A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Is the blood at first relations (dam besulim) stored in packets or connected to the body? The Gemara (גמרא)'s question depends on whether the issur of chaburah is netilas neshamah or tzavei'a (dyeing). Tosfos analyzes Rashi (רש"י)'s position on what constitutes the forbidden labor of chaburah.
The shiur analyzes a fundamental Talmudic debate about the nature of dam besulim (blood from first relations) and the underlying prohibition of chaburah (wounding). The Gemara (גמרא) asks whether dam besulim is mefukad pakod (stored in separate packets) or chaburah mechaber (connected to the body). This question has practical implications for the issur of chaburah - if it's mefukad pakod, there would be no violation of chaburah when removing it, but if it's chaburah mechaber, removing it would constitute making a wound. Tosfos extensively critiques Rashi (רש"י)'s position on the nature of the chaburah prohibition. In Masechta Shabbos (שבת), Rashi explains that chaburah violations involving sheratzim occur due to tzavei'a (dyeing the skin), but Tosfos argues this cannot be correct. He presents several difficulties: First, the Gemara in Eilu Treifos indicates that sheratzim without skin wouldn't be liable for tzavei'a when blood emerges, contradicting Rashi's approach. Second, by dam besulim there's no applicable tzavei'a. Third, by milah there's similarly no dyeing involved.
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!
Kesubos 5b
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.
