Claim OwnershipBeyond the Daf - Hadran
Subscribed: 5Played: 20
Subscribe
© Hadran: Advancing Talmud Study for Women
Description
Welcome to Hadran: Beyond the Daf where you will discover enlightening shiurim led by remarkable women, delving deep into the intricacies of Talmudic teachings, and exploring relevant and thought-provoking topics that arise from the Daf.
This podcast is more than just a study session; it's a platform dedicated to empowering women scholars, fostering diverse perspectives, and creating female Jewish role models. Tune in to be inspired, informed, and engaged in the vibrant world of Torah learning and discussions.
Daf Yomi shiurim podcast: Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran
hadran.org.il
This podcast is more than just a study session; it's a platform dedicated to empowering women scholars, fostering diverse perspectives, and creating female Jewish role models. Tune in to be inspired, informed, and engaged in the vibrant world of Torah learning and discussions.
Daf Yomi shiurim podcast: Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran
hadran.org.il
39 Episodes
Reverse
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz (Episode 79)
Bava Metzia 72 75
Are witnesses who testified about a loan with interest considered valid?
The Mishnah at the end of the perek clarifies that witnesses violate the lav of "lo tesimun alav neshech" , and Tosafot explains that sometimes they also violate the prohibition of "lifnei iver". In light of our sugya, it's difficult to understand how the gemara on Daf 72 says that a document attesting to a loan with interest is considered valid. How could it be that it's a valid document if the witnesses are violating halakha, and those who violate halakha are invalid witnesses?! Tosafot offers a fascinating solution to this problem -- join us for a deep time as we approach the end of the perek.
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
Learn more on Hadran's website
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
source sheet
What are the principles upon which the heter iska is built? How do we understand the role of legal circumvention in upholding Jewish law and life?
Questions? Comments? Email dinanddaf@gmail.com
For more on Chazal’s legal circuvmentions, check out my new book, Circumventing the Law. It’s available
here at 30% off with discount code PENN-ESHAIN30
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz (Episode 78)
Bava Metzia 64
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
SOURCES
Learn more on Hadran's website
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer
Sources
Bava Metzia 70-80
Learn more on hadran.org.il
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
source sheet
Similar to ona’at mammon, in which neither the consumer nor the seller may perform it (consumer can’t underpay; seller can’t overcharge), the prohibition of taking interest applies to both borrower and lender (borrower can’t give it; lender can’t charge/accept it). How does this factor impact our understanding of what the prohibition of interest (ribit) is all about?
Dr. Elana Stein Hain – dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz
What have we learned from the story of Akhnai's oven? The Tosafot teaches us new things and challenges what we previously knew.
Bava Metzia 59
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study
source sheet
The gemara in Bava Metzia 58b states that oppression with speech (ona’at devarim) is a greater sin than oppression with finances (ona’at mammon). One reason given is because while the latter affects money, the former affects the “self.” This distinction is well-worn among Chazal, both in terms of protecting/harming someone’s possessions vs. their person and in terms of using one’s own possessions vs. one’s own person to do good. We will examine this distinction in this shiur.
Dr. Elana Stein Hain – dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz
As we approach Pesach, we'll look together at the sugya of "Mi ShePara," and will explore how, throughout the laws of transactions and the laws of shomrim, the words that we say become both ethically and legally meaningful even before legal action has been taken. Can words alone obligate me?
Sources
Bava Metzia 49
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
source sheet
The Gemara describes ona’at mammon as overcharging (or underpaying) for portable items. This seems far afield from the description of ona’ah in the Torah (Vayikra 25). What does the discrepancy between the two tell us about the various dimensions of ona’at mammon?
Dr. Elana Stein Hain – dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer
Sources
Bava Metzia 48
Learn more on hadran.org.il
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer Masechet
Sources
Bava Metzia 42
Learn more on hadran.org.il
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
Din & Daf: Borrowing without Permission: Why is it Problematic?
Bava Metzia 41, 43
source sheet
The Gemara in BM 41a and 43b claim that one who uses another person’s items without permission is a thief and she is liable for damages if someone happens to the item even after she finished using it! Why should this be so, especially where the “borrower” returned the item to where she found it before anything happened to it? Is this categorization always relevant? In this shiur, we will examine the logic behind this categorization of thief, especially what it suggests about personal ownership in halakhah.
Dr. Elana Stein Hain - dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz
A shomer sachar (paid guardian) digs a hole deep in the ground to bury the money that he is safekeeping -- and then the money is stolen. Is he liable? What do you think? Explore a heated debate among the Rishonim that emerges from Tosafot on our Daf.
Bava Metzia 42
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
Negligence, followed by unavoidable interference: Who’s at fault?
Dr. Elana Stein Hain – dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
source sheet
Bava Metzia 36a-b discusses the concept of תחילתו בפשיעה וסופו באונס, damage that resulted from a process that began with negligence but most immediately was caused by unavoidable interference. Should the person who was negligent originally be liable for compensation, does the unavoidability of the immediate cause of the damage change the equation of guilt? This is a great test case for considerations of responsibility!
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Shalhevet Schwartz
This week, we will address the question of when a litigant can take back voluntary commitments that he took upon himself in beit din. In general, beit din is a place where judges act coercively, but sometimes a litigant is willing to take on commitments beyond those of the black letter law -- in such cases, do those litigants have the option to back out?
Sources
Bava Metzia 34
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer Masechet
Sources
Bava Metzia 33-34
Learn more on https://hadran.org.il/
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
Bava Metsia 30b
source sheet
The Gemara introduces the concept of lifnim mi-shurat ha-din, often described as going above and beyond the letter of the law. But what does this category actually mean? Does this mean that a person can choose whether or not to do it? If so, what are the ramifications of that? And if it can be forced, who can and enforce it, and how is it still considered going beyond the letter of the law?
Dr. Elana Stein Hain – dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer
Source Sheet
Bava Metzia 23
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni
If I find a coat out on the sidewalk and try to return it to its rightful owner, do I have to keep it in my home until Eliyahu comes, even if it’s clear that its owner has given up on it? According to the Ramban in our sugya, the answer to that question is “yes.” Why would the Ramban think so? And why would our sugya refer to a good man, someone who is trying to return lost objects, as though he picked up the object illegally? What does Tosafot think? What do we conclude l’halakhah? This week, we will answer all of these questions except for the final one. Next week, bli neder, we will also discuss the halakhah. Join us to familiarize yourself with a fascinating classic discussion and debate among the Rishonim on our Daf.
Learn more on hadran.org.il
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
Acting in Someone Else’s Interest without their Knowledge - זכין לאדם שלא בפניו
Source sheet
We have seen a few mentions of the principle that one may effectuate binding transactions on someone else’s behalf without the latter’s knowledge. How does this work? What does this tell us about human interest and about human connection from a legal point of view?
Dr. Elana Stein Hain – dinanddaf@hadran.org.il
Comments
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States