A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
How does "lo yefater min ha'olam ad she'yehei nazir" work when the person doesn't make himself a nazir now? The shiur develops a fundamental chiddush in the Rambam (רמב"ם) (Hilchos Nazir, Hilchos Arachin 6:31) that a person can obligate himself to *become* a nazir through a shevud ha'guf to Hashem (ה׳)—without actual kabbalas nazirus—resolving why this constitutes ba'al ta'achar de'nazirus rather than ba'al ta'achar de'nedarim, and proving that one can commit to be makdish a davar shelo ba'olam.
This shiur analyzes a fundamental tension in the Rambam (רמב"ם) regarding the status of someone who says "lo yefater min ha'olam ad she'yehei nazir" (I will not leave this world before I become a nazir). The Rambam in Hilchos Nazir (halacha (הלכה) 4) states this person is a "nazir miyad" (a nazir immediately), yet in Hilchos Arachin (Perek 6) the Rambam uses this very case to prove that one can make a neder to be makdish something in the future—a davar shelo ba'olam. This appears contradictory: if the person is a nazir miyad, how does this prove the din of future commitment? The major answer proposed by many is that "nazir miyad" doesn't mean the person *is* a nazir immediately, but rather that he is obligated to *accept* nazirus immediately (chayav l'kabel nazirus). This creates a neder to make a neder. However, Rabbi Zweig identifies two severe problems with this approach. First, the Rambam's language in Hilchos Arachin is "chayav linhog b'nazirus" (obligated to conduct himself in nazirus), not "chayav l'kabel nazirus"—suggesting actual nazirus conduct, not just acceptance. Second, if this were truly about being obligated to accept nazirus, then violating this would be ba'al ta'achar of the *neder* (to accept), not ba'al ta'achar of *nazirus* itself—yet the Rambam clearly treats it as ba'al ta'achar de'nazirus.
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 4a
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.
