No community start suggestion yet.
When a married woman is found not to be a besula, how do we resolve conflicting chazakos? The shiur analyzes Tosafos (תוספות)' approach that cheskas haguf (presumption of physical status) can override cheskas heter l'bayla, but explores the deeper question of when chazaka can create a halachic status versus when conflicting chazakos cancel each other out.
This shiur presents an in-depth analysis of Gemara (גמרא) Kesubos 9a, focusing on the complex interplay of chazakos (presumptions) in cases where a woman's besula status comes into question. The central case involves a woman who was kiddushin as a ketana (minor) and is later found to be a beula (non-virgin) when examined. The Gemara presents a sfeik sfeika (double doubt): perhaps the biya occurred when she was still a ketana (in which case it would be considered onas/rape regardless of consent due to her age), or perhaps it occurred after she became a gedola, in which case there's a further safek whether it was onas or rotzon (consensual). Tosafos (תוספות) asks why this constitutes a sfeik sfeika when we should rely on cheskas heter l'bayla - the presumption that she was permitted to her husband until now.
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 9a
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.
