No community start suggestion yet.
Does birchas erusin require ten people like sheva brachos? The Gemara (גמרא) derives from Boaz that birchas chasan needs ten, but only mentions nisuin, not erusin. The Rosh argues that erusin also requires ten since Boaz performed both ceremonies, while others question this extension.
The shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kesubos regarding whether ten people are required for birchas erusin (betrothal blessing) as they are for sheva brachos (wedding blessings). The Gemara (גמרא) establishes from the story of Boaz and Ruth that birchas chasan requires ten people, learning this from two possible sources: either from Boaz gathering ten elders, or from a pasuk about praising Hashem (ה׳) "mimakor Yisrael" (from the womb of Israel). The central dispute involves the Rosh's position that birchas erusin also requires ten people. Rav Shmuel HaNagid challenged this, noting that the Gemara only explicitly mentions the requirement for birchas chasan (nisuin), not for erusin. The Rosh responds that since Boaz performed both erusin and nisuin ceremonies when he gathered ten people, both require a minyan. He further argues that if we learn from "makor Yisrael" (matters relating to the womb), this applies to erusin as well since marriage is necessary for proper procreation.
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!
Kesubos 7b
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.
