No community start suggestion yet.
Can a man marry half a woman with half a pruta, then marry the other half with another half a pruta? The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s question of whether one can perform kiddushin on "chatzi isha" (half a woman), exploring the machlokes between Tosfos (who holds kiddushin involves both kinyan and kedusha aspects) and the Rashba (who focuses on chasar niskayach), and how the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Rama understand the structure of partial marriages.
This shiur examines a fundamental sugya in Masechta Kiddushin (daf 7a-b) dealing with the possibility of marrying a woman in stages or portions. The central question is whether a man can be mekadesh (marry) half a woman with half a pruta, and then marry the other half with another half a pruta, or whether such partial marriages are valid at all. The Gemara (גמרא) presents several cases: marrying with "chatzi pruta v'chatzi pruta" (half a pruta and half a pruta), marrying with "pruta u'pruta" (a full pruta and another full pruta), and various permutations involving partial marriages. The fundamental question is whether the concept of "hispashtus" (spreading out) applies—whether a kedusha that takes effect on half should automatically spread to encompass the whole woman.
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 7a-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.
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.
