No community start suggestion yet.
Why is safek sveka mutar while a single safek assurs? The shiur builds on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s distinction that eishes kohen cases involve status questions (zonah or not), while eishes Yisrael cases involve contractual obligations. When a woman married as a besulah has a civil obligation to remain so, violation becomes a breach of contract governed by different halachic principles.
This in-depth Gemara (גמרא) shiur on Kesubos 9a analyzes the fundamental distinction between safek sveka (double doubt) being permitted while a single safek (doubt) renders forbidden. Rabbi Zweig begins by questioning why Rabbi Eliezer needs to give a second example of 'pesach (פסח) pasuach' using the extremely rare case of a woman married at age two and found not to be a virgin at age thirteen, when the first case of an adult woman married to a kohen already illustrates the principle. The shiur develops a crucial distinction through careful analysis of the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s organization in Hilchos Issurei Biah. The Rambam presents eishes kohen and eishes Yisrael as fundamentally different types of cases. For eishes kohen, the issue is purely a status question - whether she is a zonah who is unfit to marry a kohen. This concerns her intrinsic status, not her relationship with her husband specifically.
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 9a
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.
