No community start suggestion yet.
Can chuppah create kiddushin independently, or does it only complete the kinyan begun by kesef? The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s kal v'chomer and examines Rashi (רש"י)'s position that all three kinyanim work ba'al korchah in ishus versus Tosfos' reading. A Ramban (רמב"ן) regarding a Kohen Gadol's kiddushin forces a fundamental reexamination of whether chuppah functions independently or only as gomeres kesef.
The shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kiddushin 5a-b exploring the nature of chuppah as a kinyan for kiddushin. The central question is whether chuppah can create kiddushin on its own or whether it only completes (gomeres) the kinyan begun by kesef. The Gemara (גמרא) attempts a kal v'chomer: if kesef, which cannot effect nisuin, can create erusin, then chuppah, which can create nisuin, should certainly be able to create erusin. The Gemara raises a pircha: perhaps the three kinyanim (kesef, shtar, and biah) that work ba'al korchah cannot be used to learn out chuppah, which does not work ba'al korchah. Rav Huna responds that only a chumra found in ishus itself would invalidate the kal v'chomer, and ba'al korchah is not specific to ishus.
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 5a-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.
