No community start suggestion yet.
What does the Gemara (גמרא) mean when it says "pitui ketanah onas"? The shiur contrasts two approaches: the Rambam (רמב"ם) holds that seducing a minor is considered coercion, while Tosafos (תוספות) creates a safek sfeika based on age and marital rebellion. This fundamental dispute affects whether a young girl who commits adultery remains forbidden to her husband.
The shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kesubos 9a concerning a bas Yisrael who lost her virginity before age three and is now suspected of adultery. Rabbi Zweig begins by examining how Rashi (רש"י) differs from the plain reading of the Gemara (גמרא), noting that Rashi adds that she is now twelve years old, which the Gemara doesn't explicitly state. The primary focus is understanding what the Gemara means by "pitui ketanah onas" (seducing a minor is considered coercion). Rabbi Zweig presents a fundamental dispute between Rishonim. According to the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s approach, the phrase specifically refers to *pitui* (seduction) of a ketanah being considered onas (coercion). When an adult with superior intellect persuades or emotionally manipulates a minor who lacks the status of bardas (legal majority), this constitutes a form of coercion, even if the girl ultimately agrees. The Rambam holds that what forbids a woman to her husband is acting berotzon (willingly), and seduction of a minor negates true rotzon.
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!
Kesubos 9a
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.
