No community start suggestion yet.
What role does the amir (verbal declaration) play in the ma'aseh kiddushin? The shiur develops three approaches: that it merely shows the parties want to be married, that it defines what kinyan is being made, or that it creates the mechanics of "ki yikach"—the husband's act of taking. A machloket Rishonim between the Ran and the Rashba on kiddushei shtar reveals whether the woman is a passive object or an active party who must be makneh herself.
This shiur explores the fundamental nature of the verbal declaration (amir) in kiddushin, analyzing the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of nosen hu ve'omer hi (he gives and she speaks). The shiur begins by reviewing the Avnei Miluim and Ketzot's yesod that the woman is essentially passive in kiddushin—she is merely the object being acquired, not a party to the transaction. This is derived from the pasuk "ki yikach" (when he takes) rather than "ki sikach" (when she is taken). According to their view, kiddushin only requires eidim (witnesses) for the husband's actions, not for the woman's understanding or consent. The shiur challenges this approach by examining the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position. The Rambam rules that kiddushei shtar requires giving the document in front of witnesses, yet also rules that by a get (divorce document), if witnesses sign the document, the woman can effect the divorce simply by having it in her possession without witnesses at the moment of delivery. The Lechem Mishneh questions why kiddushin should be different—why can't witnesses sign a shtar kiddushin and then let the woman effect the kiddushin by possessing it? The Meir Simcha answers that by get, her admission (hoda'ah) that she received it is valid since it doesn't harm others (chav la'achrini), whereas by kiddushin, her admission would potentially harm her sister by prohibiting the sister from marrying this man, making it chav la'achrini and therefore invalid.
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 5b
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.
