A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why can't one eat matzah on Erev Pesach (פסח) if it must be eaten letayovon, yet the Gemara (גמרא) discusses eating matzah al hasova without appetite? The shiur reframes Tosafot's analysis by distinguishing between the basic matzah mitzvah (מצוה) and zecher korban Pesach, suggesting letayovon means 'with enjoyment' rather than just 'hungry.'
This shiur examines a complex Tosafot on Pesachim 99b regarding the prohibition of eating matzah on Erev Pesach (פסח). The Mishna states that one cannot eat on Erev Pesach because matzah must be eaten letayovon (with appetite). Tosafot raises a difficulty: the Gemara (גמרא) discusses eating matzah b'tzeit (early in the meal) when one has only one kezayit of matzah, followed by eating at the end al hasova (when satisfied) - seemingly without letayovon. Rabbi Zweig questions Tosafot's premise, noting that when eating matzah early versus late, one is fulfilling two different mitzvos: the basic mitzvah (מצוה) of matzah versus the zecher (remembrance) of korban Pesach. The shiur explores whether Tosafot redefines letayovon from meaning 'hungry' to meaning 'with enjoyment' - allowing for different levels of fulfillment. The analysis continues with Tosafot's statement 'ad shetechshach' (until dark), questioning why one cannot make kiddush early on Pesach night and eat, similar to what is done on Shabbos (שבת). Rabbi Zweig proposes several explanations: perhaps the prohibition exists because eating early would compromise the higher level hidur (beautification) of eating when truly hungry, or perhaps it extends the prohibition of eating matzah sheir (regular matzah) beyond when one would normally be allowed after accepting Yom Tov early. The discussion includes practical implications about the timing of kiddush, the nature of kedushat hayom (sanctity of the day), and whether chag hamatzot begins before one can fulfill the mitzvah of matzah. Throughout, the shiur demonstrates the intricate balance between different levels of mitzvah fulfillment and the principle that one should not compromise a d'oraita (biblical) hidur for a d'rabbanan (rabbinic) obligation.
Pesachim 99b
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.