A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What makes a valid act of giving when the husband throws a get upward to his wife standing on a roof? The shiur develops Rashi (רש"י)'s fundamental distinction: derech aliyah vs. derech yeridah is not about kinyan chatzer mechanics but about the definition of ma'aseh nesinah—what constitutes an authentic act of "giving" in gittin.
This shiur analyzes Gittin 79a, focusing on the Mishna's case of a husband throwing a get to his wife who stands on a roof. The central question is whether the get must travel derech yeridah (downward) to be valid, or whether derech aliyah (upward) also suffices. Rav Nachman quoting Rav Bar Avua teaches that the Mishna discusses only derech yeridah—throwing the get upward toward the wife is insufficient until it begins descending toward her chatzer. The shiur contrasts two fundamental approaches. Tosafos (תוספות) understands the requirement of derech yeridah as a technical rule of kinyan chatzer: a chatzer can only acquire an object that is traveling downward, not upward. According to this reading, the distinction is about the mechanics of how a courtyard effects acquisition. Tosafos asks how this squares with the Gemara (גמרא) in Bava Metzia about aver sofah lo noach, where throwing through another's domain still creates a valid kinyan. Tosafos answers that kinyan chatzer simply does not function with upward motion.
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!
Gittin 79a
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.
