No community start suggestion yet.
The shiur analyzes Kiddushin 3b, examining why the Gemara (גמרא) brings a different pasuk than on daf beis to derive the methods of kiddushin. Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot present fundamentally different understandings of the kal vachomer: Rashi learns kesef from the kinyan of biyah, while Tosafot learn kesef as a kinyan from amah ivriyah's kinyan structure, treating the entire framework as kinyanim rather than ishus-based relationships.
The shiur opens with a fundamental question: why does the Gemara (גמרא) on daf gimmel aleph cite a different pasuk to derive the laws of kiddushin than the Gemara on daf beis aleph? Rashi (רש"י) explains that the pasuk here concludes with "veyatza," teaching that a get is required to dissolve the relationship. This establishes that kiddushin creates a status requiring a get for termination—demonstrating that we're dealing with a real kicha (acquisition) that equates to geirushin (divorce). The Rambam (רמב"ם) similarly brings different pesukim in different contexts: in Yad HaChazakah he cites the pasuk from Meis Shemera to teach that kinyan is required, while in Sefer HaMitzvos he brings this parsha's pasuk to teach the derachim (methods) of kinyan. The Gemara derives kiddushin through a kal vachomer, but Rashi and Tosafot fundamentally disagree on its structure. According to Rashi, the kal vachomer compares kesef to biyah: since biyah works by isha, kal vachomer kesef should work. The proof that kesef is stronger comes from amah ivriyah—where biyah doesn't work but kesef does. According to Tosafot, the kal vachomer compares the kinyan of isha to the kinyan of amah ivriyah: since kesef works by amah ivriyah (which is not niknis with biyah), kal vachomer it should work by isha (which is niknis with biyah). The difference is fundamental: Rashi learns kinyan kesef from kinyan biyah of isha, using amah ivriyah merely as evidence that kesef is stronger. Tosafot learn kinyan kesef of isha from kinyan kesef of amah ivriyah, using biyah as the measure to show amah ivriyah is more chamur.
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 3b
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.
