A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why is a get signed shelo lishma by kosher eidim only pasul mid'Rabbanan and not batul? The shiur analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s chiddush that eidim pasulim are "nothing" (hence only pasul d'Rabbanan), but shelo lishma creates a real chasima that could have been pasul mid'Oraisa. The distinction reveals a fundamental split between the din of eidus and the din of chasima.
This shiur explores Masechta Gittin daf 4a, focusing on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s treatment of eidim chasima versus eidim mesira in the laws of divorce. The central tension is: if eidim chasima are only a din d'Rabbanan (because mid'Oraisa only eidim mesira are required), why should a get signed shelo lishma or by pasul witnesses ever be worse than simply "missing" the Rabbinic requirement? The Rambam in Perek Alef, Halacha (הלכה) Yud Gimmel establishes that eidim mesira are the ikar mid'Oraisa, and eidim chasima were instituted by the Chachamim lest the eidim mesira die. Nevertheless, l'chatchila one should have both eidim mesira and eidim chasima "she'ikar hageirushin b'eidim mesira." The Rambam rules that if a get has kosher eidim chasima but is given without eidim mesira (or with pasul eidim mesira), it is kasher—though there is a minority view (yesh omrim) that holds it pasul.
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 4a
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.
