A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What distinguishes psik reisha lo nichah from melacha she'einah tzrichah legufa? The shiur develops a fundamental chakira: some melachot require only the physical action while others require specific intent to even constitute a melacha. This framework resolves the apparent contradiction between Tosafos (תוספות) and the Rambam (רמב"ם) on mafis morsah.
Rabbi Zweig explores a fundamental distinction in hilchot Shabbos (שבת) between two different categories of forbidden actions and their relationship to intent (kavanah). The shiur begins by examining the din of psik reisha lo nichah, identifying two distinct types of cases that fall under this category. The first type involves performing two actions simultaneously where one is mechaven for one action but not the other. According to Rashi (רש"י), to avoid psik reisha liability, one must actively not want the second action to occur. The second type involves a single action that has two possible implications or purposes (tachlisin) - if one focuses on one purpose and is lo ichpat lei (doesn't care) about the other, this also avoids psik reisha.
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 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.
