A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why do we eat a meal after Shabbos (שבת) ends when hosting guests involves diminishing meals over time? The shiur explores the concept of melaveh malkah through a Talmudic story about wasteful eating practices. The deeper question emerges: what does Shabbos itself gain from our post-Shabbos meal, parallel to how oneg Shabbos benefits the day itself.
This shiur begins with a detailed halachic counseling session about shidduchim (matchmaking), emphasizing the importance of taking time in dating decisions and looking for emotional intelligence rather than just academic achievement in a potential spouse. Rabbi Zweig warns against creating artificial momentum through intensive dating and stresses the value of finding someone who truly understands people and children. The Gemara (גמרא) study focuses on a passage about Rav Avu, who would slaughter an entire calf just to eat its kidney (kulyaisa) for his post-Shabbos (שבת) meal (melaveh malkah). When his son Avimi questioned this wasteful practice, suggesting they save the kidney from the Shabbos meal instead, a lion came and ate the animal they had set aside - apparently a divine message against this approach.
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!
Discussion of Rav Avu and melaveh malkah
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.
