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.
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.
