TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    Judaism

    Daf Yomi for Women – Hadran

    Hadran.org.il is the portal for Daf Yomi studies for women.

    Hadran.org.il is the first and only site where one can hear a daily Talmud class taught by a woman. The classes are taught in Israel by Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber, a graduate of Midreshet Lindenbaum’s scholars program with a BA in Talmud and Tanach from Bar-Ilan University. Michelle has taught Talmud and Halacha at Midreshet Lindenbaum, Pelech high school and MATAN. She lives in Ra’anana with her husband and their five children. Each morning the daf yomi class is delivered via ZOOM and then immediately uploaded and available for podcast and download.

    Hadran.org.il reaches women who can now have access to a woman’s perspective on the most essential Jewish traditional text. This podcast represents a revolutionary step in advancing women’s Torah study around the globe.

    Advertise

    Copyright: © Copyright Michelle Cohen Farber 2012-2020 All rights reserved

    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    Sanhedrin 52 - February 7, 9 Shvat Feb 07, 2025
    Show notes

    This daf is sponsored anonymously. "May the passion of our daily learning be a zechut that we see more and more miracles in the coming days."

    The Gemara discusses a case involving a daughter of a kohen who commits adultery. Rabbi Yishmael interprets the phrase "she disgraces her father" to mean that her actions affect the respect normally given to her father as a kohen, since children's behavior reflects on their parents. People may even say to the father, "Cursed is the one who gave birth to and raised her."

    Regarding the death penalty by burning, the Mishna clarifies that it wasn't performed by surrounding the person with clusters of branches and lighting them on fire. Instead, the condemned person was executed by having molten lead poured down their throat. There was a debate about how to open the person's mouth: The Sages advocated strangling them until their mouth opened, while Rabbi Yehuda suggested using tongs, concerned that strangling might cause death by suffocation rather than the required death by burning.

    The source for this method of execution is debated. Rav Matna derives it from Korach's punishment, while Rabbi Elazar points to the death of Aharon's sons (Nadav and Avihu). Both bring textual evidence showing internal burning, though they disagree on each other's interpretations. When asked why the method isn't derived from the burning of bull offerings outside the Temple, the Gemara explains that execution by burning shares more similarities with the cases of Korach and Aharon's sons. Rav Nachman adds that the principle of "love your neighbor as yourself" requires choosing the quickest and least painful method of execution.

    The Gemara provides background on these biblical cases: Nadav and Avihu were punished for discussing their anticipated succession of Moshe and Aharon's leadership and wishing for Aharon and Moshe to die so they could lead. As for Korach, he gained followers by providing food, leading to flattery from the people. This caused respected Torah scholars to be diminished in Korach's eyes, ultimately leading to their downfall as they followed his rebellion.

    A relevant case is cited where Rav Chama bar Tovia executed a kohen's daughter by burning her with branches. Rav Yosef points out two errors: the correct method is pouring molten lead down the throat, and capital punishment cannot be carried out when the Temple is no longer in existence.

    Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok attempted to justify external burning by citing a case he witnessed, but this was rejected for two reasons in different versions: either the court was composed of Sadducees who misunderstood the law, or Rabbi Elazar ben Tzadok's testimony was invalid because he was too young at the time. How can the two versions be reconciled?

    The Mishna discusses decapitation by sword: How was it performed? Since this method was used by gentiles, doesn't it violate the prohibition against following their practices? What is its scriptural source? From where do we learn those who receive this punishment?

    Similar questions are posed about death by strangulation: How was it performed and how do we learn that adulterers receive this punishment?


    Sanhedrin 51 - February 6, 8 Shvat Feb 06, 2025
    Show notes

    Study Guide Sanhedrin 51

    A braita is quoted in which a range of possibilities are suggested regarding the verse about the daughter of a kohen who gets burned for disgracing her father. After each suggestion, the braita concludes with what the verse is actually referring to. The Gemara questions most of the suggestions, trying to understand why they were even suggested. And they suggest various ways of understanding the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer which is hard to understand.

    Within the discussion of Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Yishmael's unique opinion is raised, that a daughter of a kohen who gets burned is only if she is betrothed. From where is this derived and on what basis does Rabbi Akiva disagree?


    Sanhedrin 50 - Shabbat February 5, 7 Shvat Feb 05, 2025
    Show notes

    Study Guide Sanhedrin 50

    The rabbis and Rabbi Shimon present conflicting views on how to rank the four death penalties by severity. The Gemara examines both positions in detail, exploring the textual and logical proofs each side uses to support their ordering. For the rabbis' position, the Gemara investigates the basis for claiming that stoning is the most severe, followed by burning, then execution by sword, and finally strangulation as the least severe. It similarly examines Rabbi Shimon's reasoning for ranking burning as more severe than both death by the sword and strangulation, stoning as more severe than the sword and strangulation, and finally, strangulation as more severe than the sword.

    This fundamental disagreement about the death penalties' relative severity is based on other disputes between the rabbis and Rabbi Shimon regarding capital punishment. One such case involves a betrothed daughter of a kohen (priest) who commits adultery. The rabbis maintain she should be stoned, following the law for any betrothed woman who commits adultery. Rabbi Shimon, however, rules she should be burned, treating her case like a married kohen's daughter. They also differ on the punishment for someone who leads a city into idol worship - the rabbis prescribe stoning, while Rabbi Shimon advocates strangulation.


    Sanhedrin 49 - February 4, 6 Shvat Feb 04, 2025
    Show notes

    Today's daf is sponsored by Blima Shorchein in loving memory of her mother, Mazal (Tina) bat Rina and David.

    When King Shlomo executed Yoav ben Tzruya, what was his legal justification? The Gemara details a series of trials: First, Shlomo tried Yoav for killing Avner ben Ner, but Yoav defended himself by claiming it was justified vengeance for Avner's murder of his brother Asael. Next, Shlomo tried him for the killing of Amasa ben Yeter, but again Yoav provided justification for his actions, as Asael rebelled against the king. Finally, Shlomo tried him for an unambiguous crime - joining Adonijah's rebellion against King David - and it was for this act of treason that Yoav was ultimately executed.

    While the Gemara demonstrates that Yoav's execution was legally justified, it also acknowledges that he possessed notable positive qualities.

    Regarding the four death penalties prescribed by the Jewish courts: What is their hierarchical order in terms of severity? Which is considered the most severe and which the least?

    When we find lists of items or actions in the Mishna presented in a specific order, should we understand this ordering as deliberately meaningful or merely incidental?


    Sanhedrin 48 - February 3, 5 Shvat Feb 03, 2025
    Show notes

    Rava and Abaye engage in a debate over the permissibility of using burial shrouds that were originally woven for a deceased person. The core of their disagreement lies in whether the mere act of designating an item for use for the dead is enough to prohibit others from using it. The Gemara analyzes the source each sage presents for his position, as well as their reasons for not accepting each other's sources.

    The Gemara presents eight tannaitic sources that challenge both positions equally - four questioning Rava's stance and four questioning Abaye's. While the Gemara successfully resolves the first seven difficulties, it struggles to directly address the final challenge to Abaye's position. Instead, it finds resolution by demonstrating through another tannaitic source that the Rava-Abaye debate actually mirrors an earlier disagreement between the rabbis and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

    Regarding the possessions of those executed by royal decree, a tannaitic debate exists over whether these belongings should pass to the deceased's heirs or revert to the king. While both sides cite supporting evidence from the biblical accounts of Achav and Yoav in the book of Melachim, the Gemara shows how each narrative can be interpreted to support either position.


    Sanhedrin 47 - February 2, 4 Shvat Feb 02, 2025
    Show notes

    Study Guide Sanhedrin 47

    Today's daf is dedicated in honor of the release of Yarden Bibas, Ofer Calderon, and Keith Siegal after 484 days in captivity. May we see the speedy release of all the rest of the hostages!

    Are eulogies primarily intended to honor the deceased or to comfort their relatives? After examining nine different textual sources, the Gemara concludes definitively that eulogies serve to honor the deceased.

    The Gemara discusses why there must be separate burial places for those executed by the court, explaining that righteous people cannot be buried alongside wicked people. The discussion explores the source in the Tanach for this requirement.

    Rabbi Yochanan makes two statements about sin offerings: If someone designates an animal as a sin offering but then becomes disqualified from bringing it (either by leaving Judaism or becoming mentally incompetent), that sacrifice can never be offered, even if the person later returns to a qualified state. This follows the principle that once an animal is rejected as a sacrifice, it remains permanently invalid. Rav Yosef reinforces this ruling by comparing it to the law of animals designated for sacrifice in an idolatrous city, arguing that just as the city's inhabitants receive atonement through death and yet the animals can never be brought for sacrificing. Abaye challenges this, as he holds that death does not automatically atone for sins. Rava attempts to support Rav Yosef by distinguishing between different types of death, but Abaye rejects these distinctions. While Abaye brings our Mishna to support his position, his proof is rejected.

    A practical case arose where people were taking soil from Rav's grave as a remedy for illness. When concerned individuals asked Shmuel to prohibit this practice, citing the general prohibition against deriving benefit from grave-related items, Shmuel permitted it because soil still connected to the ground is not subject to this prohibition. The Gemara explores the source for this ruling, and although several challenges are raised to Shmuel's position, they are all successfully addressed.

    Rava and Abaye debate whether shrouds embroidered for a deceased person are prohibited from being used by others. Their fundamental disagreement centers on whether merely designating an item for use by the dead is sufficient to prohibit others from benefiting from it. The Gemara examines the textual sources each sage uses to support his position.


    Sanhedrin 46 - Shabbat February 1, 3 Shvat Jan 31, 2025
    Show notes

    Study Guide Sanhedrin 46

    Today's daf is sponsored by Joyce Bendavid. "In tremendous appreciation of Rabbanit Farber who inspired me to begin learning the daily Daf."

    Today's daf is sponsored by Lori Schuldiner Schor. "With gratitude for the constant love and support of her husband, Joshua Schor."

    Those who were stoned were also hung, but it's unclear whether this applied to all or only some of those who were stoned. Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis engage in a debate about these issues, basing their arguments on different interpretations of the verses in Devarim 21:22-23. They also discuss whether women were also hung as part of this process.

    The source for burial in the Torah is derived from these same verses. In a discussion with the Persian king (Shpur Malka), Rav Hama did not use this verse as proof. This raises questions about why he chose not to do so and why he couldn't find alternative verses in the Torah to support his argument.

    The hanging process was specific and brief. Those who were hung were immediately taken down and were hung only for a short moment. This practice was derived from the verses in Devarim, with the explicit purpose of not desecrating the name of God. The dead body must be buried by nightfall. Furthermore, these verses establish a broader principle that anyone who has a relative who dies must bury them by nightfall, with exceptions only for important reasons directly related to respecting the deceased.

    Two questions were asked: Is the purpose of burial to prevent the disgrace of the dead body or to provide atonement? Similarly, are eulogies meant to show respect for the deceased or out of respect for the relatives? Various verses are brought to address these questions, though each verse can be interpreted in multiple ways to support the different possibilities.


    Sanhedrin 45 - January 31, 2 Shvat Jan 31, 2025
    Show notes

    Study Guide Sanhedrin 45

    This week's learning is sponsored by Sarah Galasko in loving memory of her mother-in-law, Carol Galasko, Chaya bat Avraham Michael v'Feyga Liba. "I wish everybody could be blessed with as wonderful a mother-in-law as I have. Baruch Dayan Emet."

    Today's daf is dedicated in honor of the release of Agam Berger, Arbel Yehud, Gadi Mozes, and five Thai hostages after 482 days in captivity. May we see the speedy release of all the rest of the hostages!

    Today's daf is dedicated in memory of the 67 victims of the tragic aircraft collision in Washington.

    The stoning ceremony required stripping the condemned person of their clothing and then covering just their private parts. For a male, this was undisputed. However, there was a debate between Rabbi Yehuda and the other rabbis regarding whether a woman should also be stripped (and then covered). This seemed to contradict a Mishna in Sotah where their positions were reversed. Rabba and Rava offered resolutions to reconcile these seemingly contradictory positions within their respective interpretations.

    The execution itself followed a specific procedure: First, one of the witnesses would push the condemned person from a designated height. Then, another witness would throw a large stone upon them. These roles were specifically assigned to the witnesses who had testified against the condemned. The Gemara explores the textual sources for these procedural details.

    Throughout these laws, there is a guiding principle that the execution should be carried out as swiftly as possible to minimize the suffering of the condemned person.

    Shmuel taught that if one of the witnesses lost a hand, the condemned person would be freed, as it would be impossible to fulfill the biblical requirement that "the witnesses' hand should be the first to kill him." This position faced several challenges: two related directly to the stoning procedure, and another drawn from a case involving a murderer where literal fulfillment of the biblical verse was not necessary. While these challenges were ultimately resolved, those who questioned Shmuel's position were questioned based on the laws of the wayward child, which demand precise fulfillment of biblical verses. This too was resolved. Additional support for Shmuel's position came from the laws of a city that collectively practiced idolatry (ir hanidachat). However, the Gemara notes that Shmuel's interpretation aligns with only one side of a debate among tannaim regarding the purification process of a leper.

    Does post-execution hanging applies to all who are stoned, or only to those specifically stoned for cursing God or worshiping idols?

    https://youtu.be/F5TGe47r9m8


    Sanhedrin 44 - Rosh Chodesh Shvat - January 30, 1 Shvat Jan 30, 2025
    Show notes

    This month's learning is sponsored by David and Ariella Merklin in loving memory of their grandparents, Liebe and Abraham Merklin, Jack and Tora Dabrosin, Ethel and Arthur Rosenthal, and Helen and Julius (Jack) Herman.

    The story of Achan teaches an important principle: even when the Jewish people sin, they retain their status as Israel, as shown in Joshua 7:11.

    From this same verse, the rabbis derive that Achan's actions constituted violations of all five books of the Torah. Various rabbis identify specific transgressions based on their interpretation of the verse.

    During Achan's execution, both his family and the entire nation were present as witnesses. This raises the question: why was such a public display necessary? Following his death, all his possessions were either burned or stoned. Among the items Achan stole was an aderet shinar, though its exact definition is debated.

    When Achan was ordered to produce the stolen items, Joshua displayed them before God. The rabbis interpret this as Joshua demanding an explanation from God for the deaths of thirty-six people, equivalent to half a Sanhedrin. An alternative view holds that only one person died - Yair ben Menashe - but his importance equaled that of half a Sanhedrin. Joshua's bold confrontation with God was viewed as inappropriate. This raises another question: why was Joshua's boldness considered worse than similar instances of forthright speech by Pinchas and Moshe? Rabbi Shila and Rav offer different explanations for Joshua's culpability in the deaths of the thirty-six: one faults him for delaying the erection of stones upon entering the land, while the other criticizes his prohibition against taking spoils from Jericho. The text also references another incident where Joshua encounters an angel of God and, according to the Gemara, is rebuked for preventing the people from studying Torah.

    Building on the previous section's discussion of angels, another verse from Proverbs is extrapolated. It is understood to be connected to a story told of the angel Piskonit as the supreme guardian angel of the Jewish people.

    If a person being executed claims innocence and calls upon the witnesses to bear responsibility, the execution proceeds regardless, even if the witnesses explain why they lied. This is illustrated by a case involving the son of Shimon ben Shatach, which Rashi discusses though it isn't detailed in the Gemara itself.


    Sanhedrin 43 - January 29, 29 Tevet Jan 29, 2025
    Show notes

    Today's daf is sponsored by Harriet Hartman in honor of her grandson Oriya Hartman's marriage to Shira Shahar Katzav. "May they live long lives together inspired by Torah and love."

    Today's daf is sponsored by Marcia Baum in loving memory of Helena K Baum, Chaya Chana Alta bat Chana v'Yekutiel Yehuda on her 9th yahrzeit. "Mom was a strong proponent of women's Torah study long before it became mainstream. She studied at the Drisha Institute with women half her age. She is missed every day by those of us who loved her and we hope we are making her proud!"

    Today's daf is sponsored in memory of Shayna Malka bat Shlomo Yosef on her yahrzeit.

    Rav Ashi derives a third source for the requirement that stoning executions must take place outside the city, finding support in the verses discussing the blasphemer.

    All basic execution expenses are covered by communal funds. However, two questions arise about additional costs: First, regarding the wages of those stationed outside the court to assist potential last-minute defenders of the condemned, and second, concerning the cost of wine and frankincense given to the convicted person to reduce their suffering before execution. The Gemara resolves the second question using a verse from Proverbs, establishing that these measures must be funded by the community since it bears collective responsibility for minimizing the condemned's suffering.

    Rav Acha bar Huna poses a question to Rav Sheshet: How should we handle a case where a student rises to present evidence for acquittal but becomes unable to speak before explaining his reasoning? Rav Sheshet initially dismisses this as obvious - since no argument was actually presented, it cannot be considered. Despite Rav Acha's persistence, the Gemara attempts to resolve this by comparing it to a case where a student presented an argument for acquittal and then died, whose vote was counted. This might suggest that only fully explained arguments can be counted, but this conclusion is ultimately rejected.

    If someone being led to execution claims to have new evidence that could overturn their conviction, the court must evaluate this claim - but only if it appears to have merit. However, a braita teaches that during the first two times the condemned makes such claims, they must be heard regardless of apparent merit. Rav Pappa reconciles this with the Mishna's stricter standard, and the Gemara explains why later claims are treated differently. Abaye adds that after the first two attempts, Torah scholars accompany the condemned specifically to evaluate whether any new claims have substance.

    A portion of the Gemara discussing Jesus of Nazareth's execution was later censored and removed from the manuscripts.

    Before execution, the condemned is asked to confess their sins. This practice is derived from the biblical story of Achan. The Gemara analyzes this story in detail, deriving both practical laws and ethical teachings from its verses. This leads to a broader discussion about collective responsibility within the Jewish community - specifically, to what extent are Jews responsible for both the public and private transgressions of their fellow Jews?


    Previous 1 60 61 62 63 64 254 Next

    Related Podcasts

    The Cathy Heller Podcast

    1

    The Cathy Heller Podcast Business
    Streetwise Hebrew

    2

    Streetwise Hebrew Education
    Tablet Studios

    3

    Tablet Studios Judaism
    The Rabbi Sacks Legacy

    4

    The Rabbi Sacks Legacy Judaism
    The Joy of Text: Where Real Sex Meets Jewish Law

    5

    The Joy of Text: Where Real Sex Meets Jewish Law Judaism
    HevriaCast: Talking With Awesome Creative Jews

    6

    HevriaCast: Talking With Awesome Creative Jews Judaism
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights