The Edit B'sit Edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, begins today with a dedication from Mr. Uri Nidam, may Hashem protect and sustain him, in honor of all the members of the minyan, all the participants in the Daf Yomi, and in honor of the rabbi, may he continue to succeed in all his endeavors. Today's daf is Nedarim daf chof chet. It is also being studied for the merit of the soul of Avraham ben Esther, may the spirit of Hashem rest upon him in Gan Eden, amen. We also pray for a complete recovery for Shelomo ben Miriam, Shaul Chai Gavriel ben Sarah, Sarah bat Rachel, Yosef ben Sarah, and Tinok ben Dina. May it be Your will, O Lord, to heal them, and may their healing be close at hand, and so may it be Your will, and let us say amen.
We begin today's daf on chof zayin amud bet, starting with a new mishna. Nodarim, we make nedarim, to protect ourselves from harm from robbers, bandits, and tax collectors, by declaring something as terumah, even if it is not terumah. What does this case refer to? Rashi, and actually Ran, explains that we make a neder to protect ourselves from harm. What is harm? It refers to murder, as in the case of Jewish bandits who kill people. If someone approaches you and threatens to kill you unless you give him money, and you say you cannot give him this money because it is terumah, you make a neder stating that if this is not terumah, you will not eat this item. This declaration serves to show that the item is indeed terumah. The Rishonim explain that while these bandits may not be concerned about murder, they are afraid of terumah because it carries a severe punishment from Heaven.
Thus, once they know the item is terumah, they will back off. This is how the Rishonim understand it. Tosafot adds that they are willing to kill over monetary issues, but when it comes to consuming something that is an issur, like terumah, they will be cautious. As for tax collectors, they are less scrupulous, as they take things without regard for the law. In all these cases, the declaration is made that this item is terumah, even though it is not. The intention is to avoid the robbers, bandits, and tax collectors. The mishna states that Beit Shammai says you can make such a neder in all cases except for a shvuah, while Beit Hillel says you can even make a shvuah.
Beit Shammai agrees with the initial part of the mishna, that you can make a neder, declaring, “Konam, this item is forbidden to me if it is not terumah,” to emphasize its importance. However, they prohibit a shvuah, stating that one cannot swear that this item is terumah. The reason for this is that a shvuah is more severe, as the Ran explains, because it states that one will not be absolved from the consequences of such a declaration. Beit Hillel, on the other hand, permits even a shvuah in this context, allowing one to declare that this item will be assur to him if it is not terumah. They clarify that one does not swear that it is terumah, but rather that it is assur to him if it is not terumah, and such a shvuah is not considered valid, as it is made under duress.
Beit Shammai further argues that one should not initiate a neder unless prompted, while Beit Hillel contends that one may initiate a declaration to demonstrate the seriousness of the situation. The Ran explains that Beit Shammai's stance is that one should not offer to make a neder unless the other party requests it. Beit Hillel, however, encourages initiating the declaration to emphasize the importance of the item being terumah.
In another disagreement, Beit Shammai states that one should not open a discussion with a neder if the other party does not prompt it, while Beit Hillel says one may open the discussion freely. The mishna continues with examples of how to declare a neder. If someone instructs another to declare that his wife cannot benefit from him, and he adds that his children also cannot benefit, Beit Shammai says that the wife is permitted, while the children remain forbidden because he added unnecessary restrictions. Beit Hillel, however, argues that both the wife and children are permitted, as the intention behind the addition is understood.
The Gemara begins by questioning the validity of the declarations made under duress. It states that the law of the land is the law, and thus one is obligated to pay taxes. However, if a tax collector is not following the law, one may declare that the item is terumah to protect oneself. The discussion continues with the implications of the declarations made, particularly in cases involving tax collectors and bandits.
As the Gemara progresses, it explores various scenarios where a neder is made, including the case of declaring items as korban if they are not cut or burnt. The Gemara raises questions regarding the validity of these declarations, particularly when conditions are applied, such as assuming that the items will be cut or burnt. The discussion highlights the importance of intention and the circumstances surrounding the declarations made.
The conclusion drawn from these discussions emphasizes the need for clarity in declarations and the understanding of the implications of the words spoken. The discussions reflect the intricate nature of halachic rulings and the importance of intention in the observance of Jewish law.
Baruch Hashem le'olam, amen and amen.