A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does Rav Yosef ask 'tali tanya bedilo tanya' when both sources are indeed tanya? Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות) offer radically different readings of the Gemara (גמרא)'s progression. The core issue emerges: when wedding delays occur, does obligation for mezonos depend on whose sake caused the delay—his or hers?
This shiur presents a detailed analysis of a challenging passage in Kesubos 2a, focusing on the cryptic exchange between Shmuel and Rav Yosef regarding 'tali tanya bedilo tanya' (you rely on a tanya versus a non-tanya). The Gemara (גמרא) initially seems to present an impossible question, leading to the reformulation 'tanya d'mefaresh ta'ama v'tanya d'lo mefaresh ta'ama' (a tanya that explains the reason versus one that doesn't). Rabbi Zweig explores the fundamental disagreement between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos (תוספות) in understanding this passage. According to Tosafos, the question is straightforward: why does Shmuel go to a different Mishna (on daf nun zayin) to find a nafka mina when our Mishna already provides clear reasoning? Tosafos essentially skips over the 'tali tanya bedilo tanya' formulation as merely a way to clarify what Rav Yosef was really asking.
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 2a
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.
