No community start suggestion yet.
When a couple consummates their relationship through biah (intimacy), does this create erusin (betrothal) or nisuin (full marriage)? The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s fundamental question, exploring whether biah can accomplish both stages simultaneously or sequentially, and examines Rashi (רש"י)'s position that even when biah creates nisuin, certain restrictions remain—suggesting she is only "kinisuin" (like nisuin) rather than fully married.
This shiur examines a fundamental question in Kiddushin 10a-b regarding whether biah (marital intimacy) creates erusin (betrothal) or nisuin (full marriage). The Gemara (גמרא)'s question "biah nisuin oisa o erusin oisa" appears straightforward, but Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary reveals significant complexity. Rashi states that the question is whether biah creates "kinisuin" (like nisuin) or merely erusin, suggesting that even according to the view that biah creates nisuin, it does not create a complete marriage status. The shiur identifies a fundamental difficulty: if biah creates nisuin, why would the Gemara need to articulate any nafka mina (practical difference)? The differences between an arusah (betrothed woman) and nesuah (married woman) are well-known throughout Shas. Rashi resolves this by explaining that the Gemara is discussing whether biah creates kinisuin for specific halachic consequences (inheritance, ritual purity, annulment of vows) but not necessarily for all aspects of nisuin. Most significantly, according to Rashi, even if biah creates nisuin status for these purposes, there may still be an issur (prohibition) for the couple to live together until proper chuppah is performed.
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-b
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.
