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.
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.
