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.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
