No community start suggestion yet.
When is a woman divorced when her get lands in her courtyard but on a raised platform? The Gemara (גמרא) distinguishes between one place and two places based on size and height. Tosafos (תוספות) adds conditions from hilchos Shabbos (שבת) (lavud and reshus), while the Rambam (רמב"ם) rules according to the Gemara's plain reading, teaching that gittin has its own kinyan framework distinct from standard Bava Metzia principles.
This shiur analyzes Gittin 77b and addresses a fundamental question: what constitutes "one place" versus "two places" when a get falls in a woman's courtyard? The Gemara (גמרא) presents the case where a get falls onto a board (pisla) measuring four by four amos in the woman's courtyard. If the board is four by four amos, it's considered a separate place and the divorce is invalid. If it's less than four amos but ten tefachim high, it's also a separate place. The Gemara establishes clear parameters: dalet amos by dalet amos creates a separate reshus, as does anything over ten tefachim high, and anything with a "shem levai" (its own name/identity) is also considered separate. Tosafos (תוספות) introduces two conditions not explicit in the Gemara. First, when the Gemara says dalet amos by dalet amos is invalid, Tosafos adds that this only applies if the board is more than three tefachim off the ground; less than three falls under the principle of lavud and remains part of the original chatzer. Second, when the Gemara says anything above ten tefachim is a separate place even if less than dalet amos, Tosafos limits this to items at least four tefachim by four tefachim—below that size, even if ten tefachim high, she would still be divorced. Tosafos derives these qualifications from hilchos Shabbos (שבת), assuming the Gemara didn't need to state what "everyone knows" about reshus definitions.
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!
Gittin 77b
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.