No community start suggestion yet.
What makes marriage distinct from all other forms of kinyan? The shiur analyzes Kiddushin 2a and Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary on the Mishna, exploring why kiddushin requires amira (verbal declaration) alongside the kinyan and why the wife must "acquire herself back" (koneh atzma) upon the husband's death. Rashi's formulation reveals that kiddushin is not merely contractual acquisition but creates an ishus relationship that endures beyond ordinary kinyan parameters.
This shiur opens a comprehensive analysis of the first Mishna in Masechta Kiddushin and Rashi (רש"י)'s foundational commentary, focusing on the unique nature of kinyan kiddushin. The Mishna states "Ha'ishah niknes—the woman is acquired" through three methods: kesef (money), shetar (document), and biah (marital relations). Rashi's very first comment introduces the concept of "koneh atzma"—she acquires herself back—raising the fundamental question: why must a woman "reacquire herself" when her husband dies? Rabbi Zweig establishes that this requirement reveals something profound about kiddushin. By non-Jews (Bnei Noach), marriage dissolves automatically upon the death of one spouse or even when one party simply walks away. No special "matir" (releasing mechanism) is needed. The fact that Jewish law requires a limud (textual derivation) to permit an eishet ish after her husband's death demonstrates that mitat ha'baal (death of the husband) is not merely the dissolution of marriage but rather a matir—a specific halachic mechanism that releases the wife. This indicates that kiddushin creates something that transcends the mere presence of two parties.
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.
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.
