A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why can brachos for certain mitzvos like tevilah be made after the action, violating 'over la'asiyatan'? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction between making brachos on the ma'aseh hamitzvah (physical action) versus the kiyum hamitzvah (complete fulfillment). When the mitzvah (מצוה) isn't fully complete, like lulav before na'anuim or kiddushin before nisuin, 'over la'asiyatan' is preserved.
This shiur analyzes Tosafos (תוספות) on Pesachim 7b regarding the principle of 'over la'asiyatan' - making brachos before performing the mitzvah (מצוה) action. The Gemara (גמרא) discusses why certain mitzvos like tevilah are exceptions to this rule, with brachos made afterwards. Rabbi Zweig examines Tosafos' complex questions about lulav, where one appears to fulfill the mitzvah upon picking it up, yet still needs to perform na'anuim (waving). Tosafos asks how one can make the bracha 'al netilas lulav' if already yotzei the mitzvah, answering that since na'anuim are still required, it's considered 'over la'asiyatan.' The shiur explores a fundamental distinction between two types of halachic requirements: hilchos brachos (bracha must be chal on something) versus hilchos mitzvos (cannot do mitzvah without bracha). This leads to analyzing whether brachos are made on the ma'aseh hamitzvah (physical action) or the kiyum hamitzvah (fulfillment). The discussion extends to other mitzvos like milah and kiddushin, where brachos are made after certain actions. The Raavad and Rambam (רמב"ם) disagree about erusin - whether brachos are made before or after, relating to whether someone else's involvement affects the timing. Rabbi Zweig explains the Ritva's position that by kiddushin, the bracha is made after the ma'aseh but before complete kiyum, since nisuin is still required. This maintains 'over la'asiyatan' since the mitzvah isn't fully complete. The shiur concludes by examining how these principles apply practically to various mitzvos, establishing when brachos can be made after actions without violating the requirement to make them beforehand.
Pesachim 7b
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.
