No community start suggestion yet.
Why must the husband tell his wife to light Shabbos (שבת) candles, and why specifically b'nichusa (gently)? The shiur develops the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s chiddush that hadlakas neiros is a joint mitzvah (מצוה): the husband initiates by directing, the wife fulfills by lighting. Speaking b'nichusa ensures the mitzvah remains hers; raising one's voice pressures her and transforms the action into his, not hers.
The Gemara (גמרא) on Gittin 6b teaches that a husband must say three things to his household erev Shabbos (שבת): "Isartem? Eiravtem? Hadliku es haner?" Critically, these words must be said b'nichusa (gently). The Gemara explains: "ki heich lekablu minei" — so that they will accept it from him. Rabbi Zweig raises several difficulties with this teaching. First, the Gemara's reasoning seems backwards — usually raising one's voice is more effective at getting things done, not lowering it. Second, the Gemara previously stated that speaking harshly (b'eimah yeseira) can lead to chillul Shabbos, yet here the reason given is different. Third, this appears to be a general principle of interpersonal conduct rather than a specific hilchos Shabbos din. Rashi (רש"י) explains that the question format changes to a statement with "Hadliku es haner" because in a small house, one can see whether the candles are lit. Therefore, it's not a question but a directive. Rabbi Zweig challenges this: it means the Mishna is only discussing a one-room house, an extreme limitation. Moreover, according to Rashi, sometimes only two things need to be said (when candles are already lit), contradicting the Mishna's statement of "sheloshah devarim."
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!
Gittin 6b
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.
