A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can kiddushin take effect at the beginning of biah or only at its completion? The Gemara (גמרא)'s conclusion that "kol ha'boeil daito l'gmar biah" means a person's intent is for the completed act, not retroactively from the start. This principle prevents kiddushin with biah for a kohen gadol and clarifies the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s distinction between erusin and nisuin.
The shiur analyzes the fundamental question in Kiddushin 10a: does the act of biah (marital relations) effect kiddushin from its beginning (techilat biah) or only upon its completion (sof biah)? The Gemara (גמרא)'s inquiry centers on whether the kinyan (acquisition) works retroactively from the initial contact or only when the act is complete. Rabbi Zweig examines the major Rishonim's approaches. The Rashba and Rivam hold that it depends on the person's kavanah (intent)—if he intends to be mekadesh at the beginning, techilat biah works; if at the end, sof biah. Rabbeinu Tam argues that the Gemara is addressing whether biah requires techilat hach'nasat ha'atar (initial penetration) or sof hach'nasat ha'atar (complete penetration), attempting to align this Gemara with the principle in Yevamot that "ha'arah konah" (initial contact effects acquisition).
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 10a
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.
