No community start suggestion yet.
When an egg is born on Shabbos (שבת) and Yom Tov follows, why is it permitted on Yom Tov? The shiur analyzes two approaches in Tosafos (תוספות). The first holds leida (birth) itself is hachana mid'oraisa; the second holds Yom Tov b'alma requires hachana from chol (weekday), and Shabbos cannot provide that. The Ran's view—that an issur existing on day one whose removal occurs through the passage of time creates a hachana derabbanan for day two—is contrasted with Tosafos.
The shiur begins with the Gemara (גמרא)'s question: when an egg is born (nolda) on Shabbos (שבת) and Yom Tov follows, the egg should be permitted on Yom Tov because its formation (nigmar) occurred on Friday, which is chol (weekday). Yet the Gemara forbids it. Tosafos (תוספות) asks: if the egg was formed Friday and merely born on Shabbos, why is there an issur hachana? Tosafos offers two answers. The first teretz holds that leida (birth) itself is hachana mid'oraisa—the act of coming into being is preparation. Even though the egg was nigmar b'atzmo (completed on its own) on Friday, the leida on Shabbos is considered a separate act of hachana. Since the egg was born on Shabbos, Shabbos has prepared it for Yom Tov, creating an issur d'oraisa of hachana.
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!
Beitzah 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.
