A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why can't you blow a shofar that came from an olah korban? The shiur examines whether the prohibition stems from meila, mitzvah (מצוה) haba'ah b'aveira, or lo yachel. Rashi (רש"י), the Rambam (רמב"ם), and Tosafos (תוספות) disagree on the basic mechanism—and each position reshapes how we understand kiyum mitzvah, hana'ah from mitzvos, and the interplay between issur and kol (sound).
This shiur is a deep analysis of Rosh Hashanah 28a, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s ruling that one may not blow a shofar taken from an olah offering, but if one does so b'shogeg, one is yotzei. The shiur opens with Rashi (רש"י)'s question: the Gemara states that after zerikas ha-dam (casting the blood), there is no meila in the hide or horns of an olah, so when was the shofar removed? Rashi explains it must have been taken before zerika. The Kesef Mishna asks: why didn't Rashi simply say it was after shechita (slaughter) but before zerika? This small textual difficulty opens the door to a much larger conceptual inquiry. Rabbi Zweig explores three fundamental approaches to explaining why shofar shel olah is problematic. The first approach, associated with the Tur and some Rishonim, is that the problem is mitzvah (מצוה) haba'ah b'aveira—a mitzvah performed through a transgression is invalid. According to this view, by blowing a shofar that still has the status of hekdesh (or that was removed in violation of issur hana'ah), the mitzvah is tainted. The shiur notes that Tosafos (תוספות) in Sukkah holds that mitzvah haba'ah b'aveira is only a rabbinic disqualification, and only when the aveira was done b'shogeg does one become yotzei. This generates a question on the Rambam (רמב"ם), who paskens that if one blows a shofar shel olah, one is yotzei, without distinguishing between shogeg and meizid—suggesting the Rambam does not accept Tosafos's framework.
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 28a
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.
