A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Can a neder be made using slang or a mispronunciation? The Rambam (רמב"ם) distinguishes two types: nedarim using "asur" work in any language or dialect, but nedarim using "korban" require a proper Hebrew pronunciation—unless that mispronunciation becomes socially accepted within a specific place and time, transforming it into a valid Hebrew variant.
This shiur analyzes the Rambam (רמב"ם)'s treatment of kinuyim (substitutions or mispronunciations) in nedarim and shevuos, exploring how language variations affect the validity of vows. The primary sources are Hilchos Nedarim Perek 1 Halacha (הלכה) 13-14 and Hilchos Shevuos Perek 2 Halacha 5, along with the Gemara (גמרא) on Nedarim 2a and 10a. The Rambam in Hilchos Nedarim begins by stating that there are places where people mispronounce language ("yesh makomos shehem alogim masnim es halashon") and use kinuyim—alternative or incomplete pronunciations. The critical question is: when does such variant language create a valid neder? The Rambam concludes with a rule: "chochan achar lashon klal ha'am be'oso makom be'oso zman"—it must be the language of the majority of people in that specific place and time. Yet the Radbaz notes that this comprehensive rule appears only in Hilchos Nedarim, not in Hilchos Shevuos, raising the question of why the Rambam didn't state it clearly in both places.
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.
