A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
The Gemara (גמרא)'s nafka mina between tchilas biah and sof biah seems unclear. The shiur develops a fundamental yesod in the Rambam (רמב"ם) that there are two distinct types of chuppah: one that creates the wife-husband status (enabling yerusha and tumah) and another that creates the right to live together (mutar lavo). This resolves multiple kashos on the Gemara and Rishonim.
The shiur begins with a difficulty in Kiddushin 10a regarding the Gemara (גמרא)'s nafka minas between whether biah for kiddushin works at tchilas biah or sof biah. The Gemara discusses whether a Kohen Gadol can be mekadesh a besulah with biah, and the Rishonim (Ramban (רמב"ן) and Ridvaz) struggle with why the Gemara needs this nafka mina when seemingly simpler distinctions exist. The Rishonim propose that the case involves making chuppah before biah, creating a situation where the kiddushin happens at tchilas biah but the woman is already in chuppah status. This leads to a fundamental question: Can one make chuppah before erusin? The Mishne LaMelech learns from the Ramban and Ridvaz that chuppah can indeed precede kiddushin, which creates halakhic complications. If chuppah before erusin is meaningless, how does it help later? Yet the Rama in Even HaEzer paskens that if someone made kiddushei ta'us followed by nisuin, and later discovered the kiddushin were invalid, when he remarries her properly he does not need to repeat sheva brachos—implying the original chuppah retained validity.
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 10a
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.
