A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why is non-cash consideration (shava kesef) valid for kiddushin when the Torah (תורה) specifies kesef (money)? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: kesef is an absolute standard while shava kesef has only relative value. Tosfos' approach—that religious rituals like kiddushin require objects readily convertible to cash, not merely equal in value—resolves disputes between the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Rashba about when doubtful-value items create valid kiddushin.
This shiur analyzes the fundamental question of how shava kesef (non-cash goods) can be equivalent to kesef (money/silver) for kiddushin, when the Torah (תורה) explicitly requires kesef. Rabbi Zweig begins by presenting a dispute between the Rashba and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding a case where a woman receives an item worth far less than its usual market value (a needle worth a tenth of a perutah given as if it were worth a perutah). The Rashba holds this creates a safek kiddushin (uncertain marriage), while the Rambam rules it is definitively invalid for kiddushin but valid for other monetary transfers like ta'anei mitnin (gift stipulations). The shiur explores how Tosfos approaches the sugya differently from other Rishonim. While most Rishonim begin by asking why shava kesef works for kinyan (property acquisition), Tosfos skips this question entirely and proceeds directly to kiddushin. Rabbi Zweig explains that Tosfos understands the fundamental problem with shava kesef is not that it's a different object than what the Torah specified, but rather that it lacks absolute value. Money has intrinsic, absolute worth (a specific weight of silver or standardized currency), while goods have only relative value that fluctuates based on location, time, supply, demand, and even the specific recipient's needs. By citing Rav Kahana's case (Pidyon HaBen with a head covering worth two shekalim accepted as five because it was especially valuable to the recipient), Tosfos demonstrates that shava kesef includes even subjective, individual valuations.
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 2a
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.