A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How can a third party effect kiddushin on behalf of another man? The shiur develops the principle that regular zechiyah doesn't work because kiddushin isn't merely a kinyan—it's an undertaking of obligations. Through analyzing the din of Eved Kanani and the machlokes between Rashi (רש"י) and the Rambam (רמב"ם), the shiur shows how kiddushin operates as a "down payment" on share, kesus, and onah.
The shiur begins by examining a fundamental question in Kiddushin 7a: why is a special din of Eved Kanani needed for a third party to effect kiddushin on behalf of another man? Why doesn't the regular parshah of zechiyah (acquiring on behalf of another) suffice? The Gemara (גמרא) establishes that just as one can give money to free an Eved Kanani on someone else's behalf, so too one can give kiddushin money on behalf of another. The shiur identifies a crucial distinction between regular zechiyah and Eved Kanani. In normal zechiyah, the one performing the kinyan (the mezakeh) does an action, and the benefit flows to the recipient (the zocheh). The mezakeh is the primary actor, and the zocheh is passive. However, in Eved Kanani, this doesn't work because giving money to acquire an eved would make the giver the owner of that eved, not free him. The Torah (תורה) therefore requires a new mechanism: when money is given for the eved, it works as if the eved himself gave the money—it's his action, not the giver's action that merely benefits him.
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 7a
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.
