A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
What is the conceptual difference between a shevuah (oath) and a neder (vow)? The shiur develops the thesis that a shevuah with Hashem (ה׳)'s name is not a commitment but a declarative statement of truth in God's name, while a shevuah without Hashem's name (like in Parshas Matos) is a promise—a commitment that falls under the halachos of nedarim. This framework explains why the Rambam (רמב"ם) places certain issurim in Hilchos Nedarim rather than Hilchos Shevuos.
The shiur presents a comprehensive analysis of Maseches Nedarim 2a, focusing on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s treatment of shevuos and nedarim and developing a fundamental conceptual distinction between them. The central thesis challenges the conventional understanding that all shevuos are commitments or promises. Rabbi Zweig begins by examining a difficulty in the Ran's approach to understanding whether a shevuah requires the word "shem" (God's name). The Ran argues that if saying "shem" alone creates an issur, then there would be no need for the chiddush of kinuyim (substitute terms for oaths). The kashya is why the Ran needs to bring a proof from Reish Lakish when this should already be clear from logic.
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 2a
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.
