A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Rambam (רמב"ם) distinguish between "safek mekudeshes" and "mekudeshes besafek"? The shiur argues that the language reflects whether the man performed a recognizable act of kiddushin (creating a reis in her chezkas pnuya) versus merely wanting to marry without executing a proper maaseh kiddushin. The difference hinges on whether the doubt is in halacha (הלכה) or in metzius.
This shiur analyzes Kiddushin 5b and the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s treatment of safek kiddushin cases in Hilchos Ishus (perek 3, halachos 2-4). The focus is on understanding the Rambam's precise language when he writes "mekudeshes besafek" in some cases and "safek mekudeshes" in others, and whether this terminological distinction carries substantive halachic meaning. The shiur opens by mapping the Rambam's rulings across several scenarios: when he gives money to woman A as an agent for woman B and says "ba'at" (you also); when he gives money and says "ba'at nami"; the case of yad (where she physically receives the kiddushin); and the cases involving two women where one accepts on behalf of the other. Rabbi Zweig notes that the Rambam uses "mekudeshes besafek" for certain cases (nosan hu ve'amar hi, and the case of kelev-rat zachar lo in connection with a loaf of bread) and "safek mekudeshes" for others (the yad case and the kelev-rat case in halacha (הלכה) daled). This precise terminological difference, if intentional, must reflect a substantive halachic distinction.
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 5b
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.
