A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
May wood that fell from a tree on Shabbos (שבת) be used on Yom Tov by mixing it with permitted wood? The Gemara (גמרא) establishes that fire hides the identity of muktzeh wood (bitul berov), but moving the logs remains problematic. The answer—that rabbinic prohibitions permit bitul lechatchila—is then challenged by the principle of davar sheyesh lo matirin.
This shiur examines Beitzah 4b, analyzing Rav Masna's statement that wood falling from a tree on Yom Tov may be used if mixed with permitted wood (mar ba'alayim eitzim). The Gemara (גמרא)'s line of questioning reveals two distinct muktzeh problems: being nene (benefiting) from muktzeh fire, and physically moving muktzeh logs. Rabbi Zweig develops a framework showing these require different solutions. The first issue—benefiting from fire containing muktzeh wood—is resolved through bitul berov because the fire itself is not nikur (identifiable): one cannot distinguish which flames come from permitted versus forbidden wood. This satisfies the requirement for using the fire even though the individual logs remain identifiable.
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!
Beitzah 4b
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.
