A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Who validates a get—the witnesses who sign it or those who see it delivered? The shiur examines the fundamental dispute between Rabbi Meir (eidei chasimah karsei) and Rabbi Elazar (eidei mesirah karsei), analyzing the Ramban (רמב"ן)'s difficulty: if signing witnesses aren't essential according to Rabbi Elazar, why must they sign lishmah when present? The discussion explores whether chasimas ha'eidim is part of the get itself or merely testimony.
This shiur analyzes a fundamental dispute in Maseches Gittin regarding the nature of witnesses in a get (bill of divorce). The Gemara (גמרא) presents two positions: Rabbi Meir holds eidei chasimah karsei (the witnesses who sign the get validate it), while Rabbi Elazar holds eidei mesirah karsei (the witnesses who observe its delivery validate it). Rabbi Zweig begins by examining the Gemara's proof that according to Rabbi Meir, the chasimah (signing) itself is considered part of the kesivah (writing). The Mishna states that one may not sign on a document while it is still attached to the ground (mechubar lekarka), but if one did so and then detached it and delivered it, the get is valid. This proves that as long as there is no interruption between the chasimah and the mesirah (delivery), the get is valid—even though the actual writing occurred while the document was attached. This demonstrates that according to Rabbi Meir, the chasimah is the essential element of kesivah, not merely the writing of the text.
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 3b
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.
