A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When someone dies during sheva brachos, does the mourner immediately become an avel or only after the week of celebration? Rabbi Zweig analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם) and Raavad's dispute through Rabbi Akiva Eiger's penetrating questions. The resolution hinges on distinguishing between the status (shem avel) taking effect immediately versus the obligation to observe mourning practices starting later.
This shiur presents an in-depth analysis of the complex laws governing mourning during periods of celebration, specifically addressing when the halachic status of avel (mourner) takes effect. The discussion centers on the case in Kesubos 4a where someone's relative dies during sheva brachos (the seven days of wedding celebration). The shiur begins with Rabbi Akiva Eiger's fundamental question about the Shearei Knesses HaGedolah's ruling. If a festival occurs three days after someone begins mourning during sheva brachos, why would the festival cancel the remaining mourning obligations when the formal mourning period hasn't even begun yet? This seems to contradict the established principle that festivals can only cancel mourning that has already commenced.
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 4a
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.
Why does the Gemara present a kal v'chomer for chuppah making kiddushin based on kesef not being maichel b'terumah, only to reject it? The shiur reveals that even the rejected kal v'chomer establishes a fundamental yesod: kiddushin is a kinyan for ishus (marital relationship), not merely a kinyan in hilchos kinyanim. The second kal v'chomer—from chuppah being gomeres—raises Tosafos's famous question.
Is the kesef used in kiddushin a true kinyan (acquisition), or merely a symbolic means of establishing marriage? The shiur analyzes multiple interpretations of the Gemara's derivation from ki yikach ki'ach mi'Sayeffron, exploring whether marriage constitutes ownership, and develops three fundamental approaches: (1) The Gemara proves ishus is a kinyan, (2) ishus is not a kinyan but uses kinyan-like means, or (3) ishus is a kinyan but the kesef may not be a ma'aseh kinyan. The Rambam's position—calling kesef "midivrei sofrim"—is explained as distinguishing between cross-referencing concepts versus borrowing terminology.
Why does the Mishna alternate between the language of "kinyan" (acquisition) and "kiddushin" (sanctification) when describing marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: marriage has two separate aspects—a kinyan dimension (ownership) and a kedusha dimension (sanctified relationship). Either aspect can initiate the bond, and understanding this dual nature resolves multiple textual and halachic questions throughout the sugya.
Does kiddushei shetar require a shevah pruta? The Ran presents two approaches to the Rif's position. The shiur develops the Ran's second pshat that shetar kiddushin functions as a hachnah (exchange) rather than a mere kinyan nesina. This reading has profound implications for isuri hana'ah, mechubar, and the relationship between kesef and shetar.
