A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When does valuation (shuma) of kiddushin property need to occur? The shiur analyzes the machlokes between Rabba and Rav Yosef on whether shuma must precede kiddushin or can follow retroactively. Rashi (רש"י) and Rambam (רמב"ם) offer fundamentally different readings: Rashi limits the requirement to cases where shaveh kesef substitutes for kesef itself; Rambam frames it as protecting the woman's dignity from a cheapened ceremony.
This shiur explores Kiddushin 7b, focusing on the dispute between Rabba and Rav Yosef regarding shuma (valuation) in kiddushin. The central question is whether a woman can be mekudeshes retroactively (me'achshav) once the item's value is verified, or whether the valuation must be known at the moment of kiddushin (mikahn u'le'haba). The discussion begins with the Gemara (גמרא)'s two cases: one where the man says "be mekudeshes with this worth fifty," and another where he says "kol d'hu" (whatever minimum value it has). Rashi (רש"י)'s approach is examined first. According to Rashi, the principle of "lo tzarich shuma" (valuation is not needed beforehand) means there is already an implicit shuma present—not that no shuma is needed at all. When the Gemara says "kuli alma lo pligi lo tzarich shuma," it means everyone agrees you don't need an independent expert appraisal beforehand because the circumstances themselves establish the value. Rashi explains that in the case of "chamisha shevu chamisha" (fifty that are worth fifty), we're discussing a situation where someone says "be mekudeshes with fifty zuz" and gives shaveh kesef (property) as the substitute for actual kesef (money). According to Rav Yosef, when shaveh kesef is used to fulfill a contract denominated in kesef, the valuation must be established beforehand. Rabba disagrees and holds the shuma can come later.
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 7b
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.