A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Gemara (גמרא) permit amira l'akum (telling a non-Jew to do work) for yishuv Eretz Yisrael but not for milah? Tosafot distinguishes between shvus d'shvus (two degrees removed from Torah (תורה) prohibition), treated like an aseh and permitted when milah is docheh Shabbos (שבת), versus one shvus, treated like a lo sa'aseh and forbidden. The Bahag disagrees, permitting even one shvus for mitzvos.
This shiur analyzes a fundamental Tosafot in Gittin 8b addressing the parameters of amira l'akum (instructing a non-Jew to perform labor on Shabbos (שבת)) for the sake of mitzvah (מצוה) performance. The Gemara (גמרא) states that for yishuv Eretz Yisrael (settling the Land of Israel), one may tell a non-Jew to perform even a melachah d'oraisa, but for other mitzvos—even milah—this is forbidden. Tosafot asks: How can yishuv Eretz Yisrael be more stringent than milah, which is actually docheh Shabbos (overrides Shabbos)? Furthermore, the Gemara in Eruvin permits telling a non-Jew to heat water for a baby's milah by carrying through an area without an eruv—a shvus—so why does the Gemara here say other mitzvos don't permit amira l'akum? Tosafot develops a fundamental principle: there is a critical distinction between shvus d'shvus (a Rabbinic prohibition two steps removed from Torah (תורה) law) and one shvus (a single Rabbinic prohibition directly protecting a Torah law). For milah, which is docheh Shabbos, one may instruct a non-Jew to violate a shvus d'shvus—such as telling him to perform a Rabbinic prohibition (amira l'akum) to do another Rabbinic act (hotza'ah without eruv). But one may not tell a non-Jew to do even a single shvus for milah, because that would be treated with the stringency of a lo sa'aseh (negative prohibition). Tosafot further limits this: even shvus d'shvus is only permitted for milah specifically, because milah is docheh Shabbos; other mitzvos do not have this power.
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 8b
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.
