A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How does bal yachel (the prohibition against nullifying one's vow) apply to a nazir who violates nazirus laws? The shiur develops a fundamental yesod distinguishing the Ran's approach from the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s: nazirus contains two distinct components—a chalos kedusha (sanctified status) and a neder b'kum vaseh (positive vow to observe nazirus laws). The bal yachel violation stems not from violating the nazir status itself, but from failing to fulfill the neder to be noheg (observe) the dinim of nazirus.
This shiur presents an in-depth analysis of Nedarim 3b, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of bal yachel (the prohibition against violating one's vow) as it applies to nazirus. The central question examined is: how does the issur of bal yachel function in the context of a nazir who violates the laws of nazirus? The shiur begins by examining the Gemara's question: while by nedarim we clearly have bal yachel, how does this apply to nazirus? The Gemara's initial assumption (havamina) appears to be that there should be no bal yachel by nazirus at all, since when a person declares "hareini nazir," they have already fulfilled their commitment—they have become a nazir. The chalos (the taking effect of the nazir status) is immediate and complete. What remains to violate?
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 3b
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.
Why does the Gemara present a kal v'chomer for chuppah making kiddushin based on kesef not being maichel b'terumah, only to reject it? The shiur reveals that even the rejected kal v'chomer establishes a fundamental yesod: kiddushin is a kinyan for ishus (marital relationship), not merely a kinyan in hilchos kinyanim. The second kal v'chomer—from chuppah being gomeres—raises Tosafos's famous question.
Is the kesef used in kiddushin a true kinyan (acquisition), or merely a symbolic means of establishing marriage? The shiur analyzes multiple interpretations of the Gemara's derivation from ki yikach ki'ach mi'Sayeffron, exploring whether marriage constitutes ownership, and develops three fundamental approaches: (1) The Gemara proves ishus is a kinyan, (2) ishus is not a kinyan but uses kinyan-like means, or (3) ishus is a kinyan but the kesef may not be a ma'aseh kinyan. The Rambam's position—calling kesef "midivrei sofrim"—is explained as distinguishing between cross-referencing concepts versus borrowing terminology.
Why does the Mishna alternate between the language of "kinyan" (acquisition) and "kiddushin" (sanctification) when describing marriage? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction: marriage has two separate aspects—a kinyan dimension (ownership) and a kedusha dimension (sanctified relationship). Either aspect can initiate the bond, and understanding this dual nature resolves multiple textual and halachic questions throughout the sugya.
Does kiddushei shetar require a shevah pruta? The Ran presents two approaches to the Rif's position. The shiur develops the Ran's second pshat that shetar kiddushin functions as a hachnah (exchange) rather than a mere kinyan nesina. This reading has profound implications for isuri hana'ah, mechubar, and the relationship between kesef and shetar.
