A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a man be mekadesh a woman and acquire her father's cow with a single pruta? The Gemara (גמרא) debates whether the man intends half the pruta for the woman and half for the cow (invalid), or whether he means to acquire the cow through meshicha (making the kiddushin valid). The shiur explores when a safek creates valid eidus on kiddushin versus when it's a fundamental lack of maase kiddushin.
This shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא) in Kiddushin 7b discussing a case where a man says "bitach uparascha bepruta" — "your daughter and your cow for a pruta." The fundamental question is whether this creates valid kiddushin or not. The Gemara presents two sides: perhaps he means half the pruta for the woman and half for the cow (which would be invalid since neither receives a full pruta), or perhaps he means the full pruta for the woman and intends to acquire the cow through meshicha (pulling). Rashi (רש"י) explains that when someone says they want to acquire both the daughter and the cow with a pruta, we interpret this to mean either the pruta for the woman or that the cow will be acquired through meshicha (since everyone knows a cow cannot be acquired with money). The Gemara extends this to a case involving land (karka), where the question becomes whether he means half the pruta for the woman and half for the land, or whether he means the full pruta for the woman and will acquire the land through chazaka (taking possession).
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.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
