A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What's the halacha (הלכה) when marital relations might cause bleeding that constitutes chabura on Shabbos (שבת)? The Gemara (גמרא) explores whether this falls under davar she'eino miskaven, examining the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon, and analyzing when hana'as atzmo creates a heter versus when kavana makes it forbidden.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of a complex Gemara (גמרא) in Kesubos dealing with the permissibility of marital relations on Shabbos (שבת) when there's a possibility of causing bleeding that would constitute the melacha of chabura (making a wound). The Gemara presents two versions of the discussion, with the central question being whether this scenario falls under the category of davar she'eino miskaven (unintentional action) or if the person is considered mechaven (intentional) for the bleeding. Rabbi Zweig carefully analyzes the Maharshal's difficulties with understanding the flow of the Gemara, particularly regarding why the Gemara seems to suggest that according to Rabbi Yehuda it would be mutar (permitted) when we know from a braisa that it's asur (forbidden). The shiur explains that the Gemara is not trying to permit the action according to Rabbi Yehuda, but rather proving that the case cannot be classified as davar she'eino miskaven.
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 5b
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.
