A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What makes a phrase a valid language of kiddushin? The Gemara (גמרא) debates whether "charufasi" works outside Yehuda, revealing a fundamental tension: Is kiddushin created by formal terminology or by understood intent? The shiur develops the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position that "asukim b'oso inyan" transforms ambiguous phrases into halachic kiddushin language—creating consequences for shtaros, belief claims, and the very definition of lashon kiddushin.
This shiur analyzes Kiddushin 6a, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of alternative terminologies for kiddushin, specifically the case of "haomer charufasi b'Yehuda" (one who says "charufasi" in Judea). The central question is whether phrases that are not the standard "harei at mekudeshes li" can effect kiddushin, and under what circumstances. Rabbi Zweig opens with a fundamental difficulty in the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s formulation of the halachos in perek daled of Hilchos Ishus. The Rambam rules (halacha (הלכה) vav) that "harei at ishti" (behold, you are my wife) creates kiddushin, but "harei at charufasi" (using terminology from Yehuda) is only a safek kiddushin. The Gemara's principle of "asukim b'oso inyan" (engaged in discussing that matter) should resolve the doubt—if both parties are clearly discussing marriage, why is there uncertainty? The Rambam seemingly omits the Gemara's resolution that if they don't understand the terminology, they are believed to say it's not kiddushin.
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 6a
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.
