A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What does it mean to say "chatzi isha mekudeshes li" (half the woman is betrothed to me)? The Gemara (גמרא) says kedusha cannot spread to the whole woman because "da'as acheres ma'akeves." The shiur presents the fundamental machloket between the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Tosafot: does hispashtus (spreading) mean the chalos of kedusha itself spreads, or only the ma'aseh kiddushin?
The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא) on Kiddushin 7b which discusses the case of a man who says "chatzi isha mekudeshes li" (half the woman is betrothed to me) or "chetziyach mekudeshes li." The Gemara raises the question of why the kedusha (sanctity) doesn't spread from the half to the whole woman through the principle of hispashtus, just as kedusha spreads in hekdesh (consecration) of animals. The Gemara answers that "da'as acheres ma'akeves" — another person (the woman herself) is resisting. The shiur presents a fundamental machloket Rishonim in understanding this sugya. Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot understand that the problem is that the woman did not agree to the second half. She only consented to what she heard — chatzi — and therefore the kedusha cannot spread to the second half. According to this approach, if she would agree to the whole thing, then even saying "chatzi" would result in full kiddushin through hispashtus. Tosafot adds a critical condition: this only works if one uses the lashon of kedusha ("mekudeshes"), not the lashon of erusin ("me'oreses"). According to Tosafot, what spreads in hispashtus is not the chalos (the status that takes effect) but rather the dibur (the verbal act) or ma'aseh kiddushin itself. Therefore, one must use language of kedusha for hispashtus to work.
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 7b
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.
