No community start suggestion yet.
Does lifnei iver prohibit only active facilitation of sin, or even passive enabling? The shiur analyzes the core machloket between the Rash and Tosafot, revealing two competing models: mazik (harm-causing) versus participation in transgression. Understanding which model applies determines when alternatives like "yesh lo behemah acheret" create a heter.
This shiur provides a comprehensive analysis of the sugya of lifnei iver lo siten michshol (do not place a stumbling block before the blind) found in Masechta Shabbos (שבת). The discussion centers on a fundamental machloket between the Rash and Tosafot regarding the nature of the prohibition. The Rash holds that lifnei iver is only violated when one actively facilitates another's transgression (nosei be'yado), while Tosafot maintains that even passive enabling constitutes a violation if the transgressor could not have acted without the facilitator's presence. The shiur explores Tosafot's position that lifnei iver applies even in hilchot Shabbos contexts, creating a potential issur d'rabbanan even when the recipient could obtain the forbidden item elsewhere. This leads to an extensive analysis of the Gemara (גמרא) in Avodah Zarah regarding selling animals to non-Jews before their festivals, where the principle "yesh lo behemah acheret" (he has another animal) creates a heter.
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!
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 halacha forbid entering dangerous places if everything happens by Divine decree? The shiur examines the debate between Rashi and Tosfos on traveling at night, developing a fundamental distinction: Rashi holds one must avoid even deserved punishments that Hashem delays through mercy, while Tosfos holds the prohibition addresses self-inflicted harm through free will. This framework reveals how people rationalize self-destructive behavior as "hashgacha."
Why does the Gemara praise hospitality to scholars as a unique mitzvah rather than ordinary hachnasas orchim? The shiur distinguishes two mitzvahs: hachnasas orchim (providing for those in need) and connecting to talmidei chachamim (cleaving to God through scholars). Yisro's meal for the Jewish leaders wasn't charity—it was his way of bonding with those transformed by Torah, teaching that learning must fundamentally change who we are.
Shabbos 3a
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!
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.
