A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a minor convert (ger katan) reject his conversion upon reaching maturity? The Rambam (רמב"ם) distinguishes between gerus (Jewish nationality) imposed by beit din and ger tzedek (religious membership) requiring personal acceptance. This explains why even after rejection, one remains halachically Jewish for certain purposes.
This shiur analyzes a complex sugya in Kesubos 11a regarding ger katan madil (a minor convert who rejects his conversion upon reaching majority). The Gemara (גמרא) states that such rejection is valid based on the principle of zachin l'adam shelo befanav (we may act for someone's benefit without their presence). Rabbi Zweig explores fundamental questions about the nature of conversion and the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s seemingly contradictory rulings. The central issue is the Rambam's position in Hilchos Issurei Biah that a ger katon can reject his conversion (higdil yachol limchos), yet in Hilchos Melachim he states that such a person becomes a ger toshav. This appears problematic since a ger toshav must accept the seven Noahide laws, but where did this person accept them?
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 11a
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.
