No community start suggestion yet.
Why must brachos be made at a wedding ceremony? The shiur analyzes Rashi (רש"י)'s position that birkas chasanim removes the issur of kala beloy bracha, creating tensions with whether this refers to yichud or biah prohibitions. The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s formulations about brachos, chupa, and nesuin reveal fundamental questions about what actually creates the marriage bond.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Kesubos 7b, focusing on the nature and function of birkas chasanim (wedding blessings) and their relationship to the marriage process. The discussion centers on several fundamental questions about Jewish marriage law and the mechanics of nisuin. The shiur begins by examining Rashi (רש"י)'s position that the wedding brachos are necessary to remove the issur (prohibition) of "kala beloy bracha" - being with one's bride without having made the proper blessings. According to Rashi, this issur remains even after erusin (betrothal), and only through the combination of chupa and brachos is this prohibition lifted. However, this creates several difficulties in understanding Rashi's approach.
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 7b
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.
