A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why do we learn the halachos of shofar on Rosh Hashanah from Yovel, yet the Gemara (גמרא) seems to reverse direction and derive Yovel's laws from Rosh Hashanah? The shiur develops a yesod that every Rosh Hashanah contains two distinct dinim: one as Yom HaDin and one as a unit of the Yovel cycle, which is itself an expression of malchus Shamayim. This explains why the term "Rosh Hashanah" in Tanach refers specifically to Yovel, and resolves the Ran's difficulty with the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position on keren hakevesh.
The shiur addresses a fundamental difficulty in the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of the gezeirah shavah between Rosh Hashanah and Yovel. The Gemara on daf 26b explains that just as Yovel is similar to Rosh Hashanah, we apply certain halachos of tekias shofar from one to the other through the gezeirah shavah of "shvi'i shvi'i." However, Rashi (רש"י) comments that even though the entire inyan of shmitas mechiras sados (release of sold fields) has nothing to do with tefillah or zikaron but rather with shiluach avadim (freeing of slaves), nevertheless we learn the requirement of peshutim (straight shofaros) through this gezeirah shavah. The fundamental difficulty is that the Gemara on 33a appears to derive ALL the core halachos of shofar on Rosh Hashanah FROM Yovel, not the other way around. The requirement to use a shofar, the requirement of tekiah-teruah-tekiah before and after the teruah—all of these are learned from the pesukim in Yovel and then applied to Rosh Hashanah through the gezeirah shavah. If all the halachos flow FROM Yovel TO Rosh Hashanah, how can we turn around and derive requirements BACK to Yovel from Rosh Hashanah? The ta'am of peshutim is based on tefillah, which is uniquely relevant to Rosh Hashanah as a day of judgment. Yovel has no such dimension—it is purely about shiluach avadim and hachrazah (proclamation). So by what logic would we impose Rosh Hashanah's tefillah-based requirements onto Yovel?
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!
Rosh Hashanah 26b
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.
