A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Rambam (רמב"ם) require "avar ha'av" (the father transgressed) before beis din may perform milah, while the Tur only requires "lo mal" (the father didn't do it)? The shiur reconciles the Rambam's Pirush HaMishnayos with the Yad Chazaka, distinguishing the father's unique mitzvah (מצוה) of Yom HaShmini from everyone's achrayus obligation, and explains why a pasuk is needed to exempt women.
This shiur continues the effort to reconcile the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s seemingly contradictory positions in the Pirush HaMishnayos and the Yad Chazaka regarding the obligation of milah. In the Pirush HaMishnayos, the Rambam says that the father and beis din are "over" (transgress) every day they fail to circumcise, while in the Yad he states that only the son transgresses daily, whereas the father and beis din only transgress if they never perform the milah at all. The shiur resolves this apparent contradiction by introducing a fundamental distinction between two types of mitzvos in milah. The Rambam holds that there are two separate dinim in milah: (1) the father's unique mitzvah (מצוה) of Yom HaShmini—a mitzvah that can only be fulfilled on the eighth day and is lost forever afterward—and (2) the ongoing achrayus (responsibility) that begins after Yom HaShmini and applies to the father, beis din, and indeed every Jew who encounters an uncircumcised child. When the Rambam says "over" in the Pirush HaMishnayos, he means the father and beis din transgress their achrayus obligation every time they have an opportunity to circumcise and fail to do so. However, they do not "mevatel" (nullify) the mitzvah unless they never do it at all. The son, by contrast, has a new mitzvah of milah every single day, which is why he is mevatel a mitzvah each day he remains uncircumcised.
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!
Kiddushin 29a
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.
