No community start suggestion yet.
Why isn't a get with invalid witnesses batel mid'oraysa when we hold eid mesirah karsei? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction in the Rambam (רמב"ם) between two separate issues: whether the witnesses create a valid shtar, and whether the shtar can serve as a valid rayah for remarriage. Each generates its own reason the get should be batel mid'oraysa—and each has its own teretz.
The Gemara (גמרא) in Gittin 4a raises a fundamental question: if we hold eid mesirah karsei—that the essential witnessing is on the delivery, not the writing—then why should invalid witnesses who signed the get pose any problem at all? If they do nothing mid'oraysa, there should be no reason for the get to be pasul. The Gemara initially suggests that if we hold eid chasimah karsei, invalid witnesses would indeed be a problem, but if we hold eid mesirah karsei, there should be no issue. Yet the Gemara's maskana is that even according to eid mesirah karsei, invalid witnesses create a problem of mezuyaf mitocho—a forged document—which invalidates the get mid'rabbanan. The Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Gerushin, Perek 1, Halacha (הלכה) 17, paskens that if witnesses on the shtar are pasul—even if one is pasul and one is kosher—the get is pasul because of mezuyaf mitocho. The Rambam defines "pasul" in Perek 2, Halacha 7 as pasul mid'rabbanan, distinguishing it from "batel," which is invalid mid'oraysa. Yet a fundamental question emerges: mid'oraysa, if we hold eid mesirah karsei, we don't need witnesses on the shtar at all. So why should witnesses who are pasul or shaloh lishmah create even a mid'rabbanan problem? Since they accomplish nothing, they should be treated as kaman d'leisa—as if they were never there.
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!
Gittin 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.
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.
