A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Gemara (גמרא) require two witnesses for a scribe's testimony that a get was written properly, rather than accepting a single witness? The shiur analyzes the interplay between rov (majority), smach mi'uta l'chazakah (minority attached to a chazakah), and davar she'be'ervah (forbidden relations) through multiple Tosafot and Rishonim, exploring whether the get's writing itself is the beginning of divorce or merely a halachic instrument.
This shiur on Gittin 2b presents a complex analysis of why a single witness (eid echad) is not believed regarding whether a get was written lishma (for the proper intent), requiring instead two witnesses. The Gemara (גמרא)'s answer invokes the principle that according to the Chachamim one relies on rov beki'in (the majority of scribes are experts), while according to Rabbi Meir even a minority concern (mi'uta) requires attention. Rabbi Zweig begins by presenting three fundamental difficulties with the Gemara's answer. First, Tosafot in Chulin 12a states that Rabbi Meir's concern for the mi'uta is only mid'Rabanan (rabbinic), not de'oraita (biblical). If so, why isn't a single witness believed? According to standard halachic principles, an eid echad is believed for rabbinic prohibitions. Second, Tosafot in Yevamot goes further, stating that Rabbi Meir is only concerned for a mi'uta where there is smach mi'uta l'chazakah (a minority attached to a presumptive status), and even that is only mid'Rabanan. The evidence: the din of demai (doubtfully tithed produce) is only rabbinic, yet it involves smach mi'uta l'chazakah. Third, the Ritva asks that even according to the Chachamim, we should have a problem of smach mi'uta l'chazakah here, since there is a chezkat issur (presumption of forbidden status) on the woman.
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 2b
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.
