No community start suggestion yet.
How can a mother's chazakah help determine her daughter's marriageability to a Kohen? The Gemara (גמרא) says "cheskas eim mahani lebas" but the mechanics seem impossible—the mother's chazakah tells us she can't be disqualified from marrying a Kohen, but doesn't resolve who the father was. The shiur develops that the daughter becomes a chalala only if the mother becomes a zonah, so when we rule the mother isn't a zonah (due to her chazakah), the daughter can't be a chalala either.
This shiur analyzes a complex Gemara (גמרא) in Kesubos 13a-13b dealing with the principle of "cheskas eim mahani lebas" (the mother's chazakah benefits the daughter). The central question is how a mother's presumptive status can help determine whether her daughter may marry a Kohen when there's uncertainty about the father's identity. The Gemara discusses a case where both mother and daughter are believed when they testify about their marriageability. Rashi (רש"י) explains this means they're permitted to marry Kohanim. The Shach learns that regarding Kohanim, this involves a safek d'oraisa (biblical doubt), while for regular Jews it's only safek d'rabbanan (rabbinic doubt).
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-13b
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.
