No community start suggestion yet.
Why do Chanukah (חנוכה) candles uniquely require a blessing for one who merely sees them, unlike other mitzvos? The shiur develops a chakira whether she'asa nisim is fundamentally a blessing on lighting or on seeing, resolving the machlokes between Rashi (רש"י) and Rambam (רמב"ם) about when the ro'eh blessing applies.
This shiur provides a detailed analysis of Gemara (גמרא) Shabbos (שבת) 21b, focusing on the complex halachic discussion regarding blessings on Chanukah (חנוכה) candles. Rabbi Zweig begins by noting a discrepancy between our Gemara and the parallel passage in Sukkah 46a - while our Gemara states 'ro'eh tzarich levarech' (one who sees must bless) followed by 'madlik tzarich levarech' (one who lights must bless), Sukkah presents the opposite order. The shiur examines Tosafos (תוספות)'s fundamental question: why do we have a special din of ro'eh (one who sees) for Chanukah candles when no such requirement exists for other mitzvos like sukkah or lulav? Tosafos suggests that since the person lighting makes multiple blessings (including she'asa nisim), there's precedent for the ro'eh to make at least one of those blessings. Rabbi Zweig explores whether the she'asa nisim blessing of the madlik (lighter) is fundamentally a birkas hadlakah (blessing on lighting) or a birkas re'iyah (blessing on seeing). This distinction has major practical implications for the order of blessings and the concept of over la'asiyasan (blessing before performing the act). The shiur analyzes a significant difference between Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary in our sugya versus his interpretation in Sukkah. In Shabbos, Rashi suggests that even one who already lit in his house must make a blessing when seeing candles outside. However, in Sukkah, Rashi limits the ro'eh blessing to 'shelo hidlik beveiso' - one who hasn't lit in his house. This leads to an important machloket between Rashi and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding the conditions for making the ro'eh blessing. According to Rashi's interpretation in Sukkah, the ro'eh blessing applies only on the first sighting (re'iyah rishonah), while the Rambam holds that as long as one didn't make the blessing (velo birech), it can still be recited. Rabbi Zweig suggests that Rashi's interpretation implies there are two separate dinim: seeing one's own candles and the din of pirsumei nisa (publicizing the miracle) by seeing others' candles. This explains why Rashi specifies 'bechatzros Yisrael' - the blessing applies when seeing candles that are lit for others to see, fulfilling the pirsumei nisa requirement. The shiur concludes with a practical question about the Rambam's omission of the general rule of over la'asiyasan in his discussion of Chanukah blessings, unlike his treatment of other mitzvos like megillah and shofar. Rabbi Zweig suggests this might be because Chanukah candles burn for an extended period, potentially allowing for the blessing to be made even after lighting, as long as the candles are still burning.
Shabbos 21b
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
How can Shabbos observance atone for the idolatry of Enosh's generation? The Rambam's reading shows that generation sought God through physical intermediaries rather than direct connection. Proper Shabbos observance creates authentic divine experience that naturally displaces attraction to spiritual substitutes - like tasting real coffee exposes ersatz as meaningless.
Why does the Gemara say one Shabbos protects from Amalek while two Shabboses bring redemption? The shiur applies a principle from Kiddushin about repetition changing psychology: the first time doing anything is experimental, but the second demonstrates genuine desire. True Shabbos connection with Hashem requires moving beyond spiritual curiosity to authentic internalization.
Why does the Gemara pray to be 'among those who eat three meals on Shabbos' rather than simply to fulfill the mitzvah? The shiur develops that Shabbos eating means 'tasting the day itself' - mindful appreciation that connects us to Shabbos's spiritual quality. This requires discipline and community support, with three meals corresponding to distinct phases of Shabbos time.
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.
