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.
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.
