No community start suggestion yet.
Why does nezirus appear after shevuos in Seder Nezikin when nezirus is fundamentally a neder, not a shevua? The shiur develops the approach that nezirus contains two distinct components: a shibbud haguf (obligation placed on one's body) similar to the Ramban (רמב"ן)'s understanding of nedarim, and a kabbalas dinim (acceptance of the laws of nezirus). This explains why nezirus is positioned after shevuos—it creates an issur gavra rather than merely an issur hefetz.
The shiur opens with a fundamental question from the Gemara (גמרא) in Nedarim 2b: Why is Masechta Nazir placed after Masechta Shevuos in Seder Nezikin? The Gemara establishes that nedarim precedes shevuos because neder creates an issur hefetz (prohibition on the object) while shevua creates an issur gavra (prohibition on the person). By this logic, nazir should come before shevuos, not after it. The Rosh addresses this difficulty, stating that nezirus is not like other nedarim—the wine is not prohibited to the nazir; rather, the nezirus is be'gufo shel adam (on the body of the person itself). This suggests that nezirus is fundamentally an issur gavra, which would explain its placement after shevuos. However, this raises several difficulties. First, the Mishna on daf 3b states "neder besoch neder, ve'ein shevua besoch shevua"—a neder can take effect upon a neder, but a shevua cannot take effect upon a shevua. The Mishna gives as its example of neder besoch neder the case of someone who says "hareini nazir, hareini nazir." According to Rishonim, this either means the person is obligated in malkos twice if he violates the nezirus now, or that he must observe sixty days of nezirus (two consecutive thirty-day periods). The Gemara explicitly uses the terminology "neder besoch neder" for this case and contrasts it with shevua, where a second shevua cannot be chal. This strongly suggests that nezirus is fundamentally a neder, not merely an issur gavra.
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 3b
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.