A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a woman be divorced when the get lands in her vessel that's in her husband's domain? The shiur analyzes whether the kinyan operates through chatzer (domain) or yad (hand), examining Rashi (רש"י)'s requirement of hagbah (lifting) versus Tosafos (תוספות)'s position that placement in the vessel suffices, with implications for how gittin acquire differently than standard kinyanim.
This shiur analyzes the sugya in Gittin 78a concerning a fundamental question in the laws of gittin (divorce): when a husband places a get in a vessel belonging to his wife while that vessel is still in his domain, has she acquired it? The Gemara (גמרא) establishes that if the vessel is gavuah asarah (elevated ten tefachim), the get is valid even though it remains in the husband's property. The shiur presents a fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות) on how kinyan (acquisition) works in this case. Rashi maintains that even when an object is already in one's hand (yad), one still needs to perform hagbah (lifting) of at least three tefachim for a kinyan to take effect. According to Rashi, the reason the get works when the vessel is elevated ten tefachim is that at that height, the vessel constitutes a reshus bifnei atzmo (domain unto itself), and the husband's domain cannot be mevatel (nullify) the wife's domain. Rashi adds that the space beneath must be usable by the husband—if the bed has sides that prevent use underneath, it wouldn't work.
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!
Gittin 78a
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.
