A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Tosafos (תוספות) Rishonim reject sfeik sfeika here, claiming it's ein misapach? The shiur develops two approaches: either we have only a halachic safek (not a metzius safek) since rov says he's a baki, or smoch miyut l'chazakah creates a din safek but not true fifty-fifty odds that would allow another miyut to tip the scales.
This shiur addresses multiple complex questions on Tosafos (תוספות) in Kesubos 9b regarding sfeik sfeika (double doubt) in cases of eishes ish. The Gemara (גמרא) discusses a woman whose husband claims she committed adultery based on finding a pesach (פסח) pasuach (evidence of relations). The basic question is whether she loses her kesuvah and becomes forbidden. Rabbi Zweig begins by outlining several fundamental questions: Why does Tosafos require a chazakah here when it's already a sfeik sfeika? What's the mechanism by which sfeik sfeika can override the principle of ein ochin mamon acharov (we don't remove money based on doubt)? Why does the Tosafos Rishonim claim this sfeik sfeika is ein misapach (not applicable)?
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!
Kesubos 9b
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.
