A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What are Rabbi Yossi and Rabbi Yehuda actually arguing about regarding eating before Shabbos (שבת)? The shiur develops a chiddush from the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s dual formulation: Rabbi Yossi holds Shabbos requires desiring a formal seudah, while Rabbi Yehuda holds it requires actual food appetite. This explains their dispute and why Erev Pesach (פסח) has additional stringencies.
This shiur analyzes Pesachim 99b, focusing on the machlokes between Rabbi Yossi and Rabbi Yehuda regarding eating on Erev Shabbos (שבת) and Erev Pesach (פסח). The Gemara (גמרא) presents Rav Papa's teretz that according to Rabbi Yehuda, there's a distinction between Erev Shabbos/Yom Tov (where eating is prohibited from mincha and onwards) and Erev Pesach (which has an additional chumra of 'samuch l'mincha'). Rabbi Zweig examines the fundamental question of what Rabbi Yossi and Rabbi Yehuda are actually arguing about. The Shulchan Aruch in siman 529 rules that me'ikar hadin, regular meals that one eats during the week are permitted all day on Erev Shabbos, following Rabbi Yossi. However, one cannot be kovea seudah (establish a formal meal), especially fancy meals beyond what one normally eats.
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!
Pesachim 99b
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.
