No community start suggestion yet.
When a husband claims his wife was not a virgin (pesach (פסח) pasuch matzasi), what determines whether he is believed? The shiur analyzes the machlokes between Tosafos (תוספות) and Rabbeinu Chananel regarding whether a bogeres has dam besulim, developing how conflicting chazakos create different types of safek.
This shiur delves into a complex sugya in Kesubos 9a regarding pesach (פסח) pasuch matzasi ("I found the opening open") - a husband's claim that his wife was not a virgin at marriage. The discussion centers on the fundamental disagreement between Tosafos (תוספות) and Rabbeinu Chananel concerning whether a bogeres (mature woman past 12.5 years) has dam besulim (hymenal blood). Rabbeinu Chananel maintains that bogeres do not have dam besulim, but their pesach (hymen) is not necessarily pasuch (open). Therefore, if a husband claims pesach pasuch, he is believed, but if he claims there was no blood, he is not believed since most bogeres don't have blood anyway. Tosafos disagrees, arguing that bogeres can be claimed to have pesach pasuch, and they do have dam besulim.
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 9a
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.
