A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a man betroths with "manah zu" while counting out money sequentially, is the first coin the kiddushin with the rest as conditions, or is the entire hundred-coin transfer one large ma'aseh kiddushin? The shiur contrasts Rashi (רש"י)'s tenai framework (where incompletion allows withdrawal) with the Ran's unified ma'aseh approach (where deficiency invalidates), then applies Tosafos (תוספות)'s understanding to the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Shulchan Aruch—showing how the time-limited nature of "manah zu b'holech" determines whether silence or explicit agreement is required when the final payment is deferred.
This shiur is the second part of Rabbi Zweig's analysis of Kiddushin 8a, continuing the exploration of the principle governing betrothal when money is given sequentially (manah zu–manah stam). The foundational yesod is established: when a ma'aseh kiddushin is performed in a sequence—saying "manah" and giving money in multiple givings—the default structure is that the first giving is the kiddushin, and the subsequent givings are tenai (conditions). The lecture examines two central cases: manah stam (unspecified giving) and manah zu (specified amount given sequentially), probing how Rishonim define the nature of the kiddushin and the tenai in each case. Rabbi Zweig presents Rashi (רש"י)'s approach: in both manah stam and manah zu moneh v'holech (counting progressively), the first dinar is the kiddushin and the rest are tenai. When the man says manah zu and counts, Rashi holds the kiddushin occurs with the first coin, but the tenai is not chal (takes effect) until completion—it is a tenai l'achar zman (condition for a later time), not me'achshav. This means the kiddushin is not fully binding until the hundred coins are given. According to Rashi, yachol lachzor—either party can retract—until the tenai is fulfilled. However, there is no specified deadline; the tenai remains open-ended.
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.
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.
