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
45 Episodes
Reverse
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer
Bava Metzia 104
Learn more on hadran.org.il
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
חזקת מרא קמא
source sheet
BM 100
Of the many principles afforded by the Gemara about how to resolve property disputes, perhaps the most surprising is what’s known as חזקת מרא קמא, presuming that the property still belongs to the person who originally owned it even if it is no longer physically there! What is the logic behind this principle? What can it teach us about presumptions about the reality? About ownership? About dealing with uncertainty?
Questions? Comments? Email dinanddaf@gmail.com
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
Bava Metzia 100
The Mishnah says that when someone exchanges a pregnant cow for a donkey and there is doubt as to whether the cow gave birth before or after the transaction, the two parties split the value of the calf, and no one is required to take an oath. But in the beginning of our masekhet, we learned that when in doubt about the ownership of a garment that two people are holding, they divide it but need to take an oath. And in Bava Batra, in a case when two people are fighting over land they each claim is theirs, the verdict is "kol d'alim gvar," meaning that they fight over it. What's the difference between the cases? The gemara says that in the case of the animal exchange there is "derara d'mamona," while in the other two cases there is not. But what is derara d'mamona? Rashi and Tosafot offer different explanations -- join us for a deep dive into this famous debate.
Gefet Ep.81
Learn more on http://hadran.org.il/
Din & Daf: Conceptual Analysis of Halakha Through Case Study with Dr. Elana Stein Hain
source sheet
BM 90a
In discussing the prohibition of muzzling an animal as it does farm work, the Gemara asks whether one may ask a non-Jew to muzzle the animal and work it instead. What is the logic behind the prohibition to ask a non-Jew to perform an action for a Jew that the Jew herself may not perform?
Questions? Comments? Email dinanddaf@gmail.com
Gefet: Gemara, Perushim and Tosfot
An in-depth (Iyun) Gemara shiur with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz (Episode 80)
Bava Metzia 86
In its discussion of provisions for workers, the gemara speaks about Avraham's seudah and notes that the angels didn't actually eat there. Tosafot is surprised, and says that this is up for debate! So who is it who thinks that the angels really ate, and why would someone say something so bizarre? Join is for this unique Gefet, which bridges halakha and aggadah.
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni and Shalhevet Schwartz is in collaboration with Yeshivat Drisha
Learn more on Hadran's website
On Second Thought: Delving Into the Sugya with Rabbanit Yafit Clymer
Sources
Bava Metzia 85-89
Learn more on hadran.org.il
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!
Comments
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States