A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When one person gives money to a woman on behalf of another for the purpose of kiddushin, is she betrothed? The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s comparison to orev (guarantor) and eved Kenaani (Canaanite slave), examining a fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י) and the Rambam (רמב"ם): does kiddushin require that the money itself come from the man, or is the benefit (hana'ah) of the transaction sufficient?
This shiur explores Kiddushin 7a, which discusses complex cases involving three parties in kiddushin (marriage). The fundamental question is whether a woman can be betrothed when one person (B) gives money to her (A) or to a third party (C), acting on behalf of another man who wishes to marry her. The Gemara (גמרא) presents several scenarios and compares them to the laws of orev (guarantor) and eved Kenaani (Canaanite slave). In the case of orev, even though the orev does not receive any direct benefit, he becomes obligated. The Gemara argues that similarly, in kiddushin, even when the woman does not directly receive money from the man marrying her, the kiddushin should be valid.
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 7a
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.
