No community start suggestion yet.
Why do eid zomeim receive malkos in cases where they cannot pay monetary compensation or receive other punishments? The shiur develops the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s yesod that all eid zomeim punishment requires the witnesses to have imposed a 'din rasha' - a status of wickedness - which then transfers back to them. This principle resolves apparent contradictions between the Rambam and Gemara (גמרא) regarding testimony about slavery versus theft.
This comprehensive shiur examines the complex laws of eid zomeim (perjurers) found in Masechta Makkos, focusing on cases where false witnesses cannot receive monetary punishment, physical punishment, or death penalty but still incur malkos (lashes). The shiur begins with the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of witnesses who falsely testify about someone being a ben gerushah ben chalutza (son of a divorced woman or chalitza), and the principle that such witnesses receive malkos even when they cannot pay monetary compensation. Rabbi Zweig analyzes the fundamental question of how we derive the laws of eid zomeim from the Torah (תורה), examining the Gemara's statement 'remez le-eidim zomemim min ha-Torah min heichan' - where is there a hint to perjurers in the Torah. The shiur explores Rashi (רש"י)'s interpretation versus the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s understanding of the pasuk 'v'hitzadiku es ha-tzaddik v'hirshiu es ha-rasha' (they shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked), demonstrating how this verse serves as the source for eid zomeim laws.
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!
Makkos 2b-3a
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.
