No community start suggestion yet.
Can kiddushin take effect through loan forgiveness or the pleasure derived from it? The Gemara (גמרא) on Kiddushin 6b teaches that betrothal through a loan (mekadesh b'milveh) is invalid, but through the pleasure of forgiveness (hanoah mechilas milveh) it works. Rashi (רש"י) and the Rosh offer fundamentally different approaches: Rashi requires creating an actual job for which payment is due, while the Rosh validates kiddushin when the woman consciously attributes the pleasure she receives to the man's action.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Kiddushin 6b, examining the fundamental principle of mekadesh b'milveh (betrothal through a loan) and mekadesh b'hanoah mechilas milveh (betrothal through the pleasure of loan forgiveness). The Gemara (גמרא) establishes that betrothal through a loan itself is invalid, but betrothal through the pleasure derived from loan forgiveness can be valid. The shiur explores why this distinction exists and what exactly constitutes valid kiddushin in these cases. Rabbi Zweig presents the core debate between Rashi (רש"י) and the Rosh. According to Rashi, mekadesh b'hanoah mechilas milveh does not mean betrothal through the actual pleasure of having the debt discharged. Rather, it refers to a constructed "job" - the woman would have been willing to pay someone (a schar) to obtain loan forgiveness, and the man is performing that job. Therefore, the kiddushin is not based on the pleasure itself but on the value of the service rendered. This reading creates a significant difficulty (dechik) in the language of the Gemara, since the term "hanoah mechilas milveh" seems to directly reference the pleasure of forgiveness, not a secondary job. Rashi's approach also leads to the conclusion that if the entire loan is only worth a perutah, there can be no valid kiddushin, since no one would pay a perutah to discharge a perutah debt - the payment would be less than a perutah and therefore invalid.
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 6b
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.
