A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does reading the megillah on different days create a lo saasudu problem when countless valid minhagim exist in klal Yisrael? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: lo saasudu applies only when one community views another's practice as forbidden, not when different communities simply have different customs. This reframes the entire shakla v'tarya between Reish Lakish and Rebbe Yochanan on Yevamos 13b.
The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s question regarding lo saasudu agudos (creating factions) in the context of reading the megillah on different days. The Gemara in Yevamos 13b presents a fundamental difficulty: if different communities read the megillah on the 11th, 13th, 14th, and 15th, doesn't this violate the prohibition of lo saasudu agudos, which forbids creating separate factions within klal Yisrael? Rabbi Zweig begins by challenging the basic premise of the kashya. If the Torah (תורה) itself creates different categories—kohanim, leviim, and yisraelim each have distinct obligations—how can we speak of lo saasudu when the Torah establishes these divisions? The prohibition seems to apply only when people dispute the same halacha (הלכה) and create competing camps. But here, everyone agrees on the psak: benei kfarim read on one day, benei ayarim on another, and mukafei choma on a third. There is no machlokes about the din itself; there are simply different zmanim for different categories of cities.
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!
Yevamos 13b
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.
