A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What do you need for the kinyan itself versus what is needed for nissuin? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction in the Rambam (רמב"ם) between "isheh niknes" (the act of kinyan) and "nasus mekudeshes" (the status of marriage). Rashi (רש"י) and the Rambam disagree whether amira and eidim are requirements of the kinyan or only of the marriage status.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Kiddushin 2a, focusing primarily on understanding Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary and the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s formulation in both the Pirush HaMishnayos and the Yad HaChazaka regarding the requirements for kiddushin. Rabbi Zweig develops a fundamental chakira that emerges from reading these sources carefully: what is the distinction between the kinyan itself (isheh niknes) and the status of being married (nasus mekudeshes)? The shiur begins by examining an apparent contradiction in Rashi's comments on the Rif versus his comments on the Gemara (גמרא) regarding whether shtar requires amira. More significantly, Rashi mentions amira by kesef, shtar, and bi'ah, but completely omits any mention of eidim. Similarly, the Rambam in his Pirush HaMishnayos explicitly states that shtar and bi'ah require eidim but leaves out eidim by kesef, yet in the Yad HaChazaka, he does mention eidim by kesef.
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 2a
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.
