No community start suggestion yet.
How can kiddushin work when a third party gives money on behalf of an intended husband? The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s approach shifts the mechanism from direct kinyan kesef to hana'ah (benefit), suggesting kiddushin creates a halachic relationship rather than a conventional acquisition. This explains why normal kinyan requirements don't apply - the woman enables the kiddushin regardless of whose money facilitates it.
This shiur examines a complex sugya in Kiddushin 7a focusing on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s understanding of how kiddushin operates through hana'ah rather than direct monetary transfer. Rabbi Zweig begins by analyzing the Rambam's position that when one person gives money to a woman on behalf of another for kiddushin, the kiddushin works through the benefit (hana'ah) the woman receives, not through the money itself. This raises a fundamental question about who is providing this benefit - the original giver or the intended husband. The discussion delves into the parallel case of Eved Kenani (Canaanite slave) where the Gemara (גמרא) establishes that acquisition can work through third-party payment. However, Rabbi Zweig notes a crucial distinction: while Eved Kenani operates as a standard kinyan kesef where actual money changes hands, the Rambam's approach to kiddushin suggests something fundamentally different. The shiur explores why the Rambam would change the mechanism from kesef to hana'ah and what this reveals about the nature of the kinyan.
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 7a
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.
