A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can someone make a shevuah or neder to fulfill a mitzvah (מצוה) they're already commanded to do? The Ran distinguishes between the two sugyos—the first addressing lechaim lehaitiv (optional actions), the second addressing ein shevuah chal al shevuah (one oath on another). The shiur also explores the Rosh's novel approach that a neder can be giving one's word as a chefetz, not merely personal commitment.
This shiur analyzes two related sugyos in Masechta Nedarim dealing with vows and oaths made to perform mitzvos. The central tension is whether such declarations can take effect given that one is already commanded from Har Sinai (mushba v'omeid mehar Sinai). The Gemara (גמרא) presents two cases. The first involves someone who makes an oath to eat matzah—clearly a mitzvah (מצוה) obligation. The Gemara questions whether this violates the principle of lechaim lehaitiv (that an oath must affect optional action). The second case involves someone who says "I will get up and learn this perek" or "I will learn this mesechta"—which appears optional in its specifics (when to learn, which mesechta) but still involves fulfilling the mitzvah of Torah (תורה) study.
Looking for the full summary?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Nedarim 8a
Looking for the full transcript?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Dedicate a Shiur in Gemara
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
When an animal damages crops, the Torah prescribes a unique payment formula based on multiplying the damaged area by sixty. Does this formula redefine the actual loss, or does it merely create a payment mechanism that still acknowledges the full damage sustained? The Gemara explores whether someone who ate in doubt should pay the higher-quality amount, examining how the principle of motzi me-chaveiro alav haraya applies when payments fall within the range of actual loss.
What makes testimony valid when different witnesses testify to different parts of the same event? The Gemara debates whether the principle of "davar v'lo chatzi davar" (complete testimony, not partial) disqualifies witnesses who testify separately to theft and slaughter. Rashi's approach reveals that the issue is not merely combining elements, but whether each witness's statement is independently meaningful.
Why is a ganav who sells a stolen animal on Shabbos exempt from the fourfold/fivefold payment? The shiur analyzes whether this exemption stems from kam lei b'derabbah or from the absence of a valid mechira. The Rashba's principle that matana resembles mechira when it is "nishtarish b'chet" is explored, along with the Rambam's position on hekdesh and the distinction between giving to bedek habayis versus mizbe'ach.
When a ganav shechts a stolen animal l'avodah zarah, why isn't he patur from payment since it's already isur hana'ah? The shiur explores the fundamental machloket Rashi-Tosafot on whether the isur derives from the act of shechita or from the din shechita itself. The Gemara's application of davar garem be'mamon ke'mamon domi extends the analysis to when borrowed animals become niskal.
