A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a woman remarry with a get that has not been verified (she'eino mekuyam)? The Rambam (רמב"ם) allows it based on ne'emanus and chezkas kashrus, but the Raavad insists kiyum is required even without an oirer. The shiur analyzes this fundamental dispute through Gittin 2a-3a, exploring whether chashash mezuyif applies differently to gittin versus monetary documents and why Tosfos works so hard to avoid establishing mezuyif as the concern.
This shiur delves into a crucial machlokes Rishonim regarding whether a woman can remarry with a get that has not undergone formal kiyum (verification). The sugya begins with the Mishna's discussion of how a get is verified in Eretz Yisrael versus chutz la'aretz, and the circumstances under which one must say "befanai nechta ufanai nechta" (it was written and signed in my presence). The Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Geirushin (Perek 7:24 and Perek 12:2) rules that a woman holding a get is believed to remarry even if the get has not been verified through kiyum chosamo. The Rambam's position is based on the principle of chezkas kashrus—we assume the document is valid unless there is reason to suspect otherwise. Additionally, the woman herself is ne'emenes (believed) because of the principle "ein isha osah kalkalah al atzma" (a woman does not create problems for herself). The Rambam provides extensive reasoning spanning twenty-five lines to justify this leniency.
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 2a-3a
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.
