A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Is kidushei kesef (marriage through money) d'Oraisa or divrei Soferim? The shiur analyzes a fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י) and the Rambam (רמב"ם) over the gezeira shava "kicha kicha" from Avrohom's purchase of the Me'aras Hamachpela. The Rambam holds the gezeira shava teaches kinyan in principle, but the Chachamim determined kesef as the form—making it divrei Soferim. Rashi holds the gezeira shava cross-references the word kesef itself, making it d'Oraisa.
This shiur on Kiddushin 2a delivers a comprehensive analysis of the fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י) and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding the status of kidushei kesef—whether acquiring a wife through money is a biblical (d'Oraisa) or rabbinic-level (divrei Soferim) institution. The discussion opens with the Gemara (גמרא)'s statement "teinach bekasfa, b'dia ma'ikol ha'meimar"—if the woman was forcibly betrothed with money, the Rabbis can annul it, but with bi'ah (relations) this is difficult since it is biblically mandated. Rashi cites his teachers who held kidushei kesef is divrei Soferim, enabling rabbinic annulment. Yet this conflicts with the Gemara's gezeira shava "kicha kicha" from Avrohom's purchase, which should make it fully biblical. Rabbi Zweig first addresses Rashi's two core objections to calling kidushei kesef "rabbinic": (1) the gezeira shava "kicha kicha mistaya Efron" makes it as if explicitly written in the Torah (תורה), and (2) a woman betrothed with kesef who commits adultery receives capital punishment, which is impossible if she's only rabbinically married. Rashi is forced to explain the Gemara differently, rejecting the view of his teachers.
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.
