A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why doesn't the Rambam (רמב"ם) explicitly state that women are exempt from milah? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: mitzvos asei she'hazman grama are opportunities that lapse, while milah creates permanent achrayus (responsibility). This yesod explains why milah is the most chamur mitzvah (מצוה), why women are exempt from time-bound mitzvos but obligated in ongoing responsibilities, and the mechanics of how a father's and beis din's obligation differs from the child's own obligation.
The Gemara (גמרא) in Kiddushin 29a establishes that women are exempt from milah, requiring a specific pasuk despite milah being a time-bound mitzvah (מצוה) (she'hazman grama). Tosafos (תוספות) raises a difficulty: if milah is considered a time-bound mitzvah, why is a pasuk needed to exempt women? Tosafos answers that milah might have been considered shelo hazman grama because milah she-lo bizmanah (circumcision not on the eighth day) applies day and night without interruption. The shiur addresses two fundamental questions: First, why does the Rambam (רמב"ם) omit any explicit mention that women are exempt from milah, when the Tur states this clearly? Second, what is the deeper conceptual framework that explains the nature of milah and its uniqueness among mitzvos? Rabbi Zweig builds his answer on a careful analysis of the Rambam in Hilchos Milah (Perek 1, Halacha (הלכה) 2), where the Rambam declares milah the most chamur (stringent) of all mitzvos. The Rambam writes that if a father fails to circumcise his son on the eighth day, he transgresses a great and severe mitzvah, and "lo yitachen lo le'olam l'shalem zos ha'mitzvah"—he will never be able to complete this mitzvah. This appears paradoxical: unlike Sukkos (סוכות) or Pesach (פסח) where the time passes and the mitzvah can never be fulfilled, milah can be performed later. How then is it more chamur? The Rambam explains that precisely because milah she-lo bizmanah remains an obligation, the severity is greater—the responsibility never ends.
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 29a
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.
