A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What is the measure of chatzi shiur (half-measure) that's forbidden on Yom Kippur? The shiur analyzes whether the Gemara (גמרא)'s din of chatzi shiur min haTorah applies the same way to Yom Kippur as it does to forbidden foods. A fundamental distinction emerges: in prohibited foods chatzi shiur means kol shehu, but on Yom Kippur—where the issur is inui, not mechales asuros—the Rambam (רמב"ם) requires hanachas grono, something close to a kezayis.
This shiur examines Yoma 73b and the sugya of chatzi shiur (half-measure) on Yom Kippur. The Mishna teaches that on Yom Kippur one who eats the size of a koseves hagasa (large date) or drinks a melo lugmav (cheekful) is chayav. The Gemara (גמרא) questions why the Mishna uses the term "asur" when it should say "chayav kareis" for eating on Yom Kippur. Rebbe Yochanan answers that the Mishna is not discussing the full shiur but rather chatzi shiur (half the measure), and chatzi shiur is asur min haTorah—forbidden by Torah (תורה) law—according to Rebbe Yochanan. The shiur begins by raising a fundamental question on Rashi (רש"י)'s formulation. Rashi explains "chatzi shiur" as "pochos mi'shiur" (less than the measure), but then adds "v'chi lo shalem shiurei kares like issur." This language appears redundant—if Rashi already said chatzi shiur means less than the full measure, why add that one is not chayav kareis for incomplete measures? Rabbi Zweig suggests that Rashi is teaching a fundamental principle: the issur of chatzi shiur only applies when one does NOT complete the full shiur. If one eats a full shiur, there is no separate issur of chatzi shiur—one is only chayav for the complete shiur. This addresses a conceptual problem: if chatzi shiur were forbidden even when one eats a full shiur, one would be over an infinite number of aveiros every time one ate a kezayis, since every full measure contains infinite half-measures within it.
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!
Yoma 73b
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.
