A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Mishna say "kinidrei sheirim lo yomar klum" when the Rambam (רמב"ם) holds that righteous people do make vows to improve their character? The shiur develops the yesod that "kinidrei sheirim" is a kinui (substitute language for issur), not a yad (pointing device), and cannot function as valid kinui because tzaddikim rarely make such vows—unlike "kinidrei reshaim" where the language itself creates issur.
This intricate Gemara (גמרא) shiur on Nedarim addresses a fundamental contradiction between the Mishna's ruling that "kinidrei sheirim lo yomar klum" (vows like those of righteous people have no effect) and the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s explicit statement in Hilchos Nedarim 13:23 that righteous people do make vows of prohibition—specifically to improve their character or actions. The Rambam writes that one who was gluttonous with meat may prohibit meat upon himself, or one who drinks excessively may prohibit wine—and doing so is "noam meshubach" (praiseworthy). How then can the Mishna declare such vows ineffective? The shiur begins by reviewing the Ran's position that the novelty of "kinidrei sheirim lo yomar klum" lies in cases where someone says "hareini alai imenu" regarding an item lying before him (nosar lefanav). The Ran argues this cannot be the Rambam's understanding because the Rambam introduces this halacha (הלכה) before discussing the concept of nosar lefanav in his legal code. Therefore, according to the Rambam, there must be a distinct chiddush in "kinidrei sheirim" independent of the nosar lefanav requirement.
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 12a
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.
