works and why the Rambam (רמב"ם) doesn't require ketana status.
This shiur analyzes Kidushin 7b, focusing on the case where two brothers use one pruta to marry two sisters through a shaliach. Rabbi Zweig presents a fundamental disagreement between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות) about whether this case involves ketanos (minors) or gedolos (adults), and what makes the kiddushin work. According to Tosafos, the girls must be ketanos because the father is not a shaliach but rather the principal (the father owns his ketana daughter's kiddushin). Tosafos argues that bus'ar noisen (following the giver) is lav davka—only bus'ar mekabel matters. Where the father acts as shaliach for the boys, you would definitely need two prutas since there are two separate maase kiddushin happening.
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 7b
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.
