A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What is the difference between kinyan (acquisition) and kiddushin (betrothal) in marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction in the Rambam (רמב"ם): kinyan alone creates a relationship severable by either party without a get, while kinyan al menas l'nisu'in (with intent for marriage) creates kiddushin requiring a get and carrying issur eishes ish. This framework explains the Rambam's psak on mekadesh an ubar.
The shiur opens with the Gemara (גמרא)'s language on Kiddushin 2b, which shifts between "isha niknes" (the woman is acquired) and "ish mekadesh" (the man betroths). Rabbi Zweig questions why the Mishna uses the passive "isha niknes" rather than the active "ish koneh," and why it switches to "isha koneh" when discussing how the woman acquires herself back through death of the husband or get. The Gemara explains that "isha koneh" refers to two cases: sefer (get) where she acquires herself, and misah ba'al (death of husband) where it's not that she actively acquires herself but rather Hashem (ה׳) is makneh her back—"d'lav ikcha makneh lah, min shamaya kamakneh lah." Rabbi Zweig emphasizes the precise language of the Gemara: death of the husband is not a makneh (undoing) of the kiddushin in the sense that the man is no longer here so the relationship dissolves. Rather, it is a hakneh—Heaven actively returns her to herself. This implies that misah ba'al doesn't simply terminate the relationship automatically; a hakneh is required. This is evident from the Gemara's extended discussion proving that misah ba'al permits the woman, indicating it's not a simple sevara.
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 2b
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.
