No community start suggestion yet.
What is the underlying mechanism when one yavam performs yibum or chalitza—does it release all the other brothers through shlichus ai ka'avdi, or because bayis echad hu boneh v'eino boneh shnei batim? The shiur traces the machlokes between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot through the sugya, showing how it reshapes the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s psak on eishes ach and the issur after chalitza.
This shiur analyzes a fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot on Yevamos 9b regarding the mechanism by which yibum and chalitza operate when multiple yevamos fall to multiple yevamim. The discussion centers on whether we require the principle of shlichus ai ka'avdi (agency—that one brother's action is considered done on behalf of all) or whether a simpler principle of bayis echad hu boneh v'eino boneh shnei batim suffices. The Gemara (גמרא) earlier presented two possible understandings of the machlokes between Rab Yochanan and Reish Lakish. According to the first approach, Rab Yochanan holds there is no eishes ach at all (the zikah does not create forbidden relationships), while Reish Lakish holds there is. According to the second approach, both agree there is eishes ach, but they argue over whether chalitza by one brother removes the eishes ach only for him (Reish Lakish) or for all the brothers (Rab Yochanan). The shiur demonstrates that this dispute directly determines whether we need shlichus ai ka'avdi as an operating principle.
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!
Yevamos 9b
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.
