A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What eating does the Mishna prohibit on Erev Pesach (פסח) after Mincha Ketana? Tosafot explains it refers to matzah ashira, which doesn't fulfill the mitzvah (מצוה) but still requires restriction. This distinction reveals two fundamental approaches to why matzah is forbidden on Erev Pesach - protecting the mitzvah experience versus matzah's inherent sanctified status.
The shiur begins with an analysis of the Mishna's prohibition against eating on Erev Pesach (פסח) after Mincha Ketana. Tosafot asks a fundamental question: if the Mishna prohibits eating, what exactly is forbidden? If it refers to matzah, that's already prohibited the entire Erev Pesach based on the principle that eating matzah on Erev Pesach is like a groom being intimate with his bride in his father-in-law's house. If it refers to other foods, those are generally permitted. Tosafot answers that the Mishna refers specifically to matzah ashira - enriched matzah made with fruit juice rather than water. This type of matzah doesn't fall under the regular prohibition of eating matzah on Erev Pesach because it's not considered proper matzah for fulfilling the mitzvah (מצוה), yet it's still restricted before Mincha to avoid starting a meal. The Maharsha raises several questions on Tosafot's approach. First, why doesn't Tosafot mention pas shel goyim (bread of non-Jews) as another option, since this also cannot be used to fulfill the mitzvah yet would seem to fall under the same restriction? The Maharsha suggests that perhaps there's a distinction based on taste - matzah ashira doesn't taste like regular matzah, while pas shel goyim does retain the taste of matzah, making it more problematic. Rabbi Zweig challenges this explanation as somewhat forced, noting that there are more fundamental differences between these cases.
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!
Pesachim 99b
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.
Why does the Gemara present a kal v'chomer for chuppah making kiddushin based on kesef not being maichel b'terumah, only to reject it? The shiur reveals that even the rejected kal v'chomer establishes a fundamental yesod: kiddushin is a kinyan for ishus (marital relationship), not merely a kinyan in hilchos kinyanim. The second kal v'chomer—from chuppah being gomeres—raises Tosafos's famous question.
Is the kesef used in kiddushin a true kinyan (acquisition), or merely a symbolic means of establishing marriage? The shiur analyzes multiple interpretations of the Gemara's derivation from ki yikach ki'ach mi'Sayeffron, exploring whether marriage constitutes ownership, and develops three fundamental approaches: (1) The Gemara proves ishus is a kinyan, (2) ishus is not a kinyan but uses kinyan-like means, or (3) ishus is a kinyan but the kesef may not be a ma'aseh kinyan. The Rambam's position—calling kesef "midivrei sofrim"—is explained as distinguishing between cross-referencing concepts versus borrowing terminology.
Why does the Mishna alternate between the language of "kinyan" (acquisition) and "kiddushin" (sanctification) when describing marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: marriage has two separate aspects—a kinyan dimension (ownership) and a kedusha dimension (sanctified relationship). Either aspect can initiate the bond, and understanding this dual nature resolves multiple textual and halachic questions throughout the sugya.
Does kiddushei shetar require a shevah pruta? The Ran presents two approaches to the Rif's position. The shiur develops the Ran's second pshat that shetar kiddushin functions as a hachnah (exchange) rather than a mere kinyan nesina. This reading has profound implications for isuri hana'ah, mechubar, and the relationship between kesef and shetar.
