A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why isn't mogmar (burning spices for fragrance) permitted on Yom Tov according to the principle of metoch? The Gemara (גמרא) questions Rav Papa's position allowing chabura (cutting) on Yom Tov through metoch reasoning - if cutting is permitted beyond its primary purpose, shouldn't burning spices be equally permitted?
This shiur analyzes a complex sugya from Masechta Kesubos dealing with the principle of metoch on Yom Tov. The Gemara (גמרא) presents Rav Papa's position that making a chabura (cutting/wounding) is permitted on Yom Tov because of metoch - since cutting (havara) is permitted for the sake of ochel nefesh, it becomes permitted even not for ochel nefesh. Rav Papi challenges this by asking why mogmar (burning spices for fragrance) wouldn't similarly be permitted through metoch reasoning. The answer given is that only actions that are "shave l'chol nefesh" (applicable to all people) qualify for this extension. Mogmar is only for "mefunakim" (the refined/wealthy), while basic needs like making a chabura for a wedding are universal. The shiur explores Tosafot's interpretation that Rav Papa may have initially thought the heter was based on "ein isur etzah b'Yom Tov" rather than metoch.
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 7b
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.
