A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What does *l'di di shaveh li* ("to me it is worth") mean when a Kohen accepts an object valued at five for pidyon haben or kiddushin? The shiur analyzes the machlokes between the Rambam (רמב"ם) (Kesef Mishneh) and the Ran: does it have to be worth five to *this* Kohen, or merely to *someone* in the world? The Gemara (גמרא)'s case of Rav Kahana taking a sudra for his wife generates fundamental questions about valuation, market price versus subjective worth, and the mechanics of kinyan.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Kiddushin 8a, focusing on the concept of *l'di di shaveh li* ("to me it is worth")—the formula a Kohen uses when accepting an object for pidyon haben (redemption of the firstborn) or other mitzvos requiring a fixed monetary value. The Gemara (גמרא) establishes that an object worth less than five selaim in market value can still be valid if the Kohen declares it worth five *to him*. But what does "to him" mean? Rabbi Zweig presents the fundamental dispute between the Rambam (רמב"ם) (as explained by the Kesef Mishneh/Beit Yosef) and the Ran. According to the Kesef Mishneh, *shaveh li* does not require that the object be worth five specifically to *this* Kohen—it suffices that somewhere in the world, *someone* would value it at five. The market price may be three, but if there exists a "gray market" or niche buyer willing to pay five, the Kohen can accept it as five even though he personally would not spend that amount. The Ran, by contrast, holds that the object must actually be worth five to *this particular* Kohen—or at least to people in his situation. A *gavra rabba* (great man) who needs a sudra for his uniform might value it at five even when market price is three; the Ran adds that this principle extends beyond actual *gedolim*—anyone in circumstances where they would pay the premium (e.g., desperation, urgent need) qualifies.
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 8a
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.
