A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
When can a kal v'chomer create a new issur or chiyuv payment? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: ein onshin min hadin blocks only the creation of a new *shem issur* (category of prohibition), but when the lesser case is fully included in the greater—as the Rambam (רמב"ם) holds regarding non-kosher animals without simanim—the kal v'chomer reveals what was always covered by the original issur, and ein onshin does not apply.
This shiur presents an intricate analysis of the principle of **ein onshin min hadin**—the halachic rule that forbids deriving punishments or certain prohibitions from logical inference (kal v'chomer). Rabbi Zweig builds his framework through several key sugyos, focusing on when ein onshin applies and when it does not. The shiur opens with a **Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Ma'achalos Asuros** that seems to violate ein onshin min hadin. The Rambam paskens that there is a lav asei prohibiting consumption of animals lacking the two simanim of kashrus (split hooves and chewing cud). The Rambam then makes a kal v'chomer: if an animal with one siman (like the arneves or pig) is forbidden by explicit lav, certainly an animal with no simanim at all (like a horse) should be forbidden. The **Ramban (רמב"ן) challenges** this: ein onshin min hadin means you cannot create prohibitions through kal v'chomer, even when the inference seems obvious. Even if a horse intuitively should be more assur than a pig (which at least has one siman), the Torah (תורה) must state it explicitly.
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!
Bava Kamma 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.
