ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nedarim 8
(a) Rav Gidal Amar Rav learns from the Pasuk "Nishbati va'Akayeimah Lishmor
Mishpetei Tzidkecha" - that one may swear to fulfill a Mitzvah (that the
Neder is effective).
(b) The problem that we have with this is - the principle 'Mushba ve'Omed
me'Har Sinai Hu' (that one Shevu'ah does not take effect on another).
(c) What Rav is therefore saying is - that it is permitted, and even
commendable, to make a Neder encouraging oneself to perform a Mitzvah
(though this Neder is not subject to Malkos).
(d) Rav's Chidush cannot be that, whereas "Leha'ra O Leheitiv" which is
written in the Parshah of Korbanos, does not apply to Mitzvos (but is
confined to voluntary acts), 'bal Yacheil' does - because then, Rav should
have said just that, rather than referring to the Pasuk "Nishba'ti
va'Akayeimah ... ".
(a) When Rav Gidal Amar Rav says about someone who makes a Shevu'ah that he
will learn a certain Perek 'Neder Gadol Nadar l'Elokei Yisrael' (even though
he too, is 'Mushba ve'Omed me'Har Sinai) - he is coming to teach us that,
even though he could fulfill his basic Mitzvah of Talmud-Torah by reciting
the Sh'ma each morning and evening, his Neder is fully effective (not only
because of 'Ziruzi Nafshei', as in the previous case), and he will even
receive Malkos for contravening it.
(b) Even though Rav uses the Lashon 'Neder Gadol Nadar ... ' - it is really
a Shevu'ah, and not a Neder at all (seeing as there is no object involved
here - see also Tosfos DH 'Mushba').
(c) When we say that by reading the Sh'ma morning and evening, a person
fulfills his duty regarding the Mitzvah of Talmud-Torah - we are referring
to the basic written obligation of Torah-study, but not to that of
constantly adding to one's store of knowledge, until one is able to reply
clearly to any question that one is asked. That obligation is derived from
"ve'Shinantam le'Vanecha" (in the first Parshah of the Shema).
(d) What Rav means here is - that although the basic obligation is *not
subject to a Shevu'ah* (since whatever is written explicitly is considered
'Mushba ve'Omed me'Har Sinai'), the obligation that is derived from
"ve'Shinantam le'Vanecha" (which is not written specifically), *is*.
(a) Rav Gidal Amar Rav learns from the Pasuk "Vayomer Eilai Kum Tzei el
ha'Bik'ah ... va'Eitzei el ha'Bik'ah ve'Hinei Sham K'vod Hashem Omed" - that
someone who says to his friend 'Come, Let's go and learn this Perek' (for
example)! is obligated to take the initiative (whether his friend joins him
(b) What obligates the instigator to take the initiative in carrying it
out - is the fact that he said 'Come, Let's go ... ', which is a form of
(c) Rav is also teaching us here - that an undertaking to perform a Mitzvah
has the power of a Neder, even though no Lashon of Neder was used.
(a) Rav Yosef says that someone who dreams that he has been placed in Niduy,
must have it released by ten people. The reason that he needs ...
1. ... to have it released at all - is because we suspect that Hashem
arranged for the Ba'al ha'Chalamos to place him in Niduy (and Hashem
[Kevayachol] has the power of a Beis-Din of ten. (Refer to the first Ran on
(b) The ten men must be of the caliber who teach Torah ('de'Masni Hilch'sa')
and not just who learn it ('ve'Lo de'Tanu'). Alternatively, they must learn
Gemara, and not just Mishnah ('de'Tani Hilch'sa, Aval Masni, Lo').
2. ... ten people to release it - because if Hashem did indeed arrange for
the Niduy, then Hashem will have to release it, and wherever there are ten
people, the Shechinah rests.
(c) If he cannot find ten men ...
1. ... who teach Torah (or who learn Gemara) - then Bedieved, it is
sufficient to release the Niduy with ten men who learn Torah (or who learn
2. ... who (even learn) Torah - the Menudeh should stand by the crossroads
and greet ten people who pass. Their return greeting will shield him from
punishment until such time as he finds the required ten men to release his
(a) When Ravina asked Rav Ashi whether, if he knows who placed him in Niduy
in his dream, that person is permitted to release the Menudeh's Niduy on his
own - he replied that perhaps he was appointed a Sh'liach to place the
Niduy, but not to release it.
(b) And when Rav Acha asked Rav Ashi whether, if in his dream, the person
who declared the Niduy also releases it, the Niduy is released - he replied
that just as all corn contains some straw, so too, all dreams, contain some
facts that are false.
(c) It is unclear whether a Menudeh in a dream is obligated to practice all
the Dinim of a Menudeh. We might make a distinction between someone who is
placed in Niduy in a dream and someone who made a Neder in a dream (though
the Rashba disagrees) - inasmuch as by the former, we suspect that maybe
Hashem arranged for the Niduy (as we explained), which does not apply to a
Neder (where the person must personally undertake the Neder, when he is in
full possession of his faculties).
(a) Ravina asked Rav Ashi whether a husband can be a Sh'liach to nullify his
wife's Nedarim. The Rambam follows the opinion of the Yerushalmi, that this
She'eilah is confined to a husband, but as far as anyone else is concerned,
it is obvious that he cannot - because the Noder must be in the presence of
Beis-Din whilst his Neder is being nullified.
(b) A husband might be different - because of the principle 'Ishto ke'Gufo'.
(c) Rav Ashi replied - that a husband can be a Sheli'ach for his wife,
provided he finds the three Dayanim already gathered, but Chazal did not
want to go as far as to permit it even in a case where he has to go and look
for them (because, ideally speaking, the Noder should personally be in
(a) According to Tosfos, it is obvious that anyone can be a Sheli'ach to
nullify someone else's Nedarim, and a husband might be worse - because we
are afraid that (precisely on account of 'Ishto ke'Gufo') he might present
Beis-Din with an exaggerated version of his wife's Charatah.
(b) And this will also explain Rav Ashi's answer. We are only afraid that he
might exaggerate, after he has gone through the trouble of looking for a
Beis-Din, but not if he finds the Dayanim without difficulty.
(c) Rabeinu Shimshon permits writing down the details of one's remorse and
sending it to Beis-Din for them to nullify one's vow - despite the fact that
he is not present or aware at the time when his Neder is being annulled
(this appears to follow the ruling of the Tosfos that we just quoted in a.).
(d) His source - is the Hafaras Nedarim that a husband makes for his wife,
which does not need the wife's knowledge. The sole difference between the
Hataras Nedarim of Beis-Din and the Hafaras Nedarim of the husband, he
maintains, lies in the Lashon, but not in their practical Halachos.
(a) We learn three things from Rav Ashi's reply. We learn that a husband can
be a Sheli'ach to nullify his wife's Nedarim in Beis-Din, that he can only
do so if he finds the three Dayanim already gathered - and that one is not
permitted to nullify vows in the vicinity of one's Rebbe.
(b) Despite the fact that the Yerushalmi rules like Rebbi Yehudah, in whose
opinion a husband is not permitted to nullify those Nedarim of his wife that
do not affect him intimately - the third Chidush is significant inasmuch as
Ravina could have sat on a Beis-Din with two other Dayanim (which, some
maintain, the Yerushalmi concedes).
(c) Even assuming that, due to the principle 'Ishto ke'Gufo', the Yerushalmi
forbids even that - Ravina might have asked his disciples to nullify his
wife's Neder (if not for K'vod Rabo).
(a) Shamta is more lenient than Neder - in the third of the above Dinim,
inasmuch as one is permitted to release a Shamta even in the vicinity of
one's Rebbe (see Rosh).
(b) A Yachid Mumcheh may release a Shamta (or a Neder for that matter). We
learn this from the Pasuk "Roshei ha'Matos" (written in connection with
Nedarim) - which implies Halachic experts, as opposed to "Elohim", which
implies Dayanim with Semichah.
(c) From the fact that Rav Huna annulled Nedarim on his own (Yerushalmi),
and that Rav Nachman is named as someone who was eligible to permit
Shechting a Bechor on his own (Bechoros) - that a Yachid Mumcheh in this
regard needs to be a Halachic expert, but not necessarily a Samuch (since
neither of them had Semichah).
(d) The Rambam rules - that three ordinary people may release a Niduy if
there is no Chacham available (in the same way as they may annul Nedarim).
(a) When Mal'achi writes "ve'Zarchah Lachem Yir'ei Sh'mi" - he is referring
to people whose Yir'as Hashem causes them to utter Hashem's Name only when
it is necessary.
(b) Rebbi Yehudah b'Rebbi Ila'i learns from the continuation of the Pasuk
"Shemesh Tzedakah u'Marpei bi'Chenafehah" - that the particles of dust that
are visible in the sun's rays have healing powers.
(c) Resh Lakish explains that the Pasuk in Malachi refers to Olam ha'Ba.
1. "Shemesh Tzedakah u'Marpei bi'Chenafehah" - means that, in Olam ha'Ba,
the sun will shine and that the Tzadikim will be healed by it from all their
ailments. In any event, he disagrees with Rebbi Yehudah - inasmuch as the
Pasuk refers, in his opinion, to Olam ha'Ba, whereas according to Rebbi
Yehudah it pertains to Olam ha'Zeh
(d) Resh Lakish - is referring to the era after Techi'as ha'Meisim, not to
the Olam ha'Ba after death, where Gehinom operates in full force.
2. "vi'Yetzasem u'Fishtem (you will enjoy yourselves) ke'Eglei Marbeik" -
that they will also derive much pleasure from it. ?
3. "Hinei Yom Ba Bo'er ka'Tanur ... " - means that the boiling sun will burn
the Resha'im, dispensing with the need for Gehinom.