No community start suggestion yet.
Does bari v'shema allow the wife to collect her kesuba when claiming anoos? The shiur develops the concept of migu of taina me'ula beyosa - where even though both claims are equally weak, the fact that one could have made a more respectable claim proves truthfulness. This novel form of migu works even when the alternative taina wouldn't win the case.
This shiur explores the complex sugya of Kesubos 12b dealing with a woman claiming her full kesuba payment when her husband disputes whether she was a besulah at marriage. The central dispute involves whether bari v'shema (certain claim vs. uncertain claim) allows her to collect, or if we follow the principle that bari v'shema lav bari yaduv (a certain claimant doesn't overcome an uncertain one when extracting money from its current possessor). The Gemara (גמרא) presents a fundamental machloket between Rav Yehuda/Rav Huna who hold bari yaduv (the certain claimant wins) versus Rav Nachman/Rav Yochanan who hold patur because of uki mamona b'chezkas mareh (leave the money with its current possessor). Rabbi Zweig analyzes why the woman nevertheless collects according to some opinions.
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 12b
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.
