A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When is a woman believed about her own status regarding marriage to a kohen? The Gemara (גמרא) analyzes why the Mishna uses the euphemistic term "midaberet" instead of direct language, with a machlokes between whether it refers to seclusion (yichud) or actual relations, and explores the basis for her credibility.
This shiur examines a fundamental Gemara (גמרא) on Kesubos 13a dealing with a woman's credibility regarding her own status for marriage to a kohen. The Mishna presents a case where witnesses saw a woman "midaberet" (speaking/conversing) with a man, and she claims he was kosher and suitable for kohanim. Rabbi Gamliel and Rabbi Eliezer rule she is believed, while Rabbi Yehoshua rules she is not believed and is presumed to be disqualified from marrying a kohen. The Gemara focuses on the term "midaberet," analyzing why the Mishna chose this euphemistic language. Ziri interprets it as "nistera" (they were secluded), while Rav Asi reads it as "nivla" (they had relations). The shiur examines Rashi (רש"י)'s explanation that this demonstrates the principle of lashon hakavod (dignified language), noting that the Gemara in Sukkah derives this concept from a different verse.
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!
Kesubos 13a
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.
