No community start suggestion yet.
Why is there a bal yachel violation in nazir when the prohibition is already expressed through specific lavim like bal yoka and bal yishte? The shiur develops the fundamental machlokes between Rashi (רש"י) and other Rishonim: whether nazir involves only a kabbalas kedusha or also contains a neder-like commitment dimension. According to the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s reading, the hekesh to nedarim teaches that nazir itself is a neder—mechallel nidrei issur—creating dual violations.
This shiur analyzes the opening Gemara (גמרא) in Nedarim 2a, focusing on the relationship between the prohibition of bal yachel (not violating one's word) in nedarim and in nezirus. The Gemara establishes that just as one violates bal yachel when making a neder and transgressing it, there is also a bal yachel violation when one accepts nezirus and violates its restrictions. However, the Gemara raises a fundamental difficulty: while by neder the bal yachel violation is clear—when someone says "this loaf is forbidden to me" and then eats it, he violates his words—by nezirus the violation seems redundant. When a nazir drinks wine or becomes tamei, he violates specific prohibitions like bal yoka (not drinking wine) and bal yishte (not drinking grape juice). What room is there for an additional prohibition of bal yachel? The Gemara's question reveals a fundamental conceptual issue about the nature of nezirus. According to Tosafos (תוספות) and the Rosh, the Gemara is asking: how can there be a bal yachel violation by itself in nezirus? They understand that the Gemara concludes lavra la'vishnei—a nazir violates two prohibitions simultaneously when he drinks wine: both bal yoka and bal yachel. But the question remains: why should there be any bal yachel at all when the Torah (תורה) already specified the particular prohibitions?
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.
