No community start suggestion yet.
What distinguishes a neder (vow) from a shevua (oath)? The Gemara (גמרא) states that neder is an issur cheftza (prohibition on the object) while shevua is an issur gavra (prohibition on the person). Building on the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s formulation, the shiur develops that neder requires a commitment expressed through "harei alai" language, while shevua is a statement of truth about one's future actions. This distinction explains the laws of chatfasa (extension of vows) and why certain formulations work for one but not the other.
The shiur opens with the Gemara (גמרא) on Nedarim 2a discussing the fundamental distinction between nedarim and shevuos: a neder creates an issur cheftza (prohibition on the object itself), while a shevua creates an issur gavra (prohibition on the person). Tosfos raises the question of what practical difference emerges from this distinction. Rabbi Zweig questions why the Rishonim don't focus on the apparent nafka mina (practical difference) regarding chatfasa (the ability to extend a prohibition from one object to another) - since an issur cheftza should allow for chatfasa while an issur gavra should not. The shiur then analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Shevuos (Perek 2, halachos 8-9), where the Rambam discusses two scenarios of chatfasa in shevuos. In one case, a person makes a shevua and his friend says "ani kamocha" (I am like you) without explicitly uttering the word "shevua." In another case, someone swears not to eat a certain piece of meat, then says a piece of bread should be "like that meat." The Rambam rules that while these cases exempt one from punishment (malkos or korban), the second object remains forbidden. A careful reading reveals that the Rambam only states the prohibition applies in the second case (regarding the bread), not necessarily in the first case of "ani kamocha."
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.
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.
