No community start suggestion yet.
Why is an egg born on Yom Tov forbidden on Shabbos (שבת) if Yom Tov and Shabbos are considered "kedusha achas" (one holiness)? The shiur analyzes Tosafot's difficulty with the concept of hachana (preparation) and muktzeh machmas yom shavar (muktzeh from the previous day), exploring how Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot each resolve the fundamental problem of why nolad on one day should impact the next.
This shiur examines a fundamental Gemara (גמרא) on Beitzah 3a dealing with the case of an egg laid on Yom Tov when it falls adjacent to Shabbos (שבת). The Gemara's basic question is: if we say "kedusha achas" (one unified holiness), why should the egg be forbidden on the second day? Rabbi Zweig opens by clarifying what "kedusha achas" means. It cannot mean that every prohibition from one day automatically extends to the other, as we don't forbid cooking on Yom Tov just because Yom Tov follows Shabbos. The concept must mean something more nuanced about how the two sanctified days relate to each other regarding the specific issur of nolad (items that came into being).
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 3a
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.
