A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What does holech isur isur mean, and when does it work? The shiur develops two distinct mechanisms: (1) when one heter takes effect, a second parallel heter is mutar, and (2) once a heter is chal, no subsequent isur can interfere with what the Torah (תורה) permitted. The Gemara (גמרא)'s shift from "naso meis zachas nos achai" to "naso meis umeis" reveals the limits of the first type—and the power of the second.
Rabbi Zweig delivers an advanced Gemara (גמרא) shiur analyzing the sugya of holech isur isur in Yevamos 6a, developing a fundamental chakira in how this principle operates. The shiur begins by reviewing several unresolved questions from the previous session, including the Argue More's conclusion that holech isur isur requires the heter to be mutar, the figyu of zachas that suddenly transforms a tumei meis into a zav, the Pnei Hasadom's question about chametz dika milk, and the Maggid of Rum's shaila about burning a keili on Yom Tov. The core question addressed is: what is the underlying sevara of holech isur isur? On the surface, the concept appears paradoxical—if the Torah (תורה) permits one thing, how does that automatically permit another? Rabbi Zweig demonstrates that the Gemara's progression from "naso meis zachas nos achai" to "naso meis umeis" is not merely a factual correction, but reveals a fundamental machlokes about how holech isur isur operates.
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!
Yevamos 6a
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.
