A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why can a father be mefar a ten-day neder but not a thirty-day nezirus? The Ran explains that the distinction is not duration but psychological reality: neder imposes deprivation (issur cheftza), while nezirus ideally elevates a person above ta'avah. The shiur develops this reading through the Mordechai's framework and explores its implications for shevuos.
The shiur analyzes the Ran's approach to the Gemara (גמרא)'s question regarding why hafaras nedarim can be derived from nedarim to nezirus. The basic question is profound: if the reason a father can be mefar is because of tzara (distress), how can a ten-day neder be more distressing than a thirty-day nezirus? The Ran explains that the distinction is "less leketzusa" – a neder is not bound by a specific time limit in its essential nature. Rabbi Zweig develops a psychological reading of this principle, drawing on the Mordechai in Shevuos (Tof Shin Peh Ches). The key insight is that neder is an issur cheftza (prohibition on the object) while nezirus is an issur gavra (prohibition on the person). This distinction is not merely technical but reflects two fundamentally different psychological states.
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 4b
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.
