A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What does the Gemara (גמרא) mean when it says "kol omer tenou k'omer sechu domi"? The shiur develops the machlokes between Rabbeinu Tam and the Rambam (רמב"ם): Rabbeinu Tam holds tenou implicitly means sechu whenever the intent is clear, but the Rambam rejects this in hilchos gerushin because gerushin requires a specific ma'aseh mesina. By halva, however, tenou k'sechu works only as zakei, creating a direct kinyan rather than merely an irrevocable chazer right, to avoid the problem of chav l'acheirim.
This shiur on Gittin 11b examines the sugya of tofes l'ba'al chov and the critical Gemara (גמרא) statement "kol omer tenou k'omer sechu domi." Rabbi Zweig begins by raising fundamental questions on the Rif and Rambam (רמב"ם): where do they derive the halacha (הלכה) that tofes l'ba'al chov b'makom she'ein chav l'acher koneh? The Rav Maggid claims the source is from our Gemara, but the Gemara itself discusses a Mishna that speaks only of "ein yachol achzo bo," not that he is koneh. Furthermore, the Rif appears to bring the rayah from the Gemara's maskana rather than from Rabbi Yochanan's original statement, which is problematic. The shiur then turns to the Rambam's formulation in Hilchos Malveh V'Loveh, where the Rambam paskens that if the loveh says "zakei" to one of the ba'alei chovos, that ba'al chov acquires the object. The Rav Maggid says the source for this is our Gemara, but this raises serious difficulties. The Gemara says "tenou k'sechu," not "zakei." Moreover, the Rambam himself in Hilchos Sheluchin explicitly distinguishes between tenou and sechu, stating they have different halachic consequences. How then can the Rambam pasken davka zakei when the Gemara says tenou?
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!
Gittin 11b
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.
