A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does a shtar kiddushin require lishmah if the woman hasn't even agreed to marry yet? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: by get, lishmah is part of the maaseh gerushin itself, whereas by kiddushin it's only a requirement for the shtar—to make it a religious document, not a mere legal instrument. This resolves the Ktzos's question on writing a shtar shichrur for an eved you don't yet own.
The shiur opens with the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position that a shtar gerushin requires lishmah because "since she was not a bas gerushin from him when the get was written," the writing must be directed to the specific woman. The Ktzos HaChoshen raises a powerful question: if we learn lishmah for shtar kiddushin from shtar gerushin (based on the hekkesh of "veyatza v'haysa"), then how can you write a shtar kiddushin for a shifcha before you're meshahrer her? Just as you cannot write a get for a woman you're not yet married to, you shouldn't be able to write a shtar kiddushin for a shifcha who is not yet bar kiddushin. The Ktzos offers a complex answer: by get, it's theoretically possible to give the shtar gerushin before the kiddushin (which would invalidate it), but by shifcha, the shtar kiddushin and shtar shichrur come b'vas achas (simultaneously), so when delivered it will always be effective for kiddushin. The shiur finds this teretz extremely difficult (mamash unbelievable l'chor) and proposes an alternative approach.
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 2b
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.
