A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How can one fulfill both Krias Shema of Arvis and Shacharis during the overlapping period between amud hashachar and netz hachamah? The shiur analyzes whether 'beshachbecha' means 'when you sleep' or 'when focused on sleep,' showing how this distinction resolves the Ba'al Hamaor's fundamental question about simultaneous obligations.
This shiur provides an in-depth analysis of Brachos 8b-9a, focusing on the fundamental machloket regarding the proper times for reciting Krias Shema. The Gemara (גמרא) presents two interpretations of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai's position: the first holds that Krias Shema of Arvis can be said until amud hashachar, after which only Krias Shema of Shacharis applies; the second maintains that Krias Shema of Arvis continues until netz hachamah. The core issue is the Ba'al Hamaor's question: how can one be yotzei both Krias Shema of Arvis and Shacharis simultaneously during the overlapping time period? The Rif rules that both interpretations are valid, allowing for both recitations between amud hashachar and netz hachamah. The Ramban (רמב"ן) responds that there's no contradiction since most people are awake by this time (making it zman kima), while some are still sleeping (maintaining it as zman shekiva), thus permitting both. The shiur examines Tosafos (תוספות)' complex analysis, which presents two approaches: first, that the periods are mutually exclusive - if some people are getting up, it's no longer zman shekiva for Krias Shema of Arvis; second, that both can coexist during this transitional period. A key insight emerges regarding the definition of 'beshachbecha' - whether it means 'when you are sleeping' versus 'when you are focused on going to sleep.' According to the first interpretation, once people begin rising (even if only some), others won't return to sleep, thus ending the zman shekiva period. The second interpretation defines beshachbecha simply as when people are sleeping, allowing for overlap since some remain asleep even as others rise. The shiur also addresses the relationship between Krias Shema and tefillin times, noting Tosafos' position that Krias Shema time begins before tefillin time (contrary to Rashi (רש"י)). The analysis concludes that the fundamental dispute reflects different understandings of whether these time periods operate according to absolute day/night cycles (like other mitzvos) or according to the specific behavioral patterns described by beshachbecha u'vekumecha. This creates practical ramifications for when one can fulfill the obligation of Krias Shema and highlights the sophisticated halachic reasoning employed by the Rishonim in resolving apparent contradictions in the Talmudic text.
Brachos 8b-9a
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.
Up Next in this Series
Why does saying Ashrei three times daily guarantee a share in the World to Come? The verse 'umasbia l'chol chai ratzon' reveals that God provides not just sustenance but pleasure to all creation out of pure love. This recognition teaches us that even basic needs are expressions of divine chesed, creating the foundation for love-motivated service through both major and minor mitzvos.
Should one learn Torah full-time trusting in Divine providence, or combine learning with work? The shiur distinguishes between Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai's approach of complete separation from worldly concerns versus Rabbi Shmuel's view that proper work itself becomes part of Torah. The key insight: true emunah means learning without demanding sustenance from either Hashem or community, unlike having a 'contract' expecting payment for learning.
Should one combine Torah study with work, or rely entirely on Divine providence through exclusive learning? The shiur analyzes the machlokes between Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, explaining that 'Bnei Aliyah' live above natural law where Torah itself becomes their reality. This connects to the difference between tzaddik gamor and tzaddik she'eino gamor regarding transcending physical limitations.
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.
