No community start suggestion yet.
Why can beis din convert a minor without his consent when we normally can't act on someone's behalf without their permission? The Gemara (גמרא)'s comparison to acquiring property for another person raises fundamental questions about the nature of conversion. Rashi (רש"י)'s approach distinguishes between lifestyle issues (where proper chinuch prevents later rejection) and inherent desires (where even minors will eventually rebel).
This shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of converting a minor (ger katan) through beis din without the child's consent. The fundamental question is how this fits with the general principle that one cannot acquire something for another person that might be detrimental to them (ein choven l'adam shelo befanav). The Gemara compares this to the principle of zachin l'adam shelo befanav (we can act for someone's benefit in their absence), suggesting that conversion is beneficial for the child. However, this raises a conceptual difficulty: how can conversion, which involves taking on the burden of mitzvah (מצוה) observance, be compared to acquiring property or other material benefits? The shiur explores Rashi (רש"י)'s interpretation of why conversion is considered beneficial for a minor but potentially burdensome for an adult. Rashi explains that an adult who converts faces the challenge of tom tom di-isur (he has tasted forbidden pleasures), making Jewish observance feel restrictive. A child, however, hasn't yet developed these desires, so conversion represents pure benefit.
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!
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.
Why does halacha forbid entering dangerous places if everything happens by Divine decree? The shiur examines the debate between Rashi and Tosfos on traveling at night, developing a fundamental distinction: Rashi holds one must avoid even deserved punishments that Hashem delays through mercy, while Tosfos holds the prohibition addresses self-inflicted harm through free will. This framework reveals how people rationalize self-destructive behavior as "hashgacha."
Why does the Gemara praise hospitality to scholars as a unique mitzvah rather than ordinary hachnasas orchim? The shiur distinguishes two mitzvahs: hachnasas orchim (providing for those in need) and connecting to talmidei chachamim (cleaving to God through scholars). Yisro's meal for the Jewish leaders wasn't charity—it was his way of bonding with those transformed by Torah, teaching that learning must fundamentally change who we are.
Kesubos 11a
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!
