A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Is the mitzvah (מצוה) of shofar to blow an instrument (tekiah) or to hear the sound (shemiyah)? The shiur resolves this tension by explaining that shofar is a chefetz of tefillah—an appendage to the person speaking, not an independent musical instrument. This yesod answers the classic kashyas: how shlichut works for a mitzvah shebe'gufo, and why a cheresh or katan cannot fulfill the mitzvah.
This shiur addresses a fundamental machloket Rishonim about the nature of the mitzvah (מצוה) of shofar on Rosh Hashanah. The Gemara (גמרא) in Rosh Hashanah 26a presents two seemingly contradictory principles: the requirement that a bar chiyuv (obligated person) blow the shofar suggests a mitzvah of tekiah (blowing), while the requirement that one hear the actual sound of the shofar (not an echo in a bor) indicates a mitzvah of shemiyah (hearing). The Maran Habib, Chasam Sofer, and Shaagas Aryeh all grapple with this tension. The Maran Habib suggests that there are two aspects to the mitzvah: both tekiah and shemiyah, which must occur simultaneously. This creates a difficulty: if there is a mitzvah of tekiah, how can one person blow shofar as a shaliach for another? It would be a mitzvah shebe'gufo (a mitzvah that must be performed personally), like putting on tefillin. The Maran Habib proposes a special derasha from "Yom Teruah Yihiyeh Lachem" to permit shlichut, but this is a difficult approach.
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!
Rosh Hashanah 26a
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.
