No community start suggestion yet.
Why does Tosafos (תוספות) understand that even a baki is considered she'aino baki regarding hatoya? The sugya explores whether expertise in hatoya makes biah permitted on Shabbos (שבת) without concern for psik reisha, and why even experts remain nervous. The analysis shows that true bikius requires such effort that even experts face tirda, affecting the entire framework of psik reisha.
This Gemara (גמרא) on Kesubos 6b addresses when a husband is permitted to have biah with his wife on Shabbos (שבת), particularly focusing on the concept of hatoya (careful intimate relations to avoid bleeding) and the halachic status of baki versus she'aino baki (expert versus non-expert). The sugya begins with a question of secretion - whether biah on Shabbos constitutes psik reisha (inevitable consequence) of causing bleeding, which would be forbidden. The Gemara initially answers that bikiim (experts) know how to perform hatoya, making biah permissible. However, this leads to a new question: if someone is truly expert, why would he be obligated in kriyas Shema? An expert shouldn't have tirda (anxiety) that would require this obligation. The Gemara responds that even a baki is considered she'aino baki - meaning even experts face uncertainty.
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!
Kesubos 6b
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.
