A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a woman be mekudeshes through kinyan chalipin? The Gemara (גמרא) teaches that kinyan sudar (where the man promises money but gives only a symbolic cloth) doesn't work. Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot debate whether an actual exchange—giving the woman an object she can keep—is valid, with Rashi holding that using the lashon "chalipin" creates a genai that invalidates the kiddushin.
This shiur examines Kiddushin 2b and the question of whether chalipin (exchange) can create valid kiddushin. The Gemara (גמרא) establishes that chalipin doesn't work for kiddushin through a kal v'chomer: if yibum (which works through bi'ah) doesn't work through chuppah, then certainly kiddushin (which doesn't work through bi'ah) shouldn't work through chuppah. However, Rashi (רש"י)'s interpretation raises fundamental questions about what type of chalipin the Gemara is discussing. Rashi explains that the Gemara is discussing a case where "mosro lo aviv chuppah lesheim kiddushin"—where her father gave her over through chuppah for kiddushin—implying this is a case of kiddushei ketana (a minor). This is puzzling because nowhere in the Gemara on daf 5 is there any indication that we're dealing with a ketana. The Ran and Rambam (רמב"ם) also discuss what constitutes chuppah: according to the Ran, it means hachnasah l'reshus (entering his domain), while the Rambam holds it requires yichud harai l'biah (seclusion appropriate for marital relations).
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 2b
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.
