A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a yevamah be coerced to perform yibum with a mukeh shechin yavam? The Gemara (גמרא) derives from "lo techasum shor bedisho" that she cannot be muzzled. The shiur contrasts the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s approach—treating yibum like regular ishus where the woman is a principle—with the Rashba and Meiri who see yibum as potentially coercive (bal korcha), treating the woman more as an object of the mitzvah (מצוה).
This shiur analyzes Yevamos 3b-4a, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s statement that when a yevamah falls to a yavam who is a mukeh shechin (afflicted with boils), we do not "chosum" (muzzle) her objection. The Gemara derives this principle from the pasuk "lo techasum shor bedisho" (do not muzzle an ox while it threshes). The shiur begins by examining what "ein chosmim oso" means. Rashi (רש"י) in Makos 23b explains it means we would have screamed at her to prevent her objection—pressuring her without actual physical force, since yibum cannot be done completely bal korcha (against her will). However, the Gemara's language in Yevamos suggests a stronger havamina: that we could actually force (kofa) her to be miyabem. The Meiri and Rashba explain this havamina stems from "yevamah yavo aleha"—the Torah (תורה)'s language suggests yibum can be done even bal korcha, leading to a potential havamina that we could coerce her for yibum.
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 3b-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!
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.
