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.
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.
