A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When did Avram become Avrohom and Sarai become Sarah? The Midrash reveals that while Hashem (ה׳) commanded the name changes before the bris milah, the actual transformation occurred only at the moment of circumcision. This creates a fascinating halachic framework where the prohibition against using the old names preceded the actual acquisition of the new ones.
This shiur analyzes Midrash Rabbah 18:18 on Parashas Korach, examining the intricate mechanics behind the name changes of Avram to Avrohom and Sarai to Sarah. The Midrash presents a complex picture: while Hashem (ה׳) told Avram his name would become Avrohom before the bris milah, the actual name change (chal hashem) occurred only at the moment of circumcision. The shiur explores the cryptic statement that Avrohom received his additional 'hei' from Sarah's name, with one opinion suggesting the 'yud' from Sarai split into two 'hei's - one for Avrohom and one for Sarah. Another view maintains the 'yud' remained intact and was transferred to Yehoshua (when Moshe changed Hoshea's name).
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!
Midrash Rabbah Korach 18:18
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.
