A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What is the nature of eidim zomemim - punishment for the aveira of false testimony, or a halacha (הלכה) to maintain judicial integrity? The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s chiddush that eidim zomemim is "ein bo meisa aveira" reveals it's not punishment for perjury but rather preserving the validity of beis din's psak. This explains why the Gemara (גמרא) says "eini yodei" regarding conflicting punishments.
The shiur analyzes a fundamental machloket regarding the nature of eidim zomemim (conspiring witnesses) based on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position that "ein bo meisa aveira" - there is no death penalty aveira involved. The Rambam in Hilchos Eidus rules that eidim zomemim don't need hasra'ah (warning) because their punishment isn't for committing an aveira, but rather to maintain the integrity of the beis din's psak. The shiur presents two possible understandings of "ein onshin ela ken mas'hirim" (we only punish after warning): Either punishment serves as kapara requiring the person to understand what they did wrong, or it establishes that every punishable act must have a prohibition (otherwise one could choose to accept consequences rather than avoid the action entirely). The Chinuch suggests this second approach.
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!
Makkos 2a
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.
