A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What is the halachic status of an eved between the time of shichrur and tevilah? According to most Rishonim, an eved is already Jewish and only needs to remove the din of avdus. The Rambam (רמב"ם), however, maintains that he becomes a ger who requires tevilah to become fully Jewish.
The shiur explores a fundamental machlokes about the status of an eved (Jewish slave) who has been freed but has not yet done tevilah. The discussion begins by examining several difficult questions (kashas) raised by Tosafos (תוספות) on Rashi (רש"י)'s explanation in Kesubos. The first kasha concerns whether an eved is considered "hefker and nechalah" (available and accessible). According to Rabbi Meir, it's a chovah (obligation), while according to the Chachamim it's chos (forbidden) for an eved. Rashi explains that an eved is subject to improper behavior because of "zeh lo shaleiach" - the shifchos (female slaves) are readily available to him, creating tremendous temptation. However, this explanation is problematic when applied to a goy, as a goy doesn't have the same level of availability to shifchos that an eved does.
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 12
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.
