ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nedarim 39
(a) Assuming that the visitor in our Mishnah is the Madir, and the sick
person, the Mudar, the Madir will be permitted to visit the Mudar - because
he is performing a Mitzvah, and the benefit that the sick person receives is
only G'rama (see also the last answer on the Amud).
(b) The problem that we then have with the distinction the Tana of our
Mishnah makes between standing and sitting is - why does the Tana forbid the
Madir to sit?
(c) The problem that we have if it is the sick person who is the Madir, and
the visitor, the Mudar is - that seeing as even entering the Madir's house
is forbidden (like we learned earlier, according to Rebbi Eliezer), why does
the Tana permit him even to stand?
(a) Initially, we establish the Mishnah when the visitor is the Madir and
the sick person, the Mudar, and the reason that he is forbidden to sit
is -because the Tana is speaking in a place where they tend to take money
for sitting (which is not part of the Mitzvah). Consequently, when the Madir
sits without taking money, he is benefiting the Mudar.
(b) In some places, they were stringent not to take money even for sitting
(in which case sitting would be permitted, too) - to avoid making the
mistake of taking money even for standing (which is forbidden).
(c) The Tana chose to teach us the Din in a place where they take money for
sitting and not for standing, and not in a place where they do not take
money for either - in order to stress that although it is permitted, in
those places, to take money for sitting with a sick person, there is no
Heter whatsoever, to take money for standing with him.
(a) Alternatively, the Tana holds like Rebbi Shimon ben Elyakim later, who
holds 'Gezeirah Shema Yashheh'. The Tana is speaking - when the Minhag is
not to take money for sitting, yet it is forbidden to sit free of charge
because of the decree that he might sit longer than necessary.
(b) When he remains standing, we are not afraid that he may remain longer
than necessary to fulfill the Mitzvah - because the fact that he is made to
stand will remind him not to remain too long.
(a) Ula establishes our Mishnah when it is the sick person who is the Madir
and the visitor, the Mudar, and the reason that the Mudar is even permitted
to enter the Madir's house and stand in front of him is because -
presumably, when the Madir made the Neder, he did not mean to include those
occasions when he needed the Mudar.
(b) Some have the text '*u'Kegon* de'Lo Adrei min Chiyutei'. This text
however - has no significance, because, whether he said so specifically or
not makes no difference, since, in any event, that is what we presume.
(c) He is not however, permitted to sit, since he can fulfill the Mitzvah by
remaining standing, in which case, sitting is included in the Neder and
(a) The Beraisa (which we assumes, comes to elaborate on our Mishnah) states
'Chalah Hu', Nichnas Levakro; Chalah B'no, Sho'alo be'Shuk'. This Beraisa
poses no problem on Ula, whose opinion we have just discussed - because
according to him, the Tana permits the Mudar to visit the Madir when he is
sick (due to the S'vara 'de'Lo Adrei min Chiyutei'), but not his son (whom
we cannot assume was also precluded from the Neder).
(b) This proves what we stated earlier (that the Noder meant to preclude
those occasions where he needed the Mudar from the Neder, whether he said so
*specifically* or not) - because if he had to state it specifically, then
what would be the difference between himself and his son (if he specifically
precluded mentioned both, then the Madir would be permitted to visit both of
them, and if he did not, then he would be permitted to visit either).
(c) The problem with Shmuel (who learns our Mishnah when the visitor is the
Madir and the sick person, the Mudar) from this Beraisa is - why there
should be any difference between the Madir and his son? If anything, it
should the distinction should be the reverse (even if the Madir is forbidden
to visit the Mudar, he should be permitted to visit the son)?
(d) Shmuel agrees with Ula in establishing the Beraisa when the sick person
is the Madir, and the visitor, the Mudar, because he too, holds of the
S'vara ('de'Lo Adrei min Chiyutei'). What makes him then learn our Mishnah
when the visitor is the Madir and the sick person, the Mudar - is the fact
that the Tana differentiates between standing and sitting, and in his
opinion, if the sick person was the Mudar, there would be no more reason to
forbid the Madir to sit than to stand (because he does not agree with Ula,
who maintains that he is forbidden to sit, seeing as he is able to stand).
(a) Shmuel and Ula both established the Beraisa (which permits the visitor
to visit the sick person) when it is the sick person who was Madir the
visitor. The concession to visit the sick person will only apply however, if
it was the sick person who had declared the Neder forbidding his property on
the visitor - but not to where it was the visitor who had declared the Neder
on himself, because then the S'vara ('de'Lo Adrei min Chiyutei') will not
(b) The Halachah in the above Machlokes is like Shmuel - because Rava
supports him from our Mishnah.
(c) In the case of our Mishnah, where it is the property of the visitor that
is forbidden on the sick person, and when the former is permitted to visit
the latter provided he does not sit down - he should also take care not to
give him anything, because it is only abstract Hana'ah that is permitted,
and not real Hana'ah that is tangible.
Resh Lakish explains the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Im K'mos Kol ha'Adam Yemusun Eileh" to mean - 'If these men will die
like everyone else who fall ill and die on their death-beds'.
2. ... "u'Fekudas Kol Adam Yipakeid Aleihem" - 'and people come to visit
(a) What the following have in common - is that they were all created before
the world was: Torah, Teshuvah, Gan Eden, Gehinom, Kisei ha'Kavod - the
Beis-Hamikdash and the name of Mashi'ach.
(b) When Rava says that these things were created before the creation - he
means that Hashem's decision to create them was made before the world was
created (because they were an essential part of the creation).
(c) Seeing as Gehinom was one of the initial creations, when Moshe requested
"Im B'riyah Yivra Hashem" (If it is not created already, then Hashem should
create it now) - he was asking, not for the creation of Gehinom, but for a
(d) In order not to clash with the Pasuk "Ein Chadash Tachas ha'Shemesh" -
we amend this too, to a request to move the entrance (at least temporarily)
to the spot in the desert where they were currently located.
(a) Despite the fact that the sun and moon 'reside' in the heaven called
'Raki'a' - they had currently moved up to 'Z'vul' following the rebellion of
Korach, refusing to shine upon the world until Hashem avenged Moshe's honor.
(b) Hashem responded - by shooting arrows at them and accusing them of
defending Moshe's honor, but not His, when, every day, people insult His
honor when they bow down to them.
(c) The punishment that they received was - that from that time on, they
shine each day only after arrows have been shot at them.
(d) We establish the Pasuk "Shemesh Yarei'ach Amad Zevulah ... " with regard
to the episode of Korach - because the Navi Chavakuk has just referred to
the Exodus from Egypt and the crossing of the Yam-Suf, when he writes
"Machatzta Rosh mi'Beis Rasha", which appears to refer to Korach.
(a) The Beraisa states 'Bikur Cholim Ein Lah Shiur', which Rav Yosef
interpreted to mean that there is no fixed limit to the reward that one
receives for fulfilling it. The problem with this is - from the Mishnah in
Pirkei Avos 'Hevei Zahir be'Mitzvah Kalah ke'va'Chamurah', which teaches us
that no Mitzvah has any fixed limit.
(b) Abaye therefore interprets the Beraisa to mean that one is even
obligated to visit someone of a lower status than oneself. According to
Rava - it means that there is no limit how many times a day one should visit
him (even a hundred).
(c) Rav Acha bar Chanina says that someone who visits a sick person removes
one sixtieth of his illness. This does not mean however, that if sixty
people visit him, he will be fully cured - but that each successive person
removes one sixtieth of what remains. Furthermore, it is only a 'ben Gil'
(someone born under the same Mazel as the sick person - on average, one in
twelve) who has the power to achieve this.
(d) This answer is based on 'Isuraisa de'Rebbi' - the ruling of Rebbi that
when a man dies, each unmarried daughter will become entitled to one tenth
of his property. When they asked Rebbi whether that meant that a man who
dies leaving twelve daughters would receive the entire inheritance, leaving
the sons with nothing, he replied that each successive daughter would be
entitled to a tenth of what remained after the preceding one had taken her
share. Having made that Cheshbon, they would then divide the sum total of
all the tenths equally among the ten daughters.