A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) put father first in kivud av v'eim but mother first in reverence, contrary to natural tendencies? The shiur develops Rabbi Yeshaya Greenberg's yesod that this ordering defines the mitzvos themselves, not just our approach. True parental honor and reverence are spiritual obligations independent of natural feelings.
This shiur analyzes a fundamental Gemara (גמרא) in Kiddushin (daf 31b) that explores the ordering of parents in the mitzvos of kivud av v'eim (honoring father and mother) and morah (reverence). The Gemara explains that naturally, children tend to honor their mother more than their father because mothers speak softly and are more nurturing, while children naturally fear their fathers more, especially because fathers traditionally teach Torah (תורה). Therefore, the Torah deliberately reverses the natural order - putting father first in the mitzvah (מצוה) of honor and mother first in the mitzvah of reverence. Rabbi Yeshaya Greenberg ZT"L challenges the conventional understanding that this reversal merely emphasizes doing mitzvos even against natural tendencies. Instead, he argues that the Torah's ordering defines the very essence of these mitzvos. By placing father first in honor, the Torah teaches that kivud av v'eim is not based on natural feelings or emotional responses. The mitzvah of honoring one's father - who is less naturally honored - establishes the true definition of parental honor, which must then be applied equally to one's mother. Similarly, by placing mother first in reverence, the Torah defines morah as a spiritual obligation independent of natural fear responses.
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!
Kiddushin 31b
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.
Up Next in this Series
How was Yitzchok comforted after Sarah's death through marrying Rivka? The Hebrew 'vayinachem' means both comfort and change of direction, revealing that healing comes through shifting focus outward. Depression and mourning are self-absorbed states; true comfort emerges when we channel our pain into caring for others.
How could Avrohom keep the entire Torah before it was given, including rabbinical laws? The key insight is that mitzvos represent eternal spiritual realities, not just historical commemorations, so Avrohom could access these truths through his genuine search. His entire 172-year journey—even his early idolatry—retroactively became service of God once he reached ultimate truth.
Why does the Gemara say Avrohom knew God from age three while the Rambam says forty, after describing his idolatrous past? The principle that baalei teshuvah transform past sins into merits explains how Avrohom's early struggles became retroactive mitzvos once he used that experience to reach other idol worshippers. Unlike Shem and Ever who lacked such background, Avrohom's difficult past became his greatest qualification for helping others.
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.
