No community start suggestion yet.
When must a woman's testimony be supported by both chazakah and borei together? The shiur analyzes a complex Tosafos (תוספות) exploring whether the reisha and seifa teach separate chiddushim about Rav Gamaliel's position. The analysis reveals fundamental disagreements between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafos about when chazakah alone suffices versus requiring additional borei testimony.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Masechta Kesubos 13b, focusing on the intricate mechanics of testimony in cases involving questions of lineage and kashrus. The central discussion revolves around a complex Tosafos (תוספות) that examines the relationship between chazakah (presumptive status) and borei (clear testimony) in determining when a woman's word is accepted. The Gemara (גמרא) discusses two cases: the reisha (where a woman is not pregnant) and the seifa (where she is pregnant/muberes). Rabbi Zweig explains that Tosafos grapples with why the Gemara needs both cases, leading to the principle of 'chad l'hachshiv bah, chad l'hachshiv bitah' - one case to make her kosher, one for her daughter. However, Tosafos questions this logic: if the daughter (who lacks chazakah) can be made kosher through the mother's testimony, surely the mother herself (who has chazakah) should be kosher as well.
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 13b
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.
