A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does matzah require heseibah while maror does not, and does this obligation apply today when reclining isn't normal? The shiur distinguishes between two separate dinim: heseibah as part of demonstrating freedom during sipur yetzias Mitzrayim, and heseibah as an intrinsic requirement for eating matzah itself. Even when contemporary derech cheirut doesn't require reclining, relaxed eating remains me'akev for the mitzvah (מצוה) of achilas matzah.
This shiur examines the Gemara (גמרא)'s ruling that matzah requires heseibah while maror does not, and addresses fundamental questions about the nature of this obligation. The analysis begins with the Gemara's discussion of whether a servant needs heseibah, which leads to the Rosh's proof that heseibah is me'akev (indispensable) based on the principle that if one is not careful about it, he doesn't fulfill his obligation properly. The shiur explores a significant machlokes between the Rambam (רמב"ם) and other Rishonim regarding whether heseibah is me'akev. While the Rosh and others clearly state that without heseibah one doesn't fulfill the mitzvah (מצוה), the Rambam's language is more ambiguous, potentially suggesting it's only recommended (meshubach) rather than required.
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!
Pesachim 108a
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.
