A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
May a woman use contraception when pregnancy poses danger? The Gemara (גמרא) discusses three women who may use a moch (contraceptive): a minor, a pregnant woman, and a nursing mother. Rabbi Meir and the Rabbanan debate whether contraception is obligatory or permissible, invoking "shomer p'sa'im Hashem (ה׳)." The shiur explores the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s psak, Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot's dispute over timing, and the broader implications for safek sakana, smoking, and health risks.
This shiur analyzes Yevamos 12a, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of three women who may use a moch (contraceptive): a ketana (minor), a pregnant woman, and a nursing mother. Rabbi Meir holds that these women are obligated to use contraception due to the danger pregnancy poses in their condition. The Rabbanan (Chachamim) disagree, stating "shomer p'sa'im Hashem (ה׳)"—God protects the simple—and therefore contraception is permissible but not obligatory. Rabbi Zweig explores several fundamental questions arising from this machloket. The Rambam (רמב"ם) paskins that a sarit (barren woman) and even a sarit bito (the daughter of a barren woman who is also barren) are mutar—permitted without yibum, and the tzara is also mutar and requires chalitza miyibum. Rabbi Zweig questions why the Rambam presents these two halachot separately, and why he places the halacha (הלכה) of sarit ayeles together with chaivei lavin and chaivei esseh. The answer suggested is that the Rambam is teaching two distinct chiddushim: first, that a sarit ayeles is not an eshes ach—she does not create the prohibition of a brother's wife—because she never fell into the parsha of yibum. Second, even if she is also an erva (such as a bas, daughter), she does not create a din of tzaras habas because she was mufka (excluded) from the yibum obligation entirely. The Rambam's language "veha'rei ha'erva ayeles" (and behold the erva is barren) is analyzed—Rashi (רש"י) holds that this refers to a situation where the barrenness was known at the time, not discovered later, which has implications for the issur derabbanan of tzaras memaenes.
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 12a
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.
