A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can kiddushin be performed with something attached to the ground? The shiur analyzes three major shitos—the Baal HaItur, the Ran, and the Rashba—each understanding differently the scope of the principle "makish havaya l'yetzia." The dispute hinges on whether this hekesh applies to all kinyanim, only to the shtar ceremony, or just to the din shtar itself.
This shiur examines the fundamental machlokes Rishonim regarding mechubar l'karka (property attached to the ground) in the context of kiddushin. The Gemara (גמרא) in Gittin establishes that mechubar is pasul for a get, and the question is whether this prohibition extends to kiddushin through the principle of "makish havaya l'yetzia"—the hekesh between acquiring a wife (kiddushin) and divorcing her (gittin). The Baal HaItur takes the most stringent position: mechubar is pasul not only for kiddushin through a shtar (document), but also for kiddushin through kesef (money). He bases this on the Gemara in Gittin that explicitly states mechubar is pasul by kiddushin. The Baal HaItur understands that the hekesh between havaya and yetzia operates at the level of kinyanim—the acquisition mechanisms themselves. Since kiddushin is a kinyan and gerushin is the reversal of that kinyan (the wife acquiring herself back), whatever constitutes a deficiency in the kinyan of gerushin is equally deficient in the kinyan of kiddushin. Therefore, if mechubar cannot effect a kinyan for gerushin, it cannot effect a kinyan for kiddushin either, whether through shtar or kesef.
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 2a
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.
