A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How do you assess a person's value when obligated to pay damages or redeem them from hekdesh? The shiur develops the view that a person's value is not merely market price, but what they're worth to themselves—whatever an eved kanani could do, the person owns that ability themselves. The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s difficult ruling on nezek when there's no market loss is explained through the concept that trauma can prevent someone from utilizing their intrinsic value.
This shiur continues from a previous day's discussion on the complex topic of how the Torah (תורה) assesses a person's value, particularly in the context of damages (nezek) and redemption from hekdesh. The fundamental question is whether a person is valued like an eved ivri (Jewish slave) or an eved kanani (Canaanite slave). Rashi (רש"י) in one place says eved ivri, while the Rosh says eved kanani, yet Rashi himself appears to say eved kanani in the sugya of Megillah 23b regarding erchin (valuations). The shiur introduces a fundamental principle: just as money has intrinsic use-value in the marketplace (people pay to borrow money because money enables commerce), even though one cannot charge interest, so too a person owns their own labor-value. Whatever an eved kanani could be sold for on the market represents real productive capacity. A free person cannot be sold, but they possess that same capacity themselves—they own their own value without needing to enter the marketplace. This is why the din is eved kanani: the market price reflects the objective value of human labor and service, which every person inherently possesses.
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!
Megillah 23b
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.
