No community start suggestion yet.
What is the din of sirtut (lined paper) for tefillin, mezuzah, and sefer Torah (תורה)? The shiur analyzes a fundamental dispute between the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Rabbeinu Tam about whether sirtut is a din in the klaf (parchment) itself or a din in the writing, and resolves contradictions in both the Rambam and the Rosh about whether three or four words require sirtut.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of the laws of sirtut (writing kisvei hakodesh on lined paper) as discussed in Gittin 6b and its application to tefillin, mezuzah, and sefer Torah (תורה). The Gemara (גמרא) in Menachos establishes that tefillin don't require sirtut, yet the Gemara in Gittin seems to contradict this by stating that one cannot write more than three or four words without sirtut. This creates a fundamental tension that the Rishonim struggle to resolve. The shiur begins with the Bahag's position and then examines Tosafot's approach extensively. Tosafot distinguishes between different types of usage of pesukim: when citing a verse as a source or drasha versus when using verses poetically. Tosafot then addresses the core issue: if tefillin don't require sirtut, how can we explain the Gemara's statement that writing kisvei kodesh requires sirtut? Tosafot explains that when sirtut is required, it's sufficient to line only the top of the page, and this rule applies to aggada and halacha (הלכה) but not necessarily to sefer Torah where every line requires sirtut.
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 6b
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.
