No community start suggestion yet.
Does kiddushin require only a valid kinyan (transaction), or must the woman also want to designate herself to the man? The shiur develops that kiddushin involves two distinct elements: hilchos kinyanim (where coercion can still create a valid transaction) and a separate halacha (הלכה) that the woman must want him—asur la'kuli alma k'hekdesh. This framework resolves contradictions in Rashi (רש"י) and explains why shotgun marriages work differently for men and women.
This shiur on Kiddushin 2b analyzes a fundamental dispute among Rishonim regarding whether a woman can be mekudeshes ba'al korcha (against her will). The Gemara (גמרא) introduces the concept through the sugya of taluy v'zaven (conditional on sale) and taluy v'koneh (conditional on acquisition), exploring whether coercion invalidates kiddushin. The Rajva holds that just as taluy v'koneh works in monetary transactions, it should certainly work for kiddushin. The Gemara's discussion of afkinu rabbanan kiddushin (the Rabbis uprooted the kiddushin) applies only to the woman forcing the man, not vice versa. The Ba'alei Tosafos (תוספות), however, maintain that if taluy v'koneh doesn't work, certainly taluy v'zaven doesn't work—therefore a man cannot be forced into kiddushin either. The Smag offers a third approach: taluy v'zaven definitely doesn't work (a woman cannot be forced), but taluy v'koneh is subject to the Gemara's debate about whether afkinu rabbanan kiddushin applies.
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 2b
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.
