REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nedarim 80
NEDARIM 80 (Shabbos Shuvah) - dedicated by Mrs. G. Turkel (Rabbi Kornfeld's
grandmother), an exceptional woman who accepted all of Hashem's Gezeiros
with love and who loved and respected the study of Torah. Tehei Nafshah
Tzerurah bi'Tzror ha'Chaim.
(a) So we establish the case of 'Im Erchatz' as 'Konem Hana'as Rechitzah
Alai Im Erchatz'.
What basic change has now taken place in our way of
(b) According to this, why does the Tana say 'Im Erchatz' and not just
'Konem Rechitzah Alai'?
(c) In which point does Rebbi Yossi, who says 'Ein Eilu Nidrei Inuy Nefesh',
now argue with the Tana Kama?
(d) We refute this explanation however, on the grounds that Rebbi Yossi
should have then said 'T'nai Zeh Ein Bo Inuy Nefesh'.
What do we mean by
that? How does it disprove our previous theory?
(a) Does our Sugya hold like Rebbi Nasan, who later in the Perek will
require the Neder to have taken effect before the husband (or father) can
annul it, or like the Rabbanan, who do not differentiate?
(b) That being the case, why did we ask at the beginning of the Sugya 'Lo
Tirchatz ve'Lo Litseran' (in order to avoid the husband having to annul the
Neder)? Why should he nevertheless not annul it, like the Rabbanan?
(c) If that is so, on what grounds will Rebbi Akiva permit a husband to
annul his wife's Neder 'Hareini Nezirah le'che'she'Esgaresh', seeing as at
this point in time, there is neither Inuy Nefesh, nor does the Neder involve
(a) We establish our Mishnah when the woman said 'Hana'as Rechitzah Alai
Le'olam Im Erchatz ha'Yom'.
Why does the Tana Kama say 'Yafer' and why
does Rebbi Yossi disagree with him? What is the basis of their Machlokes?
(b) Not bathing for one day, we just concluded, is not considered Inuy
Nefesh even according to Rebbi Yossi.
Does it fall under the category of
'Devarim she'Beino le'Veinah'?
(c) How will this explain now why Rebbi Yossi did not say 'T'nai Zeh Ein Ein
Bo Inuy Nefesh' (like we asked earlier)?
(a) Based on the Lashon of Rebbi Yossi 'Ein Eilu Nidrei Inuy Nefesh', from
which it appears that Rebbi Yossi argues with the Tana Kama even by
permanent Rechitzah, why, according to Rebbi Eliezer (mi'Metz), do we say
(in explaining Rebbi Yossi's opinion) 'Nivul *de'Chad Yoma* Lo Sh'mei
Answers to questions
(b) How does Rabeinu Yonah explain 'Nivul *de'Chad Yoma*'? In what way does
a Neder not to bathe for one day differ than one not to bathe permanently?
How will this explain Rebbi Yossi?
(c) Is there any reason to suppose that Rebbi Yossi might concede that
Rechitzah Le'olam falls under the category of Inuy Nefesh?
(a) Our Mishnah also mentions 'Im Lo Erchatz'.
Why can this not be
referring to a case of 'Titsar Hana'as Rechitzah Alai Im Lo Erchatz'?
(b) So how does Rav Yehudah initially interpret 'Im Lo Erchatz'?
(c) We reject this however, because then 'Im Lo Eskashet' would not make
How would we then have to interpret 'Im Lo Eskashet'? Why would it
make no sense?
(a) So Rav Yehudah establishes the Reisha of our Mishnah as before.
does he establish the Seifa 'Im Lo Erchatz' and 'Im Lo Eskashet'?
(b) Why does the Tana need to mention both the Reisha (Neder with a
condition) and the Seifa (Shevu'ah without a condition)? What is the
(c) Why do some texts omit the word 'ha'Yom' from the Reisha ('Hana'as
Rechitzah Le'olam Alai Im Erchatz *ha'Yom*')?
- ... in the Reisha?
- ... in the Seifa?
(d) When Ravina asked Rav Ashi why the Tana then introduced the Mishnah with
've'Eilu Nedarim ... ', without mentioning Shevu'os, he gave one of two
possible answers. One of them is 'T'ni Eilu Nedarim u'Shevu'os'.
(a) Based on the Pasuk in Acharei-Mos "Kol ha'Nefesh Asher Lo Se'uneh ...
ve'Ha'avadti es ha'Nefesh (Kareis)", which of the five Inuyim does the Tana
in Yoma include in the Chiyuv Kareis on Yom Kipur?
(b) According to the Chachamim, who hold that Rechitzah is considered Inuy
Nefesh, it is not initially clear why Rechitzah is not included in the Isur
Kareis. Rava resolve this problem by differentiating between the sources
"Te'anu es Nafshoseichem", and "Kol Neder ... Le'anos Nefesh".
What is the
difference between the two?
(c) How else might we have answered the Kashya?
(d) Then why did Rava give a different answer?
(a) What does the Tana of a Beraisa say about a fountain whose source is in
a city, when it comes to drinking rights?
(b) From which Pasuk do we learn this?
(c) Does this Halachah extend to watering animals (where human life is not
involved), or to using the water for washing clothes (where there is no
life-danger at all)?
(a) Will the previous Halachah extend to a case where the people of other
towns need to drink, or to where the local residents want to wash their
clothes, according to the Tana Kama?
Answers to questions
(b) According to Rebbi Yossi, the local residents have the first rights to
wash their clothes.
How does seemingly contradict his own opinion that
not bathing is not considered Inuy Nefesh?
(c) How do we reconcile Rebbi Yossi's two statements? Why is washing clothes
more vital than bathing oneself?