A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a woman remarry with a get that has not been verified (she'eino mekuyam)? The Rambam (רמב"ם) allows it based on ne'emanus and chezkas kashrus, but the Raavad insists kiyum is required even without an oirer. The shiur analyzes this fundamental dispute through Gittin 2a-3a, exploring whether chashash mezuyif applies differently to gittin versus monetary documents and why Tosfos works so hard to avoid establishing mezuyif as the concern.
This shiur delves into a crucial machlokes Rishonim regarding whether a woman can remarry with a get that has not undergone formal kiyum (verification). The sugya begins with the Mishna's discussion of how a get is verified in Eretz Yisrael versus chutz la'aretz, and the circumstances under which one must say "befanai nechta ufanai nechta" (it was written and signed in my presence). The Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Geirushin (Perek 7:24 and Perek 12:2) rules that a woman holding a get is believed to remarry even if the get has not been verified through kiyum chosamo. The Rambam's position is based on the principle of chezkas kashrus—we assume the document is valid unless there is reason to suspect otherwise. Additionally, the woman herself is ne'emenes (believed) because of the principle "ein isha osah kalkalah al atzma" (a woman does not create problems for herself). The Rambam provides extensive reasoning spanning twenty-five lines to justify this leniency.
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!
Gittin 2a-3a
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.
