No community start suggestion yet.
When may a Jew tell a non-Jew to perform a forbidden act on Shabbos (שבת) for a mitzvah (מצוה)? The shiur analyzes Tosafot's distinction between bris milah (where amira l'akum for an issur d'rabbanan is permitted) and other mitzvos like kriat haTorah. The principle of shevut d'shevut emerges: only for a mitzvah that itself is docheh Shabbos can one invoke this leniency.
This shiur focuses on a Tosafot in Masechta Gittin 8b that addresses the parameters of amira l'akum (instructing a non-Jew to perform labor) on Shabbos (שבת) for the sake of a mitzvah (מצוה). The discussion opens with two seemingly contradictory Gemaras regarding bris milah on Shabbos. One Gemara (גמרא) in Eruvin states that if water for the bris spills and needs to be warmed, one may not instruct a non-Jew to heat water (a melacha d'oraisa), but one may do so indirectly through the mother if she is within seven days of birth (when one may be mechallel Shabbos for her needs) by being marbeh b'shiur—preparing extra water. Another Gemara permits telling a non-Jew to carry water from a courtyard (an issur d'rabbanan) for the bris. Tosafot resolves the contradiction by establishing a fundamental principle: for the mitzvah of bris milah, one may instruct a non-Jew to perform an issur d'rabbanan, but not an issur d'oraisa. The shiur then explores why the Gemara regarding land acquisition in Eretz Yisrael permits amira l'akum even for writing a document (kesiva, a melacha d'oraisa). Tosafot explains this is due to the unique mitzvah of yishuv Eretz Yisrael—settling the land of Israel—which warrants special leniency. The class grapples with what distinguishes yishuv Eretz Yisrael from bris milah. One suggestion is that the land might be permanently lost if the transaction isn't completed immediately, whereas bris milah can be performed on subsequent days (albeit without the mitzvah of performing it on the eighth day). Another theory is that the entire process of land acquisition is itself the mitzvah, not merely a hechsher (preparation).
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.
Why does the Gemara present a kal v'chomer for chuppah making kiddushin based on kesef not being maichel b'terumah, only to reject it? The shiur reveals that even the rejected kal v'chomer establishes a fundamental yesod: kiddushin is a kinyan for ishus (marital relationship), not merely a kinyan in hilchos kinyanim. The second kal v'chomer—from chuppah being gomeres—raises Tosafos's famous question.
Is the kesef used in kiddushin a true kinyan (acquisition), or merely a symbolic means of establishing marriage? The shiur analyzes multiple interpretations of the Gemara's derivation from ki yikach ki'ach mi'Sayeffron, exploring whether marriage constitutes ownership, and develops three fundamental approaches: (1) The Gemara proves ishus is a kinyan, (2) ishus is not a kinyan but uses kinyan-like means, or (3) ishus is a kinyan but the kesef may not be a ma'aseh kinyan. The Rambam's position—calling kesef "midivrei sofrim"—is explained as distinguishing between cross-referencing concepts versus borrowing terminology.
Why does the Mishna alternate between the language of "kinyan" (acquisition) and "kiddushin" (sanctification) when describing marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: marriage has two separate aspects—a kinyan dimension (ownership) and a kedusha dimension (sanctified relationship). Either aspect can initiate the bond, and understanding this dual nature resolves multiple textual and halachic questions throughout the sugya.
Does kiddushei shetar require a shevah pruta? The Ran presents two approaches to the Rif's position. The shiur develops the Ran's second pshat that shetar kiddushin functions as a hachnah (exchange) rather than a mere kinyan nesina. This reading has profound implications for isuri hana'ah, mechubar, and the relationship between kesef and shetar.