About this episode
Study Guide Pesachim 32 The Daf Yomi women of Neve Daniel are proud to dedicate a month of Daf Yomi learning in honor of all the women learning Torah in the world and in honor of completing our first year of learning together. Thank you to Hadran and to the Rabbaniot Michelle, Chamotal, Tanya, Sally, Michal, Chayuta and Meirav that lead us in our in depth learning. Yishar Kochachen! Today's Daf is dedicated by Sarah Weil in memory of Michael Weil z"l and in honor of his unwavering commitment to his beloved family. May his memory be a blessing. And by Joanna Rom for a refuah sheleima of her mother-in-law, Shirley Goldberg. And in memory of Boaz Leib ben Meir on his 7th yahrzeit. May his neshama have an aliya today and may his legacy continue to shine through his family. Also for a refuah shleima for Shaindel Chaya bat Leah. If someone (an Israelite) eats truma that that is chametz on Pesach, will he/she be obligated to pay? It depends if it was done intentionally or unwittingly. Eventually the gemara will explain this difference in two ways. The gemara quotes the Mishna Trumot 6:1 regarding the payment of the principle and the added fifth that one is obligated if one eats truma unwittingly and asks a question - is it valued at the financial value of what was eaten or by the measurement? The gemara limits the question to a case where there was a decrease in price from the time it was eaten until the time is was to be paid back. The gemara tries to bring an answer from two sources, one of them our mishna, but ultimately explains that each source can be explained according to each option. In the end the gemara proves that the answer to the question is the subject of a tannaitic debate between Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri and Rabbi Akiva. What is the requisite amount required to be obligated to pay for truma eaten - is it a law of eaten forbidden items and therefore an olive bulk or is it a law of stealing and therefore needs to be the value of a coin ( pruta )? Abba Shaul says the value of a coin and it is suggested that perhaps he requires both, however this option is rejected.