A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What is the melacha of mefarek - taking liquid out of its source? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction between squeezing liquid out (where you need the liquid) versus slicing and letting it flow (where you may not need it). This framework resolves several difficulties in the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position on when one is liable for extracting blood or other liquids on Shabbos (שבת).
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of the Talmudic discussion regarding the melacha of mefarek (extracting/separating) on Shabbos (שבת), focusing particularly on the extraction of blood and other liquids. Rabbi Zweig begins by examining the Gemara (גמרא)'s requirement that one must need the extracted liquid (dam) to be liable, and explores three possible approaches in understanding Tosafot's position: that it's melacha she'ein tzricha l'gufa, that it's mekalkel, or that it's not the melacha at all. The analysis then turns to significant difficulties with the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s approach. The Rambam holds that one is only liable for mefarek when one needs the extracted substance, otherwise it constitutes mekalkel (destructive activity). However, this creates several problems: First, regarding shechita (ritual slaughter), one should be liable for mefarek in addition to taking the animal's life, since shechita constitutes a constructive act. Second, the principle of mitoch (that which is permitted for necessity is also permitted when not for necessity) on Yom Tov should permit mefarek when not needed, yet this contradicts the Rambam's position. Third, there are contradictions regarding when liquids are considered mufkad u'pakid (deposited and ready to be removed) versus chibur mechaber (intrinsically connected).
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 6a
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.
