A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a talmid chacham release himself from self-imposed nidui? The Rashba distinguishes between nidui as Torah (תורה)-imposed punishment (irrevocable) and self-imposed teshuvah discipline (revocable). The shiur then analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s allowance to swear to observe mitzvos despite mushba v'omed meHar Sinai, exploring the Ran's position that such oaths create zrizus and the profound hashivus of performing mitzvos with alacrity rather than resistance.
The shiur opens with a Gemara (גמרא) in Nedarim 7a presenting a straightforward ruling: a talmid chacham can place himself in nidui and release himself from that nidui. The Gemara challenges this with the principle ein choveis matar atzmo beis ha'sohar—a prisoner cannot release himself from jail. The shiur asks: what is the fundamental chiluk between nidui and a neder that allows self-release from nidui but not from nedarim? Rabbi Zweig explains that the Rashba draws a critical distinction based on the nature of the nidui. When the Torah (תורה) or beis din imposes nidui as an onesh (punishment) for an aveirah, it functions like a prison—ein choveis matar atzmo beis ha'sohar applies, and one cannot release oneself. However, when nidui is not Torah-mandated but rather self-imposed as a form of teshuvah or kapara, it is not an onesh at all but rather a derech in avodas Hashem (ה׳), a means of character refinement. In such cases, once the person has done teshuvah or feels he has achieved the intended tikkun, he may release himself. The Rashba's position is that where din requires nidui, you cannot self-release; where din does not require it, you may.
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 7a
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.
