A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Is eating chatzi shiur (less than the minimum measure) a quantitative lack in the act of eating, or a qualitative one? The shiur develops the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s shittah that chatzi shiur represents not merely "half the amount" but a distinct issur—a ta'am rather than achilah—derived from the ribui of "kol." This yesod has major nafka minas for shevu'os, bal ya'ir u'bal yeira'eh on Pesach (פסח), and ta'anis.
The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא) in Yoma 73b-74a concerning the issur of chatzi shiur (eating less than the minimum measure). The Gemara records a dispute between Rav Yochanan and Reish Lakish: Rav Yochanan holds chatzi shiur is assur because of "Chazal itztarfi" (it could combine to a full shiur), while Reish Lakish holds it is mutar. The Gemara ultimately cites a pasuk for the issur, leading Tosafos (תוספות) to ask: if there is a pasuk, why did the Gemara initially suggest the svara of "Chazal itztarfi"? Rabbi Zweig first surveys the major Rishonim. The Ran in Shevuos explains that chatzi shiur being assur min haTorah from a pasuk applies only where there is an issur nichnas (an actual food prohibition like chelev). For other cases (such as a shevu'ah not to eat), you need the svara of Chazal itztarfi. The Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Chametz u'Matzah rules that chatzi shiur of chametz on Pesach (פסח) is assur, citing a pasuk—but why is a pasuk needed if chatzi shiur is always assur min haTorah?
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!
Yoma 73b-74a
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.
