No community start suggestion yet.
What does the Gemara (גמרא) mean when it says "pitui ketanah onas"? The shiur contrasts two approaches: the Rambam (רמב"ם) holds that seducing a minor is considered coercion, while Tosafos (תוספות) creates a safek sfeika based on age and marital rebellion. This fundamental dispute affects whether a young girl who commits adultery remains forbidden to her husband.
The shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kesubos 9a concerning a bas Yisrael who lost her virginity before age three and is now suspected of adultery. Rabbi Zweig begins by examining how Rashi (רש"י) differs from the plain reading of the Gemara (גמרא), noting that Rashi adds that she is now twelve years old, which the Gemara doesn't explicitly state. The primary focus is understanding what the Gemara means by "pitui ketanah onas" (seducing a minor is considered coercion). Rabbi Zweig presents a fundamental dispute between Rishonim. According to the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s approach, the phrase specifically refers to *pitui* (seduction) of a ketanah being considered onas (coercion). When an adult with superior intellect persuades or emotionally manipulates a minor who lacks the status of bardas (legal majority), this constitutes a form of coercion, even if the girl ultimately agrees. The Rambam holds that what forbids a woman to her husband is acting berotzon (willingly), and seduction of a minor negates true rotzon.
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!
Kesubos 9a
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.
