No community start suggestion yet.
When does kluta k'mishun chadami (placement is like removal) apply to objects held in one's hand? The shiur resolves an apparent contradiction in Tosafos (תוספות) by distinguishing based on intent: when someone wants to move the object elsewhere, their control prevents true 'placement,' but when they intend to place it down locally, yado basar gufo limits the principle across different domains.
This shiur examines a complex sugya in Masechta Shabbos (שבת) 4a dealing with the principle of kluta k'mishun chadami (placement is like removing) and its application when objects are held in one's hand. The discussion centers on an apparent contradiction in Tosafos (תוספות) between two cases: in our Mishna, Tosafos says that when something is in someone's hand, we don't say kluta k'mishun chadami, but in another case (Daf Gimmel), Tosafos suggests we would say kluta k'mishun chadami unless the hand and body are in different reshuyot (domains). The Rav analyzes the Tosafos HaRosh's two different explanations for why objects in one's hand don't follow kluta k'mishun chadami. The first explanation simply states that when something is in your hand, you don't apply this principle. The second explanation adds the concept of yado basar gufo (one's hand is like their body). The Rav proposes a novel resolution: kluta k'mishun chadami depends on intent and control. When someone holds an object and wants to move it elsewhere, since their hand controls where the object goes, we don't say kluta k'mishun chadami - the object isn't truly 'placed' anywhere because the hand determines its destination. However, when someone wants to place the object down in the current location, then we would say kluta k'mishun chadami, except for the principle of yado basar gufo when the hand and body are in different domains. This approach explains both the case of the oni (poor person) who receives something in his hand and immediately wants to take it out (no kluta k'mishun chadami because he doesn't want it there), and the case of someone throwing from one domain to another (potential kluta k'mishun chadami limited by yado basar gufo). The shiur then addresses a difficult Rashi (רש"י) regarding why Rabbi Akiva is only liable for one violation rather than two (akira and hanacha). While others might say this is due to toda b'makom echad (one offering for multiple violations in the same place), Rashi suggests a more fundamental approach: according to Rabbi Akiva, there is only one hanacha here, not a separate akira and hanacha sequence.
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 halacha forbid entering dangerous places if everything happens by Divine decree? The shiur examines the debate between Rashi and Tosfos on traveling at night, developing a fundamental distinction: Rashi holds one must avoid even deserved punishments that Hashem delays through mercy, while Tosfos holds the prohibition addresses self-inflicted harm through free will. This framework reveals how people rationalize self-destructive behavior as "hashgacha."
Why does the Gemara praise hospitality to scholars as a unique mitzvah rather than ordinary hachnasas orchim? The shiur distinguishes two mitzvahs: hachnasas orchim (providing for those in need) and connecting to talmidei chachamim (cleaving to God through scholars). Yisro's meal for the Jewish leaders wasn't charity—it was his way of bonding with those transformed by Torah, teaching that learning must fundamentally change who we are.
Shabbos 4a
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!
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.
