A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can two men marry two women using a single pruta shared between them? The Gemara (גמרא)'s principle of "bosor nosen umekabel azlinan" reveals a fundamental distinction: kiddushin is a religious ceremony in which people can share participation, unlike hilchos kinyanim where each acquisition requires its own complete pruta. This yesod explains why the same mechanism cannot work for simultaneously buying two separate cows.
The shiur analyzes a complex Gemara (גמרא) on Kiddushin 7b dealing with the question of whether two brothers can marry two sisters using a single pruta, with the father serving as shaliach. The fundamental question is whether we follow "bosor nosen" (we look at the giver) or "bosor mekabel" (we look at the receiver) when determining if there is a valid shver pruta for kiddushin. Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות) disagree on the details of the case. Tosafos holds that by daughters who are gedolos (adult), the father would be their shaliach, and therefore two prutos would definitely be needed. Therefore, Tosafos explains the Gemara is discussing ketanos (minors), where the father's acceptance is sufficient. Rashi, however, does not specify ketanos, suggesting that even by gedolos, one pruta suffices. This implies that even when the sons are shluchim (agents), only one pruta is needed. The Rambam (רמב"ם) similarly rules "stam" (without qualification), implying the halacha (הלכה) applies even to gedolos.
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.
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.
