A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the pasuk need to teach that kibud av doesn't override Shabbos (שבת)? The Gemara (גמרא)'s havamina that the aseh of honoring one's father could push aside the lav of chillul Shabbos raises a fundamental question: Is kibud av merely a din of kedima (precedence), or does listening to one's father when he commands an avera render that act no mitzvah (מצוה) at all? Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot diverge sharply on the mechanics of aseh docheh lo sa'aseh and what counts as hechsher mitzvah.
This advanced Gemara (גמרא) shiur on Yevamos 5b examines the Gemara's teaching that a father's command does not override the mitzvah (מצוה) of Shabbos (שבת) observance. The shiur opens with the fundamental question posed by Tosafot: if we already know from the sugya in Kiddushin that when a father and mother give conflicting commands, the father's command takes precedence because the mother herself is obligated in kavod to the father, why do we need a separate pasuk to teach that Hashem (ה׳)'s command overrides a father's command? The logic should be straightforward—just as the mother is obligated to honor the father, both father and son are obligated to honor Hashem, so naturally Hashem's command should take precedence. Rabbi Zweig develops Tosafot's answer: the din learned from the Kiddushin case is not merely a din of kedima (precedence) but rather teaches that when one listens to the father over the mother in such a case, one is still fulfilling kibud av. However, when a father commands something that contradicts Hashem's direct command, listening to the father is not a mitzvah at all—it doesn't merely lose out in a calculation of priorities. This is a fundamental distinction. The pasuk regarding Shabbos teaches not just that Shabbos takes precedence, but that in such a case there is no mitzvah of kibud av whatsoever.
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!
Yevamos 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.
Why does the Gemara present a kal v'chomer for chuppah making kiddushin based on kesef not being maichel b'terumah, only to reject it? The shiur reveals that even the rejected kal v'chomer establishes a fundamental yesod: kiddushin is a kinyan for ishus (marital relationship), not merely a kinyan in hilchos kinyanim. The second kal v'chomer—from chuppah being gomeres—raises Tosafos's famous question.
Is the kesef used in kiddushin a true kinyan (acquisition), or merely a symbolic means of establishing marriage? The shiur analyzes multiple interpretations of the Gemara's derivation from ki yikach ki'ach mi'Sayeffron, exploring whether marriage constitutes ownership, and develops three fundamental approaches: (1) The Gemara proves ishus is a kinyan, (2) ishus is not a kinyan but uses kinyan-like means, or (3) ishus is a kinyan but the kesef may not be a ma'aseh kinyan. The Rambam's position—calling kesef "midivrei sofrim"—is explained as distinguishing between cross-referencing concepts versus borrowing terminology.
Why does the Mishna alternate between the language of "kinyan" (acquisition) and "kiddushin" (sanctification) when describing marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: marriage has two separate aspects—a kinyan dimension (ownership) and a kedusha dimension (sanctified relationship). Either aspect can initiate the bond, and understanding this dual nature resolves multiple textual and halachic questions throughout the sugya.
Does kiddushei shetar require a shevah pruta? The Ran presents two approaches to the Rif's position. The shiur develops the Ran's second pshat that shetar kiddushin functions as a hachnah (exchange) rather than a mere kinyan nesina. This reading has profound implications for isuri hana'ah, mechubar, and the relationship between kesef and shetar.
