A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Rambam (רמב"ם) differentiate between "yemei simcha" and "yemei mishta" in the laws of mourning during sheva brachos? The shiur builds on textual analysis showing the Rambam distinguishes between a full wedding celebration (which creates yom simcha status like yom tov) and mere marriage with a party afterward. This distinction explains when aveilus is suspended versus merely modified.
The shiur analyzes a fundamental distinction in the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s Hilchos Avel regarding the interaction between wedding celebrations and mourning laws. Rabbi Zweig begins by examining the Gemara (גמרא)'s ruling that when a close relative of the chasan or kallah dies on the wedding day, they proceed with the marriage and sheva brachos, then observe shiva afterward. He contrasts this with cases involving other relatives or when food can be sold, where the funeral takes precedence. The main focus centers on resolving apparent contradictions in the Rambam's language. In some halachos, the Rambam calls the seven-day period "yemei simcha" and compares it to "regel" (festival), while in others he uses "yemei mishta" and compares it to "Shabbos (שבת)." Rabbi Zweig demonstrates that this linguistic precision reflects a crucial halachic distinction.
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 4a
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.
