A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a man remarries his divorcée and dies childless, does she require chalitzah? The shiur analyzes a fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י), Tosafos (תוספות), and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding whether the pasuk of tumah creates an issur of eishes ach on the gerushah, and explores the nature of the resulting chalitzah—is it chalitzah psulaḥ or a unique zikah lechalitzah only?
This shiur presents a comprehensive analysis of Yevamos 11b and the complex machlokes between Rashi (רש"י), Tosafos (תוספות), and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding the case of machzir gerushaso—a man who remarries his divorcée, then dies childless. The central question is whether this gerushah requires chalitzah, and if so, what is the halachic nature of that chalitzah. The Gemara (גמרא) presents a dispute between the Chachamim and Rav Yosi ben Kipper. According to the Chachamim, the pasuk of tumah is written specifically on the gerushah, creating a unique din. According to Rav Yosi ben Kipper, the tumah was removed from nisuin by the Torah (תורה), implying a different halachic structure. The first shakla v'tarya of the Gemara asks whether the gerushah herself needs chalitzah, and whether the tzarah needs chalitzah or may do yibum. The second shakla v'tarya establishes that according to the Chachamim, the gerushah is forbidden and requires chalitzah, while the tzarah is muteres leyibum.
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!
Yevamos 11b
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.
