A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When found matzos might have been bought with ma'aser sheini money, can we use statistical probability to determine their status? The Rivash's principle distinguishes between real mathematical probabilities (like birth ratios) versus mere speculation about human behavior. This creates a fundamental yesod about when halacha (הלכה) recognizes statistical reasoning.
This shiur analyzes Gemara (גמרא) Pesachim 7a focusing on the case of matzos found in Jerusalem before Pesach (פסח) and the halachic question of their status. The Gemara discusses whether such matzos can be assumed to have been purchased with ma'aser sheini money, which would affect their permissibility for consumption. The discussion centers on the principle of 'samech miyut la-palga' - relying on a minority factor combined with a majority to create a new majority. Rashi (רש"י) explains that most people in Jerusalem buy animals with ma'aser sheini money from those who came up for the festivals. Once the animal is purchased, the kedushah transfers to the animal and the money becomes chullin (ordinary). The question arises whether found money fell from the seller (now chullin) or the buyer (still ma'aser sheini).
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!
Pesachim 7a
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.
