No community start suggestion yet.
Why did the Torah (תורה) use goral (lottery) when Moshe already knew each tribe's portion through divine prophecy? The shiur develops the principle that goral establishes corporate ownership - every tribe owns sovereignty in all of Eretz Yisrael while receiving private ownership only in their specific portion. This explains why women have no Biblical obligation to bench since they lack land ownership, while Kohanim and Leviim retain their obligation through corporate ownership.
The shiur opens with a Gemara (גמרא) in Brachos 20a regarding whether women are obligated in birchas hamazon from the Torah (תורה) or rabbinically. Rashi (רש"י) explains that since women received no portion in Eretz Yisrael, their obligation is only rabbinic. However, Tosafot challenges this logic: if land ownership determines the obligation, then Kohanim and Leviim should also only have a rabbinic obligation, which seems untenable. Rabbi Zweig addresses this difficulty by analyzing the seemingly contradictory pesukim about dividing Eretz Yisrael. The Torah states both that larger tribes should receive larger portions and that the land should be divided equally by lottery. The Ramban (רמב"ן) explains that each tribe received equal-sized portions, while individuals within larger tribes received smaller shares. Rashi argues the opposite - that each individual received equal portions, necessitating different-sized tribal territories.
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!
Brachos 20a
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.
Up Next in this Series
Why does seeing a sotah inspire one to become a nazir? The nazir's abstention creates a pre-sin state where body and soul exist in perfect harmony. This 30-day period corrects the internal contradiction that led to his original transgression.
What is the primary purpose of the cities of refuge - protecting the accidental killer or something else? The shiur argues that creating respect for law takes precedence over providing sanctuary. True deterrence comes from recognizing the gravity of murder itself, not fear of punishment.
How can sinas chinam lead someone to harm himself even more than his enemy? The shiur develops that sinas chinam requires self-hatred first — only someone alienated from himself will damage himself to hurt others. The Bar Kamtsa host and R. Zecharya ben Avkulas both exhibited this self-alienation, showing that proper anava restores love of both self and others.
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.
