No community start suggestion yet.
When is borrowing something considered mutar hana'ah versus mutar ma'achal? The shiur analyzes the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of whether the prohibition on borrowing items depends on vitur (forgoing) or on whether people charge for them (makom she'maskirin). Two approaches emerge: either the issue is monetary savings, or it's about the level of hana'ah and deprivation—transforming how we understand the entire sugya.
The shiur explores Nedarim 32b-33a, focusing on the Mishna's distinction between mudar hana'ah and mudar ma'achal regarding borrowed items. The Gemara (גמרא) asks why borrowing a napa (sieve), kever (winnowing fan), or tanur (oven) is prohibited only in a makom she'maskirin (place where people charge), suggesting the prohibition depends on the ruling about vitur (forgoing minor benefits). Rabbi Zweig identifies a fundamental difficulty: the Gemara seems to classify borrowing household items—things people are clearly makpid about and wouldn't lend to strangers—as mere vitur, comparable to walking across someone's field (drisa serego). This appears contradictory. The shiur develops two major approaches to resolve this tension. The first approach, based on Rashi (רש"י) and Tosafot, redefines makom she'maskirin. The key insight is that makom she'maskirin doesn't mean "where people actually charge money," but rather indicates the level of hana'ah being given. Something is makom she'maskirin when it represents a significant favor, even if in practice no money changes hands. For example, letting someone sleep in your house overnight is worth more than many things people do charge for, even though friends typically don't charge friends for such favors. The prohibition isn't based on monetary savings but on the magnitude of benefit received. Anything more substantial than basic vitur becomes prohibited under mudar ma'achal because it constitutes a real hana'ah.
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 32b-33a
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.
