No community start suggestion yet.
How can the pasuk "lo savaru eish" teach both that one is chayav for a single melacha and that thirty-nine melachos yield thirty-nine korbanos? The shiur develops a yesod through Rashi (רש"י), Tosfos, the Rashba, and the Ramban (רמב"ן): a pasuk can generate multiple limudim even when yotze mi-klal, provided the new insight emerges as a byproduct of the primary din.
Rabbi Zweig opens with two fundamental questions in the sugya of lo savaru eish on Yevamos 7a. First, Rashi (רש"י)'s position: the havah aminah was that one is chayav only when performing all thirty-nine melachos together. The pasuk of lo savaru teaches two things—that one melacha alone obligates a korban, AND that thirty-nine melachos incur thirty-nine separate korbanos. But how can the same pasuk teach both dinim? The Gemara (גמרא)'s method of deriving lechaliq yotzah seems to address the second point (thirty-nine is thirty-nine), while the din of carbon (teaching chiyuv for one) appears to address the first. The kashya is how to reconcile these overlapping limudim from identical source material. The second question relates to the Ramban (רמב"ן) in Chumash. The Ramban brings a midrash suggesting that without lo savaru eish, one might think havara is permitted on Shabbos (שבת) because it "warms the body" like refuah, analogous to milah which is permitted. But the kashya is: if the pasuk is needed to assur havara at all (le-gufey), how can Rav Noson in the midrash simultaneously hold that lo savaru teaches lechaliq? If the pasuk assurs havara, it cannot simultaneously be splitting melachos into separate categories—those two functions appear mutually exclusive.
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!
Yevamos 7a
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.
