A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How can we learn the principle of aseh docheh lo saaseh from the mitzvah (מצוה) of yibum? The shiur analyzes whether the Torah (תורה) allows an aseh to override a lo saaseh because they are equal (shev v'al taaseh resolves the conflict), or because an aseh is inherently stronger. Tosfos' questions on the sugya reveal that the svara of onus rachmana patrai operates only when the competing mitzvos are equal.
This shiur explores the sugya in Yevamos 3b dealing with the foundational principle of aseh docheh lo saaseh (a positive commandment overrides a negative prohibition). The core question is why the Gemara (גמרא) doesn't immediately derive this principle from yibum itself, where the aseh of levirate marriage overrides the lo saaseh of eishes ach (a brother's wife). Tosfos raises several powerful questions on this sugya. First, if the Gemara's question on daf 7 is about aseh docheh lo saaseh, why do we never find a distinction between one and two lo saasehs? Second, why didn't the Gemara raise this question by pesach (פסח) and milah? Third, and most fundamentally, why did the Gemara wait until the end of the sugya to discuss learning from eishes ach? If the question is aseh docheh lo saaseh, that should have been the first place to look.
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 3b
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.
