A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why is a dried-out lulav (lulav hayovesh) invalid, and how can the Rambam (רמב"ם) rule it's kosher b'sha'as hadchak? The shiur distinguishes two independent dimensions in the mitzvah (מצוה) of lulav: netilas lulav (taking) and hallel (praise). A dried lulav fails only the hallel aspect ("lo hameisim yehallelucha") but remains valid for netilah, enabling the b'di'eved ruling without compromising Torah (תורה) law.
This shiur tackles a fundamental question in Hilchos Lulav: the Gemara (גמרא) on Sukkah 29b rules that lulav hayovesh (a dried-out lulav) is invalid, yet the Rambam (רמב"ם) states that b'sha'as hadchak (under pressing circumstances) or b'sha'as hasakan (danger) it remains kosher. The Raavad challenges this sharply: how can a Torah (תורה)-level invalidation (pasul) have a distinction between l'chatchilah and b'di'eved? By Torah law, pasul means absolutely invalid—there is no conditional validity. Rabbi Zweig develops an answer rooted in the Yerushalmi and other Chazal sources. The Yerushalmi states: "lo hameisim yehallelucha"—the dead do not praise God. This phrase reveals that lulav has two independent halachic dimensions. The first is netilas lulav—the act of taking the four species as prescribed in the Torah. The second is an aspect of hallel—praising Hashem (ה׳) with the lulav, which is tied to simcha, publicizing the miracle, and celebrating redemption (e.g., "am nivra yehallel ka"). The shiur brings evidence from several sources: the Midrash that ties lulav to praise after being judged favorably on Yom Kippur, the concept of na'anuim (waving) as a form of hallel, and the mitzvah (מצוה) in the Mikdash to take lulav for seven days as an expression of simcha before Hashem.
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!
Sukkah 29b
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.
