Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Latest Episodes:

Sanhedrin 92 - March 19, 19 Adar Mar 19, 2025

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Yarden and Guy in honor of Leah Zelda Shechter's birthday!

What happens to someone who doesn't teach Torah to others? What happens to someone who does?

Rava, Ravina and Rav Ashi brought three more verses to prove the resurrection of the dead. Rabbi Elazar brought a statement relating to the resurrection of the dead. From there, the Gemara brings several statements from Rabbi Elazar about different topics, including the value of de'ah, leaving bread of the table in case a poor person shows up, and being humble.

A braita from the school of Eliyahu teaches that when the dead are resurrected, they will not die again. The Gemara brings the verses in Ezekiel where Ezekiel brings the bones back to life. Can this be brought as a source for the resurrection of the dead or to prove that when they are brought back to life, they will not live forever? Various interpretations are brought to explain whether he really resurrected the dead (or was it just a parable) and if he did, whether they lived for a few moments or went on to lead full lives. Another question is who were the people who Ezekiel resurrected? Several suggestions are brought, and the last interpretation leads into the story of Chanania, Mishael, and Azarya.

Sanhedrin 91 - March 18, 18 Adar Mar 18, 2025

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Sharona Shuster in loving memory of her father, Elliot Shimoff, Eliyahu Chaim ben Harav Ephraim. "He enjoyed his family, learning Torah, and Israel. He was loved by all and a true talmud chacham. His love of learning encouraged me to learn Daf at a later age and I now see his passion. Yehi zichro baruch."

Today's daf is sponsored by Becki Goldstein for a refuah shleima of her grandson Eitan Efraim ben Ayelet. "Tfilot for the success of a long and complicated surgery for Eitan to repair the nervous system from his shoulder to his fingertips from his injury in Gaza. May the operating team be shlichim neamanim B"H."

In three separate encounters with either the emperor or a heretic, the question is asked: how could God possibly bring back to life those who have died? In each incident, the Jew offers a different answer. In the third encounter, Geviha ben Pesisa responds.

Three additional stories describe when Jews were brought to trial before Alexander of Macedon by other nations. In each case, Geviha argues on behalf of the Jews. The pattern is consistent: the opposing nation uses a verse from the Torah to attack Jewish actions, and Geviha counters with a different verse that refutes their claim.

Antoninus raises several questions to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Some questions Rabbi Yehuda resolves, while on others, Antoninus convinces him of a different view. The first question concerns how both body and soul can claim exemption from judgment after death, each blaming the other for causing sin. The second asks why the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. The third explores when the soul enters a person—at conception or during fetal development. The fourth examines when the evil inclination begins to influence a person—during fetal development or at birth.

Reish Lakish, Ulla, Rav Chisda, and Rava each present seemingly contradictory verses about life after death, mortality, or resurrection. Each sage then resolves the contradiction he identified.

Five additional verses are presented as proof of resurrection from the Torah.

Rav Yehuda, citing Rav, teaches that withholding a halakha from a student is equivalent to stealing from their inheritance, since the Torah was given as an inheritance to all Jewish people.

Sanhedrin 90 - March 17, 17 Adar Mar 17, 2025

Show notes

Study Guide Sanhedrin 90

Today's daf is sponsored by Rachel Savin in loving memory of her father, Shalom ben Shmuel, on his third yahrzeit.

Rabbi Shimon and the rabbis disagree about the death penalty for a prophet who tries to sway the people to worship idols. Rav Chisda and Rav Hamnuna disagree about whether their debate extends to a prophet who tries to sway the people to uproot a different commandment entirely or is it limited to idol worship only. A braita relating to this issue is quoted and Abaye explains it according to Rav Chisda, and Rava explains it according to Rav Hamnuna.

Two approaches are brought to explain why the Torah specifically brought a verse about a prophet who uses signs to show he is telling the truth and then tells the people to worship idols. Is it because idol worshippers have the power to make signs, or is there a concern that a true prophet may turn bad and try to sway people to worship idols after having shown signs as a true prophet?

The eleventh chapter of Sanhedrin begins with a list of who has a part in the world-to-come and who does not. The first topic the Gemara delves into is the resurrection of the dead, as one who does not believe in that does not have a part in the world-to-come. What is the source for the resurrection of the dead in the Torah? Several debates are brought between gentiles or heretics who argued with the rabbis about belief in the resurrection of the dead and the proofs of the rabbis.

Sanhedrin 89 - March 16, 16 Adar Mar 16, 2025

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Amy Goldstein in loving memory of her mother, Carolyn Barnett-Goldstein on her sixth yahrzeit. "Mom - I miss your knowledge of music, art, and literature. You were gone way too soon."

Further conditions are brought under which the rebellious elder can get killed. Only the High Court in the Temple is allowed to execute the rebellious elder. There is a debate about how his death is publicized - is his death delayed until the next holiday and killed while everyone is in Jerusalem or is he killed immediately and the court sends letters to all the communities?

A false prophet, who tells of a prophecy that he either did not hear or was told to someone else, and one who prophesizes in the name of an idol receive the death penalty of strangulation. Three other cases regarding false prophets are subject to death by the hands of God - one who suppresses a prophecy, one who does not listen to the instructions of a prophet, and a prophet who doesn't listen to their own prophecy. The Gemara brings examples from the Tanach for each of these six categories.

A difficulty is raised against one who doesn't listen to the words of a prophet - how does the person know that the prophet is a real prophet? The answer is that this would only be true in a case where the person was already proven to be a true prophet. The Gemara brings examples of situations where it was clear that they needed to listen, such as Yitzchak at the akeida, as Avraham was already proven to be a true prophet. Also, Eliyahu at Mount Carmel was trusted already when he told the prophets of Baal to bring sacrifices outside the Temple.

The Gemara digresses to the akeida story and brings two explanations to the verse introducing the section "And it was after these matters that God tested Avraham." The first explanation relates it to the celebration of Yitzchak's weaning and introduces the Satan character from Job as pushing God to test Avraham. The second explanation connects it to the circumcision of Yishmael and Yitzchak and to sibling rivalry.

Rabbi Shimon and the rabbis disagree about which penalty is given to a prophet who tries to sway the people to worship idols and a person who sways an entire city to worship idols.

Sahendrin 88 - Shabbat Shushan Purim - March 15, 15 Adar Mar 14, 2025

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Amy Goldstein in loving memory of her grandmother, Ann Barnett on her yahrzeit. "Her strength kept us going and she maintained her dedication to seeking knowledge all the days of her life."

How do all the cases in the previous braita accord with Rabbi Meir's opinion that a rebellious elder can only be in a case that can lead to a prohibition of karet?

In what way does a rebellious elder need to disagree with the court in order to be convicted? Rav Kahana rules that only if he dares to disagree based on his own logic with a tradition of the rabbis of the court, he is convicted. Rabb Elazar disagrees and says that the purpose of convicting a rebellious elder is to prevent debates and therefore any disagreement of any sort will lead to a conviction. Two sources (one of them from our Mishna) are brought to raise a difficulty with Rav Kahane's position and the second is left unresolved.

What is the hierarchy of the courts? How were judges chosen?

The rebellious elder is convicted only if he either goes back and teaches against the ruling of the High Court and he himself acts according to his ruling or people follow his ruling. A difficulty is raised on the former possibility as if he follows his own ruling, he should already be liable for the death penalty for the action, not for being a rebellious elder. The Gemara offers a few possibilities to resolve this difficulty.

The Mishna explains that there is a stringency with Rabbinic law for a rebellious elder - if he tells people to go against Torah law, he is not convicted, but if he differs from the court regarding the rabbinic definition of a Torah law and adds to it, like five compartments in the tefillin, he can be convicted. Rav Oshaya says that this would be the only possible case. Why not the four species? Why not tzitzit?

Sanhedrin 87 - Purim - March 14, 14 Adar Mar 14, 2025

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Devorah & Binyamin Radomsky on the occasion of the Bat Mitzva of their daughter Tamar.

Today's daf is sponsored by Daphne Lazar Price "Excited to meet fellow Daf learners at the upcoming JOFA conference in NYC!"

The verse describing a rebellious elder in Devarim 17:8 is extrapolated in a braita, explaining what types of cases could lead to a rebellious elder situation, as well as other related issues.

Three different opinions are presented regarding what categories of disagreements would cause a rebellious elder to incur the death penalty: disagreement about Torah law, disagreement about matters punishable by karet, or about a rabbinic interpretation of Torah law, or even a very minor point of interpretation.

How do all the cases in the previous braita align with Rabbi Meir's opinion that a rebellious elder can only be liable in a case that involves a prohibition punishable by karet?

Sanhedrin 86 - Taanit Esther - March 13, 13 Adar Mar 13, 2025

Show notes

This daf is sponsored by Miriam Adler in loving memory of her mother whose first yahrzeit is today. "When I started this round of daf yomi in January 2020, my Mom who was 98 years old at the time, told me that she'd like to celebrate the siyum with me! She made it to Bava Metzia. We hope to carry on her optimism and love of family and Am Yisrael."

Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Berelowitz. "May the learning of the daf be in memory of my dear mother-in-law, Sarah Berelowitz, Sarah Teyuva bat David Shlomo, on her sixth yahrzeit. We miss you Granny. Yehi zichra baruch."

If one kidnapped a person and sold them to the father/brother of the kidnapped, is the kidnapped liable the death penalty?

One who kidnaps one's own son, there is a debate between Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yochanan ben Broka and the rabbis. On what basis do the rabbis exempt?

The Torah mentions the prohibition to steal in the Ten Commandments and in Vayikra Chapter 19. From the context of each section, it is evident which one refers to kidnapping and and which refers to stealing objects.

Since there are two actions involved in kidnapping in order to be convicted (kidnapping and selling), could two witnesses testify that one kidnapped and a different two testify that one sold? Would that be considered two separate testimonies that each stands alone or is each only half a testimony? If it is half a testimony, there is a debate between Chizkiya and Rabbi Yochanan about whether partial testimony is acceptable or not. How does the case of kidnapping compare to a rebellious son, where there are also two stages - as first witnesses testify that he ate and drank, he is flogged and then if he repeats the offense in the presence of witnesses he is killed?

What is the procedure for convicting one as a rebellious elder, zaken mamre?

Sanhedrin 85 - March 12, 12 Adar Mar 12, 2025

Show notes

This month's learning is sponsored by Fally Klein "in honor of "Klein birthday month" where each of our children have celebrated a milestone coming of age: Shimi, an adult at eighteen, Dassa, a mature and beautiful sixteen, Yedidya, at three with his upsherin, And, of course, Elimelech whose bar mitzvah is today. May we have the merit to see them all grow in their Torah, avodat Hashem, and ahavat Yisrael."

This week's learning is sponsored by Sarah Zahavi in loving memory of her great-grandmother, Sarah bat Shlomo v'Chana.

Today's daf is sponsored by Adam Plunka in loving memory of Moshe ben David, Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt"l.

Is one allowed to perform a medical procedure on a parent?

Is one allowed to administer lashes in the court or cursing (during the process of excommunication) to a parent as a messenger of the court? Does the commandment not to curse or hit a parent apply to those who are no longer "part of the nation" as they have sinned? Do they apply after death? Is there a distinction between hitting and cursing regarding these two issues?

To be liable the death penalty for kidnapping, one must kidnap, exploit, and selling the person into slavery.

Sanhedrin 84 - March 11, 11 Adar Mar 11, 2025

Show notes

Study Guide Sanhedrin 84

This week's learning is sponsored by Sara Averick and Jose Rosenfeld in memory of Sara's father, Dr. Nathan J. Averick, נפתלי יוסף בן חיים ניסן הלוי ונחמה, who gazed at the heavens above the Pacific as a WWII merchant marine and recognized the בורא עולם. Thank you Dad.

Today's daf is sponsored by Betsy Mehlman in loving memory of her father Harold Mondshein, Zvi Menachem Mendel ben Shlomo z"l, on his 42nd yahrzeit. "He would be so proud of all his grandchildren and sabra great grandchildren in Israel."

The Gemara derives the last few halachot mentioned in the braita quoted on the previous page which delineated which acts relating to teruma and the Temple obligate one in death by the hands of God or just a regular negative commandment (lashes). They also elaborate on the debate in the mishna regarding a stranger who works in the temple and what punishment he gets.

The tenth perek begins with a list of who gets killed by strangulation and starts to delve into the first one - one who hits one's parents. What type of hitting is referred to? What if it is done for healing purposes?

Sanhedrin 83 - March 10, 10 Adar Mar 10, 2025

Show notes

Study Guide Sanhedrin 83

Today's daf is sponsored by Sylvia Klein in loving memory of her father, Sherman Israel Klein, Shnayor Yisrael ben Yerachmiel v'Sara, on his yahrzeit. "May his neshama have an aliyah."

Rav Sheshet answered Rav Acha that a kohen who served while in a state of impurity does not receive the punishment of death by the hands of God. After they challenged him from our Mishna, they brought two more challenges against him. They resolved one of them, but the final challenge remained unresolved because they quoted a braita where it explicitly states that a priest who served in a state of impurity is liable to the punishment of death by the hands of God.

The braita mentioned various other cases where someone would receive the punishment of death by the hands of God. The Gemara goes through each case and finds the source in the Torah for each matter.

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Daf Yomi for Women – Hadran

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected