A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why doesn't the Rambam (רמב"ם) explicitly state that women are exempt from milah? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: mitzvos asei she'hazman grama are opportunities that lapse, while milah creates permanent achrayus (responsibility). This yesod explains why milah is the most chamur mitzvah (מצוה), why women are exempt from time-bound mitzvos but obligated in ongoing responsibilities, and the mechanics of how a father's and beis din's obligation differs from the child's own obligation.
The Gemara (גמרא) in Kiddushin 29a establishes that women are exempt from milah, requiring a specific pasuk despite milah being a time-bound mitzvah (מצוה) (she'hazman grama). Tosafos (תוספות) raises a difficulty: if milah is considered a time-bound mitzvah, why is a pasuk needed to exempt women? Tosafos answers that milah might have been considered shelo hazman grama because milah she-lo bizmanah (circumcision not on the eighth day) applies day and night without interruption. The shiur addresses two fundamental questions: First, why does the Rambam (רמב"ם) omit any explicit mention that women are exempt from milah, when the Tur states this clearly? Second, what is the deeper conceptual framework that explains the nature of milah and its uniqueness among mitzvos? Rabbi Zweig builds his answer on a careful analysis of the Rambam in Hilchos Milah (Perek 1, Halacha (הלכה) 2), where the Rambam declares milah the most chamur (stringent) of all mitzvos. The Rambam writes that if a father fails to circumcise his son on the eighth day, he transgresses a great and severe mitzvah, and "lo yitachen lo le'olam l'shalem zos ha'mitzvah"—he will never be able to complete this mitzvah. This appears paradoxical: unlike Sukkos (סוכות) or Pesach (פסח) where the time passes and the mitzvah can never be fulfilled, milah can be performed later. How then is it more chamur? The Rambam explains that precisely because milah she-lo bizmanah remains an obligation, the severity is greater—the responsibility never ends.
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!
Kiddushin 29a
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.
