No community start suggestion yet.
What makes a pesach (פסח) pasuch case qualify as sfeik sfeika? The shiur argues that sfeik sfeika isn't about resolving doubts through statistics, but about avoiding speculation entirely. When you need two assumptions to create a halachic problem, that's speculation—not a legitimate safek requiring stringency.
This deep analysis of Tosafos (תוספות) in Kesubos 9a explores the fundamental nature of sfeik sfeika in cases of pesach (פסח) pasuch (non-virginity found in a married woman). The shiur begins by examining Tosafos's famous question: if we assume most women who engage in relations do so willingly (rov rotzen), and we can use the legal presumption (chezkas heter) to assume it didn't happen during marriage (tachas), then why do we need sfeik sfeika at all? The Pnei Yeshua's answer—that chezkas haguf tells us it happened after age twelve when rov rotzen applies—creates further difficulties, as it seems to eliminate one of the required doubts for sfeik sfeika. Rabbi Zweig develops a novel approach to understanding sfeik sfeika that resolves these contradictions. Rather than viewing sfeik sfeika as a statistical calculation or method of resolving doubts, he argues it represents a fundamental halachic principle: we are not required to engage in speculation. When establishing a prohibition requires making two separate assumptions, that constitutes speculation rather than a legitimate safek. The Torah (תורה) obligates stringency for genuine doubts but not for fishing expeditions.
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 9a
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.
