Kiddushin 58

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
May 082016
 

There are two potential sources for learning that deriving benefit from non sacrificial animals slaughtered in the azara is forbidden.  An opinion of Rabbi Shimon that disagrees with our mishna states that one can marry a woman with money that was used to acquire this animal.  A contradiction is raised against his opinion and resolved.  How do we derive that if one were to sell any items that is forbidden to derive benefit from, the marriage would be valid?  The next mishna relates to the issue of tovat hanaa?  What is that and is it considered to have monetary value or not?  How each opinion fits in with our mishna is discussed.  The amoraim debate the issue and the gemara then tries to prove that it is also a tannaitic debate.  However that opinion is rejected and various ways to understand that tannaitic debate are considered.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 56

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
May 062016
 

Study Guide Kiddushin 56

Different contradictory sources relating to Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion that a man who betroths a woman and knowingly uses maaser sheni is valid.  In the end the contradictions are resolved by assuming that the woman is knowledgeable in the halacha and will use the maaser money properly as opposed to a seller (in the other cases) who won’t necessarily sue the maaser money properly.  Anything that is forbidden to benefit from can’t be used to betroth a woman.  The mishna lists all those items and the gemara outlines the sources for the prohibition for deriving benefit from each item.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 55

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
May 052016
 

The gemara quotes a mishna in Shekalim: a random animal found near Jerusalem is suspected to have been designated for a sacrifice and then ran away. Therefore one who finds it must bring it as a sacrifice – if the animal is male, a burnt offering and if female, a peace offering.  Rabbi Oshaya has trouble understanding the mishna as the male could also have been a peace offering.  Therefore he assumes that the mishna is referring to a case where the owner wants to redeem the animal.  The gemara concludes that according to this, in order to redeem, one must bring money for a burnt offering, a peace offering and a thanksgiving offering (including bringing 40 loaves of bread that are brought with a thanksgiving offering).  The gemara then shows that this fits in with Rabbi Meir’s statement that if one purposely used hekdesh for his own means, he could turn it into chulin.  A discussion is held about how one can do that with an animal whose body is sanctified.  Rabbi Yochanan is troubled by the problem of how can we tell someone to sin (use the animal for regular use) in order to fix something (the lost animal that was probably designated as a sacrifice).  He therefore says one must wait until the animal becomes blemished.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 54

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
May 042016
 

Study Guide Kiddushin 54

Two interpretations of Rabbi Meir’s opinion about a sale/betrothal performed with hekdesh money inadvertently – is it considered meila or not?  There opinions are analyzed and questions raised against them.  The gemara then determines the halacha for betrothal performed using maaser sheni and hekdesh – the former like Rabbi Meir and the latter like Rabbi Yehuda.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 53

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
May 032016
 

Study Guide Kiddushin 53

There are differences of opinion regarding marrying a woman with kodshai kodshim, kodshai kalim, maaser sheni, and hekdesh between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda.  Some think that Rabbi Yehuda eventually agreed with Rabbi Meir about the kodshai kodshim and kodshai kalim.  That possibility is then proven by the gemara.  The differences between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda maaser sheni and hekdesh are analyzed and explained.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 52

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
May 022016
 

Abaye and Rava have a disagreement about whether betrothal that cannot be consummated is considered a valid betrothal (meaning that a divorce would or would not be necessary).  Proofs are brought to disprove Rava – some are rejected but in the end Rava is disproven and the gemara notes that this is one of the 6 arguments between Rava and Abaye where we hold like Abaye.  Rav derives 4 halachot from the case in the mishna regarding betrothal.  1. One can betroth with shemita friuts. 2. One cannot betroth with stolen property even stolen from the woman herself.  3. A woman can be a messenger in the betrothal of her husband to someone else.  4. The issue above that Rava and Abaye disagree about.  Some cases are brought where a man betrothed a woman using stolen property or property of someone else in the case where he was a sharecropper and used crops that would ultimately be his.  The mishna discusses betrothal using sacrificial items, hekdesh and maaser sheni.  Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda disagree about the halacha in these cases.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 37

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
Apr 172016
 

Which mitzvot are only to be done in Israel and which ones also outside of Israel?  Since there are many mitzvot in the Torah that say “when you come into the land” and yet some of them are not dependent on whether or not one is living in Israel, there are varying opinions on how to understand these verses and what was the determining factor for the categorization.  As in the previous pages, the halacha and categorizations were known to the rabbis – what is happening on these pages is the rabbis attempt to correlate between the halacha and the verses in the Torah.

Study Guide Kiddushin 37

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 35

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
Apr 152016
 

The discussion of how to derive from the Torah that women are obligated in non time bound positive commandments and exempted from time bound ones is continued.  The gemara then brings 3 different sources for why women are obligated in negative commandments and has a discussion explaining the differences between all 3 and why they are each necessary.  There are a few negative commandments that women are exempt from.  The derivation of these is discussed at length.  And another one is added by Isi in addition to the ones mentioned in the mishna and a derivation is brought and analyzed.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 34

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
Apr 142016
 

Women are exempt from time bound positive commandments and obligated in non time bound commandments.  However there are a lot of exceptions to the rule.  The derivations of these laws and their exceptions are brought.  But what is really going on here behind the discussions of the derivations?  Why are women exempt from some mitzvot and not others?  An analysis of some of the basic approaches is discussed and how historical circumstances play a role.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

Kiddushin 33

 Kiddushin  No Responses »
Apr 132016
 

The commandment to honor your elders – does this mean someone who is old or someone who is learned and old or just someone who is learned (even if they are not old)?  Does it apply to non-Jews?  Does one need to interrupt his work to stand for an elder?  Does one need to spend money to keep this commandment?  How does one determine what makes someone an elder?  What age?  What level of Torah learning?  The elder himself has a responsibility not to walk in a place where too many people will need to stand up for him.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | RSS

 Older Entries  Newer Entries