A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Gemara (גמרא) 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 (תוספות)'s famous question.
The shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kiddushin 5a-b dealing with Rav Huna's proposed kal v'chomer arguments for chuppah creating kiddushin. Rabbi Zweig opens by questioning why the Gemara (גמרא) presents a kal v'chomer that is immediately rejected: if kesef (money) doesn't make a woman maichel b'terumah (able to eat terumah) yet still creates kiddushin, then surely chuppah, which does make her maichel b'terumah, should create kiddushin. The Gemara rejects this because Ula teaches that devar Torah (תורה) (biblically) an arusah (betrothed woman) does eat terumah—kesef does make her maichel. The shiur's central question is methodological: why include this rejected kal v'chomer in the Talmud (תלמוד) at all? Since we already know from other places in Shas that arusah eats terumah mideoraysa, the Gemara could have omitted this entire passage and started directly with the correct kal v'chomer. The inclusion of the rejected argument must therefore teach us something fundamental beyond just the halacha (הלכה) that an arusah eats terumah.
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 5a-b
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.
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.
Why does a nesuah (married woman) eat terumah while an aruseh (betrothed woman) does not, if both involve kinyan kaspo? The Gemara analyzes whether chupah creates a stronger kinyan or introduces a new din of ishut (living together). The discussion explores the machlokes Rav and Shmuel about yibum be'oness, and how the Rambam understands both kinyan and ishut working together in chupah.
