A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When a man remarries his divorcée and dies childless, does she require chalitzah? The shiur analyzes a fundamental dispute between Rashi (רש"י), Tosafos (תוספות), and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding whether the pasuk of tumah creates an issur of eishes ach on the gerushah, and explores the nature of the resulting chalitzah—is it chalitzah psulaḥ or a unique zikah lechalitzah only?
This shiur presents a comprehensive analysis of Yevamos 11b and the complex machlokes between Rashi (רש"י), Tosafos (תוספות), and the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding the case of machzir gerushaso—a man who remarries his divorcée, then dies childless. The central question is whether this gerushah requires chalitzah, and if so, what is the halachic nature of that chalitzah. The Gemara (גמרא) presents a dispute between the Chachamim and Rav Yosi ben Kipper. According to the Chachamim, the pasuk of tumah is written specifically on the gerushah, creating a unique din. According to Rav Yosi ben Kipper, the tumah was removed from nisuin by the Torah (תורה), implying a different halachic structure. The first shakla v'tarya of the Gemara asks whether the gerushah herself needs chalitzah, and whether the tzarah needs chalitzah or may do yibum. The second shakla v'tarya establishes that according to the Chachamim, the gerushah is forbidden and requires chalitzah, while the tzarah is muteres leyibum.
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 11b
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.
