No community start suggestion yet.
Why are children exempt from Chanukah (חנוכה) candles despite having chinuch obligations in other mitzvos like megillah and matzah? The shiur analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s principle of "ner ish u'beiso" to show that when a father lights for his household, this actually fulfills everyone's personal obligation, unlike other mitzvos where children must perform independently.
This shiur provides a detailed analysis of the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s laws regarding Chanukah (חנוכה) candles, centered on daf 21b of Masechta Shabbos (שבת). The discussion begins with the Rambam's principle that 'whoever is obligated in reading the megillah is obligated in lighting Chanukah candles.' Rabbi Zweig examines several commentaries including the Magid Mishneh and Kesef Mishneh to understand why children (ketanim) are exempt from Chanukah candles despite having an obligation of chinuch in other mitzvos like megillah, matzah, and kriat shema. A key insight emerges regarding the nature of chinuch obligations. The Rambam uses the language 'chayav' for lulav, sukkah and other mitzvos when discussing children, but conspicuously omits this language for Chanukah, megillah and matzah. The Kesef Mishneh explains this indicates the obligation is on the father to educate the child, not a direct obligation on the child himself.
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!
Shabbos 21b
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 can Shabbos observance atone for the idolatry of Enosh's generation? The Rambam's reading shows that generation sought God through physical intermediaries rather than direct connection. Proper Shabbos observance creates authentic divine experience that naturally displaces attraction to spiritual substitutes - like tasting real coffee exposes ersatz as meaningless.
Why does the Gemara say one Shabbos protects from Amalek while two Shabboses bring redemption? The shiur applies a principle from Kiddushin about repetition changing psychology: the first time doing anything is experimental, but the second demonstrates genuine desire. True Shabbos connection with Hashem requires moving beyond spiritual curiosity to authentic internalization.
Why does the Gemara pray to be 'among those who eat three meals on Shabbos' rather than simply to fulfill the mitzvah? The shiur develops that Shabbos eating means 'tasting the day itself' - mindful appreciation that connects us to Shabbos's spiritual quality. This requires discipline and community support, with three meals corresponding to distinct phases of Shabbos time.
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.
