REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nedarim 28
(a) 'Nodrin la'Haragin, la'Charamin u'le'Muchsin she'Hi Terumah, Af-al-Pi
What do Beis Hillel say in each of these cases?
Who are ...
(b) What distinction do Beis Shemei make regarding this Halachah, between
Nedarim and Shevu'os?
- ... 'Haragin'?
- ... 'Charamin'?
- ... 'Muchsin'?
(c) What qualification do Beis Shamai make even with regard to Neder?
(d) What do Beis Shamai mean when they also forbid extending the Neder
beyond what the Haragin ask of him?
(a) Based on a principle issued by Shmuel, we have a problem with the Tana's
insertion of Muchsin in our Mishnah.
What did Shmuel say?
(b) Shmuel establishes our Mishnah by a 'Moches she'Ein Lo Kitzvah'.
is a 'Moches she'Ein Lo Kitzvah'? How does that solve the problem?
(c) How does Rebbi Yanai establish the Mishnah to answer the Kashya?
(a) What is the problem with the Din in our Mishnah, should it speak when he
said to the Harag ...
(b) So we establish the Mishnah when he says 'Ye'asru Peiros Olam Alai
ha'Yom ... '.
- ... 'Ye'asru Peiros Olam Alai Le'olam ... '?
- ... 'Ye'asru Peiros Olam Alai ... '?
What use is that, seeing as the Harag will then not take him
seriously, so what will he have gained by saying it?
(c) Why is the fact that he said it silently not considered 'Devarim
(d) Had he not been forced however, the fact that he said 'ha'Yom silently
would not have invalidated the Neder.
How does this differ from someone
who meant to forbid on himself wheat-bread, and by mistake, he only said
'bread'? Why is it that the Neder there is automatically void because he
said *wheat*-bread in his heart?
(a) Rav Huna cites a Beraisa 'Beis Shamai Omrim, Lo Yiftach Lo bi'Shevu'ah'.
Besides the fact that Beis Shamai have prohibited even a Neder if one opens
the proceedings (before having been asked by the Harag), what else is
difficult with this statement?
(b) What do we mean when we answer that our Mishnah tells us how far Beis
Shamai go, and the Beraisa, Beis Hillel?
(c) According to Rav Ashi, the Beraisa does not pertain to the Din of
Haragin at all.
Then to what *does* it pertain? What are Beis Shamai and
Beis Hillel then arguing about?
(a) What does the Tana of our Mishnah say about a case of ...
Answers to questions
(b) The fact that Pidyon is required in the Reisha suggests that the Tana is
speaking about the value of the plants or of the cloak being used for the
purchase of a Korban.
- ... 'Harei Neti'os ha'Eilu Korban Im Einan Niktzazos' and 'Talis Zu Korban Im Einah Nisrefes'?
- ... 'Talis Zu Korban ad she'Tisaref'?
What else might 'Korban' mean?
(c) In that case, why would they require a Pidyon? Why should a Konem need
to be redeemed at all?
(d) What does Rebbi Meir (in 'Ein Bein ha'Mudar') say?
(a) What do we mean when we ask 've'Lisni Kedoshos'?
(b) What is wrong with the wording ' ... Kedoshos ve'Einan Kedoshos'?
(c) According to those who interpret 'Korban' to mean Konem, how do we
indeed know that the Chidush of 'Kedoshos' is not that a Konem K'lali
requires Pidyon, like Rebbi Meir (negating the Kashya)?
(d) How do we resolve the original Kashya 've'Lisni Kedoshos'?
(a) Seeing as the plants are bound to be detached at some stage, we have to
amend the Mishnah to read 'Harei Neti'os ha'Eilu Korban, Im Einan Niktzatzos
What is then the problem with the Mishnah?
(b) What does it help to answer that there is a storm wind blowing?
(c) How do we then establish the case of 'Talis Zu Korban Im Einah
(a) What do we mean when we ask 'u'Le'olam'?
(b) bar Pada explains that 'Ein Lahen Pidyon' in the Seifa means only until
they have been detached (or the garment until it has been burned).
then the meaning of 'Ein Lahen Pidyon'?
(c) And what will then be the difference between before they have been
detached and after, according to bar Pada?
(d) According to Ula, once they have been detached, they do not even require
What is their basic Machlokes?
(a) According to the Rashba, Ula only argues with bar Pada with regard to
after the plants have been detached (as is implied by his Lashon), though he
concedes to his Din of 'Podan, Chozros ve'Kodshos'.
What does the Rashba
extrapolate from here with regard to someone who invites his friend to
acquire a field with Chazakah' until he goes to Yerushalayim (adding
(b) What is the significance of 'Me'achshav' here?
(c) Would the Din be the same if ...
- ... they had used a Kinyan Kesef to acquire the field rather than Chazakah?
- ... it was not the original owner who acquired the field (or the plants in our Mishnah), but a third person?
(a) Rebbi Moshe Kartavi disagrees with the Rashba. According to him, bar
Pada's ruling of 'Kedoshos ve'Chozros u'Kedoshos' is based directly on the
fact that he holds 'Kedushah Lo Pak'ah Bichdi'.
Why must that be the case?
(b) Why does it therefore follow that Ula, who holds 'Kedushah Pak'ah
Bichdi' disagrees with the concept of 'Kedoshos ve'Chozros u'Kedoshos'?
(c) Then why did Ula not specifically argue with bar Pada with regard to
'Kedoshos ve'Chozros u'Kedoshos'?
(d) Rebbi Moshe Kartabi proves his point from a Yerushalmi.
we follow the opinion of bar Pada (as it would appear from that Yerushalmi),
does he also argue with the Rashba regarding someone who invites his friend
to acquire a field with Chazakah' until he goes to Yerushalayim (adding
me'Achshav)'? Will we be able to learn that from Hekdesh?
(a) The Rashba for his part, had second thoughts about his proof regarding
someone who invites his friend to acquire a field with Chazakah' until he
goes to Yerushalayim (adding me'Achshav)' from Hekdesh.
Answers to questions
On what grounds
does he now feel inclined to say that, although in the Seifa of the Mishnah,
Ula agrees that 'Kedoshos ve'Chozros u'Kedoshos', he will not apply the same
S'vara in the above case?
(b) What will he say in the case of someone who says 'Karka Zeh la'Aniyim Ad