A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
The Gemara (גמרא) states that someone who says "Go pick my figs" on Shabbos (שבת) cannot later demand the figs or the animal back—why not? Rabbi Zweig develops a fundamental distinction: in the ba'al machteres case the ganav has kinyan genevah and mamona gabah (the victim's money), so kom lei b'derabbah minei only exempts the criminal penalty but not the civil chiyuv. Here, the act of taking itself was chilul Shabbos, which cannot generate any civil obligation—therefore it never becomes mamona gabah and there's no valid kinyan kesef.
The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא) in Bava Kama 70b discussing a case where someone tells another person, "Go pick figs from my tree" on Shabbos (שבת), intending to acquire an animal in exchange. The Gemara states that because of kom lei b'derabbah minei (one who is liable for a more severe punishment is exempt from a lesser one), the seller cannot later demand either the figs back or the animal. Rabbi Akiva Eiger asks a fundamental question: why can't the seller at least demand the figs back? After all, in Sanhedrin the Gemara says that even when something is be'ein (extant), the ganav must return it despite ba'al machteres. Here too, the figs are be'ein—why doesn't the din of hashavah (obligation to return) apply? Rabbi Zweig begins by clarifying that without Rashi (רש"י)'s interpretation, one could read the Gemara differently. The straightforward reading would be that the seller gave the figs voluntarily, so the only question is whether he can demand the animal in exchange. On that claim—the demand for the animal—the Gemara says kom lei b'derabbah minei prevents any mechira. The seller cannot be tovei'a (make a claim) for the animal because the act that was supposed to create the kinyan was chilul Shabbos, which cannot generate obligations. Zil shlim (go pay) would refer to the animal's value, not to returning the figs.
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 Kama 70b
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.
