No community start suggestion yet.
Can someone accept nezirus while tamei, when nezirus cannot take effect until after purification? The Gemara (גמרא) explores whether kabbalas nezirus b'tumah creates an immediate obligation or merely a commitment to begin counting after becoming tahor. The discussion turns on whether one can be mechabel only nezirus taharah (the laws applicable during purity) or whether every acceptance of nezirus includes both tumah and taharah components.
This shiur analyzes Nedarim 3a, focusing on the Gemara (גמרא)'s discussion of accepting nezirus while in a state of tumah. The fundamental question is whether someone who is tamei can meaningfully accept nezirus when the nezirus cannot take effect until after purification through the seven-day taharah process. The Gemara presents the position of Rabbeinu Bachya and explores whether kabbalas nezirus in a state of tumah creates an immediate obligation or constitutes a commitment to begin nezirus later. A key issue is whether one can be mechabel (accept upon oneself) specifically nezirus taharah—the laws of nezirus that apply during the state of purity—without accepting the tumah component, or whether every kabbalas nezirus necessarily includes both dimensions.
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 3a
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.
