A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How does the Rambam (רמב"ם) understand the melacha of mefarek when extracting blood or other liquids? The shiur develops a novel reading that mefarek requires both taking out the liquid AND needing it as ochel (food). This resolves major contradictions between the Rambam and Gemara (גמרא) regarding whether mifkad pokad (naturally stored liquid) constitutes mefarek.
This shiur presents a comprehensive analysis of the melacha of mefarek (extracting liquids) on Shabbos (שבת), focusing on a fundamental machlokes Rishonim regarding what constitutes this prohibition. The Gemara (גמרא) in Kesubos 5b discusses whether blood-letting on Shabbos is permitted, with the key distinction being dam mifkad pokad (blood that is naturally stored) versus chbur mechber (blood that is attached/connected). The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s position creates significant difficulties for the Acharonim. In Hilchos Shabbos, the Rambam states that mefarek is a toldah of dosh (threshing), and one is only liable when there is tzorech ledam - a need for the blood. The Chasam Sofer raises a fundamental contradiction: if mifkad pokad exempts from mefarek, how can we explain that squeezing grapes and olives (where the wine and oil are mifkad pokad) constitutes a biblical violation of schita?
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.
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.
