A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
The Gemara (גמרא) asks whether kiddushin requires lishmah by comparing two hekeshim: havaya leYetziya (get) and havaya laDodi (money). Why aren't these contradictory? The shiur resolves this by distinguishing between ritual requirements (like lishmah in get) and kinyan requirements (transaction aspects). Shtar kiddushin may involve both elements, but kesef kiddushin is purely a kinyan and thus doesn't require lishmah.
Rabbi Zweig analyzes a fundamental question in Kiddushin 9b regarding the apparent contradiction between two hekeshim (textual comparisons). The Gemara (גמרא) discusses whether kiddushin requires lishmah (intent for the specific purpose) by comparing havaya (marriage) leYetziya (to divorce/get) versus havaya laDodi (to money). The question is: if we learn from get that shtar kiddushin needs lishmah, why don't we then learn from shtar to kesef that kesef also needs lishmah? The central insight is that these hekeshim don't mean the laws of one kinyan automatically transfer to another. Rather, makish havaya laDodi teaches us that the fundamental nature of kiddushin is a kinyan (acquisition), not a religious ritual. Meanwhile, makish havaya leYetziya indicates that shtar kiddushin also has ritual aspects because we learn the primary din of shtar from get.
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 9b
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.
