No community start suggestion yet.
Can one pruta effect two half-marriages, creating one whole kiddushin through mona v'holech? The shiur distinguishes three cases: half-pruta for half, whole pruta used twice for each half, and one pruta for two halves simultaneously. The third case may not be mona v'holech at all—it's acquiring two distinct halves, not joining them into one whole.
This shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא) in Kiddushin 7b on the concept of mona v'holech—a progressive acquisition that joins separate acts into one complete kinyan. The fundamental question is whether kiddushin can be accomplished through incremental steps that together equal a full pruta's worth. The Gemara presents three cases. First: giving half a pruta for half the woman, then another half-pruta for the other half. This is the clearest case of mona v'holech—each individual half-pruta is worthless, so the person is clearly describing an incomplete process that requires completion. Second: giving one whole pruta but saying it should acquire half the woman, then saying the same pruta should acquire the other half. Here one pruta is being used for two separate kinyanim. Third: "shnei chatzayich b'pruta"—one pruta to acquire two halves of the woman simultaneously.
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 7b
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.
