No community start suggestion yet.
How does eid echad betumah work after kinui and stira? The shiur explores whether sotah requires eidus on the actual ma'aseh bia or whether eidus on tumah (signs of impropriety) suffices. Rashi (רש"י) and Tosfos disagree on whether pesach (פסח) pasuach works as eidei kilum or creates a hochacha of bia.
The shiur presents a detailed analysis of the Gemara (גמרא) Kesubos 9a, specifically examining the machlokes between Rashi (רש"י) and Tosfos regarding the nature of eidus required by sotah. The Gemara's discussion centers on whether ein isha nesara la'baalah ela b'kinui v'stira - that a woman only becomes forbidden to her husband through warning and seclusion - requires actual eidei kilum (witnesses to the act itself) or whether other forms of testimony suffice. The Rajbaz raises fundamental questions about the Gemara's lengthy discussion, asking why the Gemara needs such elaborate argumentation if the only innovation is that eidim are acceptable. According to Rashi's interpretation, the Gemara initially assumes that even with eidim present, kinui v'stira is required, establishing this as a separate halachic requirement beyond mere testimony. However, the Gemara challenges this by asking why pesach (פסח) pasuach wouldn't be equivalent to two witnesses if eidim are generally acceptable.
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.
