A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Gemara (גמרא) derive that asei docheh lo saaseh from nazir rather than using ein inyan to transfer the pasuk of rosho to another halacha (הלכה)? The shiur analyzes Tosafos (תוספות)'s radical chiddush that ein inyan can create dinim with no applicability to the pasuk's plain meaning, contrasts this with Rashi (רש"י) who holds we preserve pshat whenever possible, and explores the hierarchy between lav hashaveh bakol, lav she'ein shaveh bakol, and asei she'ein shaveh bakol.
The shiur examines Yevamos 5a, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of hakafas rosh (shaving the corners of the head) and the interplay between different derashos regarding nazir, Kohen, and Yisrael. The fundamental question is how the Gemara derives the principle that an asei is docheh a lav she'ein shaveh bakol from the pesukim of rosho (head) and zikno (beard). The shiur presents two leshonos in the Gemara regarding how we know that asei docheh lo saaseh. According to both leshonos, the mandomer who derives from rosho holds that hakafas kol rosh is considered hakafah (shaving) and therefore uses the pasuk to derive that asei docheh lo saaseh she'ein shaveh bakol. The only dispute between the leshonos concerns the mandomer from nazir: the first leshen says he uses the pasuk for nazir itself, while the second leshen says he already knows asei docheh lo saaseh from another source and therefore uses the pasuk for lo saaseh geridta (a regular lo saaseh) by nazir.
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 5a
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.
