A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How can Rabbeinu Tam hold that regular sunset has no halachic significance when the Gemara (גמרא) discusses eating teruma at sunset and he himself rules that sacrificial blood becomes invalid then? The shiur resolves this by distinguishing between the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s view of Shema as one mitzvah (מצוה) with exclusive time periods versus Rabbeinu Tam's approach of overlapping day and night modes.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Masechta Berachos 2a, examining the classic dispute between Rabbeinu Tam and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding the proper times for reciting Shema. Rabbi Zweig begins by explaining Rabbeinu Tam's position that one can daven Maariv from Plag Mincha based on Rav Yehuda's opinion, calculating this to be approximately 5:30-5:45 PM on a standard day. According to Rabbeinu Tam, what we consider sunset is merely "Techilas Shkiya" with no halachic significance, while true halachic sunset (Shkiya) occurs 72 minutes later, followed by Tzeis Hakochavim. The shiur addresses several fundamental problems with Rabbeinu Tam's approach: First, the Gemara (גמרא)'s Hava Amina that eating teruma should be permitted at "Bias Oro" (sunset) becomes meaningless if this moment has no halachic relevance. Second, Rabbeinu Tam himself rules in Zevachim that sacrificial blood becomes invalid at "Shkiyas Hachamos" - referring to the first sunset which, according to his own system, should be halachically insignificant. Rabbi Zweig then examines the Rambam's approach in Hilchos Krias Shema, noting apparent contradictions in the Rambam's formulation. The Rambam states that one who reads Shema after midnight but before dawn fulfills the obligation, yet rules that one who reads the evening Shema after dawn but before sunrise does not fulfill the obligation, even post-facto, unless acting under duress. This creates a fundamental question about the nature of the mitzvah (מצוה) and the authority of the Sages to modify Torah (תורה) obligations. The shiur explores whether Shema represents one mitzvah with different time periods or two distinct mitzvah modes. According to one interpretation, the Rambam views Shema as a single mitzvah that must be fulfilled every twelve hours ("Pamayim bechol yom"), making the time periods mutually exclusive. When a new time period begins, it cancels the previous obligation. The Sages can delay the onset of a new obligation (as with someone acting under duress) but cannot cancel an obligation once it takes effect. In contrast, Rabbeinu Tam and Tosafos (תוספות) view the day and night recitations as fundamentally different modes of the same mitzvah - a "Beshochbecha" mode and "Uvekumecha" mode - which can theoretically overlap during transitional periods. The analysis extends to practical halachic implications, including the permissibility of making up missed Shema recitations (tashlum) and the different blessing formulations for morning versus evening. The shiur concludes by suggesting that this fundamental dispute affects how we understand the relationship between Torah obligations and Rabbinic authority, the nature of time-bound mitzvos, and the practical applications of these principles in daily Jewish observance.
Berachos 2a
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.
Up Next in this Series
Why does saying Ashrei three times daily guarantee a share in the World to Come? The verse 'umasbia l'chol chai ratzon' reveals that God provides not just sustenance but pleasure to all creation out of pure love. This recognition teaches us that even basic needs are expressions of divine chesed, creating the foundation for love-motivated service through both major and minor mitzvos.
Should one learn Torah full-time trusting in Divine providence, or combine learning with work? The shiur distinguishes between Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai's approach of complete separation from worldly concerns versus Rabbi Shmuel's view that proper work itself becomes part of Torah. The key insight: true emunah means learning without demanding sustenance from either Hashem or community, unlike having a 'contract' expecting payment for learning.
Should one combine Torah study with work, or rely entirely on Divine providence through exclusive learning? The shiur analyzes the machlokes between Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, explaining that 'Bnei Aliyah' live above natural law where Torah itself becomes their reality. This connects to the difference between tzaddik gamor and tzaddik she'eino gamor regarding transcending physical limitations.
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.
