(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Nedarim 11

NEDARIM 11 - dedicated anonymously in honor of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, and in honor of those who study the Dafyomi around the world.


(a) Rebbi Meir learns from the T'nai of the B'nei Gad and the B'nei Re'uven that every stipulation requires a T'nai Kaful (a double condition).
What is the underlying reason for that?

(b) Why does that preclude him from being the author of our Mishnah?

(c) In which area of Halachah does Rebbi Meir agree that a T'nai Kaful is not required?

(d) Then why can he not be the author of our Mishnah, which speaks about Nedarim, which is an Isur?

(a) Rebbi Yehudah argues with Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa in Gitin.
What does he say there?

(b) Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel also argues with Rebbi Meir.
Why do we prefer to establish our Mishnah like Rebbi Yehudah?

(c) Our Sugya opens with the statement 'Savruhah Mai la'Chulin, Lo Chulin'. How would we normally interpret this?

(a) We just established the Reisha of our Mishnah like Rebbi Yehudah. How do we reconcile this with the fact that he is the author of the Seifa? If he is the author of the Reisha, then why do we need to introduce his name in the Seifa?

(b) Who must be the author of the rest of that section of Mishnah 'ke'Imra', 'ke'Dirim', 'ke'Eitzim ... '?

(c) And how will we then reconcile our Mishnah with the Beraisa which quotes Rebbi Yehudah as saying 'ha'Omer ki'Yerushalayim, Lo Amar K'lum ad she'Yidor be'Davar ha'Kareiv bi'Yerushalayim'?

(d) What is the basis of their Machlokes?

Answers to questions



(a) It is obvious that if someone says 'Chulin, ha'Chulin or ke'Chulin she'Ochal Lach' that this is not a Neder.
But on what grounds does the Beraisa say that even if he concluded 'she'Lo Ochal Lach', it is not a Neder either? Why can we not infer from that 'she'Ochal Lach, Korban'?

(b) What is then the problem with the Seifa 'la'Chulin she'Ochal Lach, Asur'?

(c) Why can we not answer that this is not really a case of 'mi'Ch'lal La'av Ata Shomei'a Hen', because 'Lo Chulin' is synonymous with 'Korban'?

(d) What would be the most convenient solution to this Kashya?

5) The Ra'avad answers the previous Kashya by amending the Lashon.
What do we now read instead of 'la'Chulin she'Ochal Lach'?


(a) In a Mishnah later, Rebbi Meir validates 'la'Korban Lo Ochal Lach'. Considering that Rebbi Meir holds 'mi'Ch'lal La'av I Ata Shomei'a Hen', how does Rebbi Aba explain this statement?

(b) Throughout the Sugya, we have assumed 'la'Chulin' to mean 'Lo Chulin'. How can Rebbi Aba then explain Rebbi Meir in this way?

(c) What problem does this present on the Seifa of our Beraisa 'la'Chulin (or 'la'Chalin) Lo Ochal Lach, Mutar'?

(d) Why do we only ask from Rebbi Aba on the Beraisa, and not on our Mishnah 'la'Korban she'Ochal Lach', which we established not like Rebbi Meir?

(a) We could answer that, although the Tana of our Beraisa agrees with Rebbi Meir regarding 'mi'Ch'lal La'av *I* Ata Shomei'a Hen', he disagrees with the Tana of the Mishnah (as explained by Rebbi Aba). According to him, 'la'Korb
an, Lo Ochal Lach' is no more a Neder than 'la'Chulin Lo Ochal Lach'. How does Rav Ashi reconcile the two?

(b) How will we explain Rav Ashi's answer according to the Ra'avad, who reads 'Chalin', instead of 'Chulin' (according to the Ran, who differentiates between 'le'Chalin' and 'la'Chalin')? In which case will we apply Rebbi Aba's explanation, and in which case will we not?

(c) According to this explanation, we will have to read the middle case in the Beraisa 'le'Chalin she'Ochal Lach, Asur', and the Seifa 'la'Chalin Lo Ochal Lach Mutar'. What is the Chidush in each case?

8) If we rule 'mi'Ch'lal La'av Ata Shomei'a Hen' (like Rebbi Yehudah in our S'tam Mishnah), why did Shmuel in Gitin institute a T'nai Kaful in the Get of a Shechiv Mera (a man on his death-bed); i.e. that the Get should be valid should he die, but not in the event that he survives (like Rebbi Meir)?


(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Re'ei "ve'Dam Zevachecha Yishafech, ve'ha'Basar Tochel"?

(b) On what grounds do we refute the initial version of Rami bar Chama's She'eilah (what will be the Din if someone declares 'Harei Alai ki'B'sar Zivchei Sh'lamim le'Achar Z'rikas Damim')?

(c) Then what is the correct version of Rami bar Chama's She'eilah?

(d) What are the two sides of the She'eilah?

(a) Even if he was Matfis a Davar Mutar (once the Zerikah has taken place), why is his Neder not valid on account of the fact that the flesh of the Korban remains forbidden to Temei'im, and because of the Chazeh ve'Shok, which remain forbidden to Zarim?

(b) What do the following have in common: Someone who is Matfis ... 1. the T'rumas Lachmei Todah 2. the meat of a Bechor (both after the Z'rikas Damim); 3. Chalas Aharon or his T'rumah?

Answers to questions

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,