A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Does fulfilling the mitzvah (מצוה) of Hallel require actively repeating words, answering amen or Halleluyah, or is silent listening sufficient? The shiur analyzes the Mishna's takanos—answering Halleluyah at paragraph breaks, repeating the rashei prakim, and responding word-for-word to a katan—and struggles with apparent contradictions in Rashi (רש"י) and the Rambam (רמב"ם) about whether shomeya k'oneh (listening is like responding) works without any verbal response at all.
This shiur examines the mechanics of fulfilling the mitzvah (מצוה) of Hallel through the principle of shomeya k'oneh (one who hears is considered as if he answered). Rabbi Zweig opens by analyzing a Mishna in Sukkah 38b that details the takanos (rabbinic enactments) governing the recitation of Hallel. The Mishna teaches that when the chazzan says "Halleluyah," the congregation answers "Halleluyah." When he says "Hallelu avdei Hashem (ה׳)," they do not answer "Halleluyah" because this indicates the start of a new paragraph. Rashi (רש"י) explains that from this we learn the takana that one must answer "Halleluyah" at the beginning and end of each paragraph. The shiur then turns to a more puzzling takana: when a katan (minor) is reading Hallel, the adult must repeat every single word after him, word for word. Rabbi Zweig struggles to understand what kind of takana this is. If the adult is obligated in Hallel mi-de'orayta or mi-derabbanan, why would repeating the words after a katan help? The Gemara (גמרא) elsewhere teaches that a katan who is not yet bar chiyuv cannot be motzi (fulfill the obligation of) an adult. Yet here Rashi seems to present this word-for-word repetition as a special rabbinic enactment. Rabbi Zweig raises the possibility that there are two ways to read this takana: either (1) without the takana, you would not be yotzei at all by hearing from a katan, and the Rabbanan were mesakein that you can be yotzei if you repeat every word; or (2) you would actually be yotzei even without repeating, but the Rabbanan required repetition as a chumra or for pedagogical reasons. The latter seems difficult—why institute a takana to do something that would already work?
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!
Sukkah 38b
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.
