No community start suggestion yet.
How can a nazir shave during his taharah process when there's an issur of "sar lo yavo rosho"? The Gemara (גמרא)'s principle of yeshno b'sheila and the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s explanation that the ase falls away create multiple unresolved difficulties. The shiur analyzes Rashi (רש"י), Tosafos (תוספות), the Avnei Miluim, and Rav Chaim to understand how ase docha lo sase works by nazir.
This advanced Gemara (גמרא) shiur tackles a complex sugya in Yevamos 5a, analyzing multiple approaches to understanding how the ase (positive commandment) of a nazir's taglachas (shaving ritual) is docha (overrides) the lo sase (negative commandment) of cutting his hair. The shiur opens by identifying five or six unresolved difficulties in the Gemara and promises "a brand new pshat in the Gemara." The first major issue concerns Rashi (רש"י)'s approach. Rashi explains that the Gemara proves ase docha lo sase sheyesh bo kares (where violating carries a kares penalty) from the case of nazir. Yet Tosafos (תוספות) asks: what about the case of amono lekayem godo (living with one's deceased brother's wife to fulfill the yibum obligation)? Tosafos establishes a hierarchy: lo sase she'eino shova bakol (not applicable to everyone—50%), lo sase of amono lekayem godo min ha'arayos (75%), and lo sase shova bakol (100%). The question arises: how does the Gemara know to derive shova bakol rather than just moving from one level of einu shova bakol to another?
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!
Yevamos 5a
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.
