A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a man betroths a woman with an object instead of money, does the kiddushin take effect immediately or only after the value is appraised? The shiur analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s reading of the dispute between Rava and Rav Yosef, revealing that the core issue is whether the stated value functions as an inducement separate from the kinyan or as an intrinsic element of it. A crucial difference emerges regarding kayetz (immediate availability): Rashi (רש"י) treats it as definitional to sheveh kesef, while the Rambam sees it as a procedural requirement for the kinyan to take effect.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Kiddushin 7b, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of betrothing a woman with objects of value (sheveh kesef) rather than money. The central question is whether kiddushin takes effect retroactively (lemafreya) once the object's value is confirmed, or only from that point forward (mi'kan ulehaba). The Gemara presents a dispute between Rava and Rav Yosef, and the shiur explores how the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Rashi (רש"י) understand this fundamental disagreement. Rabbi Zweig begins by examining the Rambam's position in Hilchot Ishut. The Rambam rules that when a man betroths a woman with silk (shiroy) or similar valuable items that people are mesabeh lehem (attach importance to), the halacha (הלכה) follows Rava: ein tzarich shuma bashuk—no formal market appraisal is required, and she is mekudeshes from the outset (misheh rishon). However, for ordinary objects, the kiddushin only takes effect mi'kan ulehaba, after the value is determined. This raises a fundamental question: if the woman agrees to accept the object for kiddushin, why does it matter whether the value matches what was stated? The shiur rejects the notion of mechilah (forgiveness of the difference), arguing that kiddushin operates through kinyan, not payment. The size and nature of the kinyan must match what was specified; if the man said "fifty" and it's worth forty-nine, there is a chisar (deficiency) in the ma'aseh kinyan itself.
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 7b
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.
