No community start suggestion yet.
Can one betroth a woman by forgiving a debt (milvah)? The Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion reveals that even though kiddushin requires less value than standard monetary acquisition, a loan still doesn't qualify because nothing physical is transferred at the moment of betrothal. The shiur further explores why interest (ribbis) creates a genuine obligation—the borrower acknowledges the money's time-value—yet still cannot serve as kiddushin currency, raising fundamental questions about the nature of monetary transfer in betrothal.
The shiur opens with Rashi (רש"י)'s position on Kiddushin 6b regarding one who betroths a woman through forgiving a loan (hamekadesh b'milveh). Rashi explains that even for kiddushin, which may have lesser requirements than ordinary monetary acquisition (kinyan kesef), a loan doesn't work because nothing is physically transferred at the moment of betrothal—the money was already given previously. The shiur establishes that kiddushin derives its requirement for monetary transfer from the gezeirah shavah of "kicha kicha mishtaayef" from the field of Ephron, meaning something must physically pass from man to woman at the time of kiddushin itself. Rabbi Zweig develops an important yesod: perhaps the kesef requirement for kiddushin differs from ordinary kinyan kesef. In a standard sale, money must represent genuine value because both parties exchange items of worth. But with kiddushin, the Rishonim acknowledge the woman has no inherent monetary value (she's "worth less than a shaveh pruta"). Therefore, the kesef of kiddushin might be a lesser standard—merely requiring a physical act of giving, a ma'aseh nesinas mamon, rather than true equivalent value. Nevertheless, even this reduced standard still excludes milvah, because forgiving a preexisting debt involves no new transfer at all.
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 6b
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.