A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a person consecrate (be magdish) ownerless property (hefker) without first acquiring ownership? The shiur analyzes a Gemara (גמרא) in Nedarim where Rashi (רש"י) requires kinyan before hekdesh while the Ran holds magbi'ah matzil chaveiro koneh chaveiro applies. The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s psak, which appears to require neither kinyan nor dal amos, raises fundamental questions about whether hekdesh requires ownership or merely control.
This shiur examines a complex sugya dealing with consecrating ownerless property (hefker), focusing on a fundamental machloket among Rishonim regarding whether one must first acquire ownership before being magdish an object. The discussion centers on understanding three different approaches: Rashi (רש"י)'s requirement of kinyan, the Ran's novel application of magbi'ah matzil chaveiro koneh chaveiro, and the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s seemingly more lenient formulation. According to Rashi's interpretation of the Gemara (גמרא) in Nedarim, one must first be koneh (acquire) an ownerless object before consecrating it. Rashi explains "ki ve'shahechiziק bo" as requiring actual kinyan - the person must acquire the object for himself first, even if only momentarily, before the hekdesh can be chal (take effect). This ensures that the fundamental principle of "ki yakdish ish" - that something must belong to you in order to consecrate it - is satisfied. Without ownership, there can be no valid ma'aseh hekdesh (act of consecration).
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 22b
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.
