No community start suggestion yet.
The Sefer HaChinuch notes that while Torah (תורה) law governs how to divide inheritance, there's no obligation to leave one at all. This parallels the Gemara (גמרא)'s ruling that supporting children is only required until age 6-7. The deeper purpose is ensuring children recognize parental care stems from love, not legal duty.
This shiur examines a fascinating insight from the Sefer HaChinuch regarding the Torah (תורה)'s laws of inheritance found in Parshas Pinchas and codified in the eighth perek of Bava Basra, Yesh Nochlim. The Sefer HaChinuch points out what appears to be an anomaly: while the Torah provides detailed halachos about how to divide an inheritance (first to sons, then to daughters if no sons exist), there is actually no mitzvah (מצוה) requiring a person to leave an inheritance at all. The obligation is purely conditional - IF there is an inheritance, THEN these are the rules for distribution. The Sefer HaChinuch contrasts this with the practice among non-Jews of his era, where civil law mandated that people must leave inheritances to their children. This creates a paradox: Jews, who are known for their devotion to their children's welfare, have no legal obligation to provide inheritance, while non-Jews, who live more for the present moment, are legally required to provide for future generations.
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!
Bava Basra, Perek Yesh Nochlim
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.
Up Next in this Series
Why did Potiphar's wife pursue Yosef, and what does Rashi mean when he calls her actions "leshem shamayim"? The shiur argues she correctly saw in astrology that she and Yosef would have a child—an unchangeable decree for most people. But as a descendant of Avrohom, whom Hashem lifted above the stars, Yosef possessed the unique power to bend astrological fate, transforming the prediction into fulfillment through her daughter (Osnas) instead.
Why did Hashem cure all the sick, blind, deaf, and lame before Matan Torah? The Rambam teaches that miracles require purpose. This shiur argues that the mass healing demonstrated that Torah is not meant for the downtrodden seeking comfort, but for healthy people who can fully channel their energies toward mitzvos and serve as proper examples to their communities.
Why does the Aramaic word for "accept" (Kabbalah) also mean "complain"? The shiur develops a profound insight: genuine acceptance only emerges from overcoming resistance. Without internal challenge, an idea merely passes through us—true commitment is born only when we wrestle with, resist, and ultimately decide to embrace a principle.
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.
