More Discussions for this daf
1. Comparing Kidushin to Gitin 2. Through a Shtar 3. Three ways
4. Tosfos DH Hacha 5. Kesef 6. Kidushin Against A Woman's Wishes
7. Darko Shel Ish la'Chazor 8. Misas ha'Ba'al 9. Kicha Ikrei Kinyan
10. Use of Derech in Masculine and Feminine Terms 11. Kesef as Kidushin 12. Kicha Ikrei Kinyan
13. Tosfos DH I Nami 14. First Tosfos here and in Kesuvos 15. Tosfos DH I Nami
16. Parallels to Yibum and the 3 Methods 17. Who Owns the Ring 18. Kidushin 002: Tosfos DH b'Perutah
19. Derech-Davar 20. Conjunction of multiple acquisitions 21. Kidushin against a woman's will
22. Comparing the term "ha'Ishah Niknis" to "ha'Ish Mekadesh" 23. Get for Yibum 24. Eirusin
25. ha'Isha Niknes 26. Erusin vs. Nisu'in 27. Hiskadshi Li in Rashi
DAF DISCUSSIONS - KIDUSHIN 2

menachem asked:

hi first thanks for your great work!

a. the gemara questions the term in our mishna:why here it is haisha nikneis,and there (the mishnah 42b) haish mekadesh? it should have equal terms?

i need tounderstand: where should we change here so it should fit for there or vice vrsa?

and for which ever way, why this way and not change the other way - MAI ROISA?

THE GEMARAS ANSWER implys that the question was to change here to fit to there,fine. but im still left with question no. 2 why change here more than there?

b. also i would like to understand WHAT should we change instead of haish niknes: here is 2 possible ways:

1)boh terms:it should say haish mekadesh

2)insted of niknes miskadeshes (RASHI).

NOW the problem with these two offers are insofar to offer number:

1)the seder of the gemara answers are not understood, for first he answers why not mekadesh then why not haish,it should be the opposite,like the order of the mishnah?

2)the seder of the questions is not understood,for first he asks niknes-miskadeshes, then later haish koneh. it should be the opposite like the order of the mishnah?

and a second problem with the second offer:

why would the makshan want to mechalek bettwen the loshon of the poel and peulah, that firsts asks that niknes should be miskadeshes, we should change every thing,so it should be totaly shoveh equal to daf 42b?

im sorry if its too long and not clear, im not a good writer.

thanking you in advance. and yishar koach for the web site! great work!

may we merrit6 the geulah miyad mamosh, ki moloh horets deah es hashem kamayim layom mechasim!

my e-mail is at asdfgh@shmais.com

menachem, ny usa

The Kollel replies:

Rashi's seems to explain that the Lashon of Kidushin should always be used (as you pointed out above). This is because acquiring an Ishah is quite different than acquiring a field due to the inherent Isur involved, making this a Kidushin. The Gemara answers that our first Mishna wanted to provide an emphasis on the Kinyan aspect of Kesef. If we must discuss Kinyan, the Gemara asks, we should keep the terminology uniform in the second Perek as well, using a Lashon of "Koneh." [As far as your "second problem with the second offer," this is a question that is discussed extensively by the Rishonim (Ritva and Rashba) and Acharonim (Pnei Yehoshua and Mitzpeh Eisan). See their answers at length.]

All the best,

Yaakov Montrose