Nedarim 68: Nisroknah

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 68

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara cites a lengthy, five-part Beraisa which discusses the applications of "Nisroknah." The RAN explains the Chidush of each part. Some of the Ran's comments are difficult to follow. At some points he writes that if the father or the husband did Hafarah and then died, the woman's Neder is considered to have been weakened, while elsewhere he writes that if the father or the husband did Hafarah and then died, the Hafarah is ineffectual and does not weaken the Neder.

We continue our exploration of vows and oaths including the way the Dead Sea community interpreted the biblical verse (Num 30:17)

Nedarim 67: Conspiring InLaws

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 67

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The first topic in the 10th perek is the status of a betrothed young woman, who is under both her father's authority and the authority of her betrothed. The Sages derived from the verses in the Torah that address the nullification of vows that a betrothed young woman's vows are nullified only if both her father and her husband nullify them. 

Underlying this Mishna is the teaching (Numbers 30) that women's vows can be nullified by their fathers and husbands.  Upon learning of the vows of their daughters and wives, fathers and husbands can either ratify or nullify those vows but only on the same day that they hear of them.  

We explore when conflict arises between in-laws and Halachic and social psychological insights to conflict resolution.

Nedarim 66: Beauty

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 66

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A new Mishna teaches about dissolving a vow to enhance the honour of the person making the vow or his family. The example of someone vowing that an "ugly woman" is konam for him when in fact she is beautiful - or that she is black when she is white, or short when she is tall, is repeated from an earlier daf. Another example - this one of a woman who is 'beautified’.

The man who named her as konam to him is confronted by Rabbi Yishmael who helps him realize that this beautified woman should in fact be permitted to him - and his vow is dissolved.

Another example is shared regarding the perception of beauty: a woman had a false tooth (we learn that it was likely made of wood and thus rotten and 'ugly') replaced by a gold tooth made by Rabbi Yishmael, thus dissolving the vow, and allowing her to marry.

We explore the notion of beauty in Rabbinics and feminist critiques thereof

Nedarim 65: Secret Vows

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 65

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A story is told of King Zedkiah who found King Nebuchadnezzar eating a live rabbit.  Nebuchadnezzar  had King Zedkiah swear an oath, shavuah, that he would not tell anyone of this transgression.  Later, when he was physically suffering, Zedkiah asked the judges of the Sanhedrin to dissolve his oath, and they did so, allowing Zedkiah to share what he saw.  Nebuchadnezzar learned that people were treating him with less respect and he demanded to know why Zedkiah was permitted to dissolve his oath without the subject of the oath in his presence.  Realizing their errors, the judges all moved from sitting on cushions to sitting on the floor, demonstrating acknowledgement of their halachic breach.    We explore this relationship from historical and archaeological perspectives.

Nedarim 64: Limits of Honor

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 64

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The new perek (9) begins with the following MISHNA:

Rabbi Eliezer says: When halakhic authorities are approached with regard to the dissolution of a vow, they may broach dissolution with a person who took a vow by raising the issue of how taking the vow ultimately degraded the honor of his father and mother, asking him the following: Had you known that your parents would experience public shame due to your lax attitude toward your vow, would you still have taken the vow?

We explore the Halacha of Kibbud Av v’em as well as the limits of the command.

Nedarim 63: First Rains

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 63

To download, click/tap here: PDF

If one takes a vow until the rains, or until there are rains, the vow remains in effect until the second rain of the rainy season falls. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the time of the second rainfall arrives, even if rain does not fall. If one takes a vow until the rains end, the vow remains in effect until the entire month of Nisan has ended; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Rebbi Meir says that the first rain is the third of Cheshvan, the second rain is the seventh and the third rain is the twenty third.

Rebbi Yehudah holds that the first rain is the seventh of Cheshvan, the second rain is the seventeenth and the third rain is the twenty third.

Rebbi Yosi holds that the first rain is the seventeenth of Cheshvan, the second rain is the twenty third and the third rain is Rosh Chodesh Kislev.

The time of the first rain is when we start reciting v'Sen Tal u’Matar.

We explore the history of the recitation of the rain prayer and how it differed historically and among different communities.

Nedarim 62: כִתְרָהּ שֶׁל תּוֹרָה

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 62

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara relates an incident: A certain man found Rabbi Tarfon eating figs from his field at the time when most of the knives had been set aside. He placed Rabbi Tarfon in a sack, lifted him up, and carried him to throw him into the river. Rabbi Tarfon said to him: Woe to Tarfon, for this man is killing him. When that man heard that he was carrying the great Rabbi Tarfon, he left him and fled. Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Ḥananya ben Gamliel: All the days of that righteous man, Rabbi Tarfon, he was distressed over this matter, saying: Woe is me, for I made use of the crown of Torah, as Rabbi Tarfon was only released out of respect for his Torah learning.

We explore other versions of this story (Yerushalmi) and the notion of misusing the crown of torah (discussing the RAMBAM’s view of being paid for teaching Torah).

Nedarim 61: Harvest

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 61

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A new Mishna tells of a vow that forbids something to a person until the grain harvest, or until the grape harvest, or until the olive harvest, the vow is in effect until that date arrives.  The principle is that a time-fixed event ends a vow upon its arrival.    However, if a person vows that s/he is forbidden from something "until it will be [the grain or the grape or the olive harvest]", that vow is valid until the event ends.  And if an event has no fixed time associated with it, then the vow is in effect only until the occasion arrives.

The Mishna goes on to say that if a person says "until the summer (kayitz)", or "until it will be summer" regarding the end of his/her vow, that vow is honoured until the people begin to bring fruit into their homes in baskets.  If s/he says, "Until the summer has passed", however, the vow stays in effect until people put away the knives that cut harvested figs.  Thus a custom helps the rabbis to determine when the summer begins and ends; when a vow begins and ends.

We explore the connection between Shavuot and harvest festivals as well as the inner metaphor of harvesting in spiritual traditions.

Nedarim 60: Time Division

For the source text click/tap here: Nerdarim 60

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna of our new perek 8 stated: [If his vow was for] “this year,” wine is forbidden (to him) for the rest of the year. The Gemora inquires: If one said, “Wine shall be konam upon me with regard to my tasting for a day,” what is the halachah? Is the law akin to a case where he said “today” (and the neder would lapse at nightfall), or is it like the case of “one day” (where the neder would be effective for twenty-four hours)? 

The Gemora attempts to resolve this: Come and hear from our Mishna: If one said, “Wine shall be konam upon me with regard to my tasting today,” wine is forbidden (to him) only until nightfall. But (we may infer), if he said, “a day,” it is as if he said, “one day” (and the neder would be effective for twenty-four hours). The Gemora disagrees: Let us consider the latter part of the Mishna: If the terminology of his vow was “for one day,” wine is forbidden (to him) from day to day (i.e., a day of twenty-four hours). But (we may infer), if he said, “a day,” it is as if he said “today” (and the neder would lapse at nightfall). 

We explore the halachic notion of time and the division of time as applied to the molad.

Nedarim 59: כׇּל הַנּוֹדֵר — כְּאִילּוּ בָּנָה בָּמָה

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 59

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our daf states:

… "say that there is another distinction between konamot and other cases where one may request dissolution by a halakhic authority.

Granted, in the case of konamot, there is a mitzva to request that a halakhic authority dissolve them, due to the statement of Rabbi Natan, as Rabbi Natan said:

Anyone who vows, it is as if he built a personal altaroutside the Temple, and one who fulfills that vow, it is as though he burns an offering upon it.

However, in the case of teruma, what mitzva is there to request that a halakhic authority dissolve its designation? Therefore, items forbidden by konamot are considered items that can become permitted, and teruma is not.

We explore the nature and history of Bamot in the biblical period as a basis for its use as a metaphor for breaking the oral law…

Nedarim 58: הַמְנַכֵּשׁ עִם הַכּוּתִי בַּחֲסִיּוֹת

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 58

To download, click/tap here: PDF

One who weeds ḥasayot with a Samaritan may eat a casual meal from them without tithing, as any untithed produce may be eaten in the framework of a casual meal. And when he completes the labor on the ḥasayot, places them into a pile, and they require tithing, he tithes them as produce that is definitely obligated in tithing, not as doubtfully tithed produce, as the assumption is that the Samaritan did not tithe the ḥasayot.

We explore the flora of the Allium family as well as the use of weeds as a metaphor in literature and healing.

Nedarim 57: Onions

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 57

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara attempts to prove that the Gidulin are not like the Ikar and are permitted, and that they can annul the Ikar. The Gemara quotes the statement of Rebbi Yitzchak in the name of Rebbi Yochanan who says that when a person separated Terumos and Ma'aseros from onions and then replanted the onions in the ground and they increased in size such that there is more new growth of onion than the original growth of onion, he is obligated to separate Ma'aser not only from the new part that grows but from the entire onion, including the original growth. This ruling clearly indicates that any new growth which sprouts forth from an object which is exempt from Terumos and Ma'aseros is obligated in Terumos and Ma'aseros (that is, the Gidulin are not like the Ikar), and that they can annul the Ikar and cause the Ikar to become obligated in Ma'aser as well.

We explore the history biological properties and dubious health benefits of onions as well as the curious statement (Nidah 17) by Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai that one who eats a peeled onion, egg or garlic that has been left sitting out overnight is literally endangering his life and will be ultimately judged as a person who took his own life.

Nedarim 56: עַרְסָא דְגַדָּא

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 56

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara asks: What is a dargash? Ulla said: It is a bed of good fortune, placed in the house as a fortuitous omen, and not designated for sleeping. The Rabbis said to Ulla: That which we learned in a mishna: When the people servethe king the meal of comfort after he buries a relative, all the people recline on the ground and the king reclines on a dargash during the meal. 

 Ula explains that a Dargash is an "Arsa d'Gada" -- a special bed designated exclusively for bringing good fortune into the home, upon which no one sits or sleeps, as the MEFARESH here and RASHI in Moed Katan (27a, DH Arsa d'Gada) explain. RASHI in Sanhedrin (20a) adds that it brings good fortune through "Nichush," superstition.

Why is one permitted to set up a bed in one's home for the purpose of Nichush? The Torah explicitly prohibits Nichush (Vayikra 19:26)! Moreover, when the RAN here explains the meaning of the word "Gada" ("Gad," or "Mazal"), he cites the Gemara in Shabbos (67b) which says that a person who attempts to improve his luck by saying, "Let my Mazal ('Gad') become fortuitous," transgresses the prohibition against Nichush. Rebbi Yehudah there adds that "Gad" refers to a type of idolatry, as he proves from a verse in Yeshayah (65:11). (CHIDUSHEI HA'RAN, Sanhedrin 20a)

We explore the use of such good luck charms in the talmud and its borrowing from ancient pagan sources in Dura Europa Synagogue.

Nedarim 55: Fierce Landscapes

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 55

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Rava said to him that it means: Once a person renders himself like a wilderness, deserted before all, the Torah is given to him as a gift [mattana], as it is stated: “And from the wilderness Mattana.”

And once it is given to him as a gift, God bequeaths [naḥalo] it to him, as it is stated: “And from Mattana Nahaliel.”And once God bequeaths it to him, he rises to greatness, as it is stated: And from Nahaliel, Bamot, which are elevated places. And if he elevates himself and is arrogant about his Torah, the Holy One, Blessed be He, degrades him,

And if he reverses his arrogance and becomes humble, the Holy One, Blessed be He, elevates him.

When Rav Yosef heard that interpretation, he understood that Rava was aware of the error of his ways in acting arrogantly toward his teacher, and was pacified by Rava’s display of humility.

We explore the notion of Torah being given in a wilderness and the connection between wilderness experiences and humility.

Nedarim 54: דִּלּוּעִין

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 54

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our new Perek begins with the following MISHNA:

For one who vows that vegetables are forbidden to him, it is permitted for him to eat gourds, as people typically do not include gourds in the category of vegetables; and Rabbi Akiva prohibits him from eating gourds

Rabbi Akiva said: it is apparent that gourds are included in the category of vegetables, although they differ from other vegetables, and therefore, the agent purchases gourds and explains that he found only gourds.

We explore the genus Lagenaria siceraria and its ancient uses as well as the kikayon of Jonah.

Nedarim 53: שֶׁמֶן שׁוּמְשְׁמִין

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 53

To download, click/tap here: PDF

One who vows that wine is forbidden to him is permitted to partake of apple wine, i.e., cider, as the unspecified term wine refers only to grape wine. One who vows that oil is forbidden to him is permitted to partake of sesame oil, as the unspecified term oil refers only to olive oil. One who vows that honey is forbidden to him is permittedto eat date honey, as the unspecified term honey refers only to bee honey.

We explore the history chemistry and phylogenetics of sesame and other oils uses in antiquity.

Nedarim 52: מוּתָּר בַּקּוֹם

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 52

To download, click/tap here: PDF

MISHNA: One who vows that milk is forbidden to him is permitted to partake of whey [kum], the liquid that separates from milk when it is made into cheese. But Rabbi Yosei prohibits him from partaking of whey. If one vows that whey is forbidden to him, he is permitted to partake of milk.

What is the difference between milk and whey?

We explore the chemistry and antiquity of whey and whey products including the kashrus ramifications of lactose and whey products.

Nedarim 51: Shibuta, Fishy Tale

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 51

To download, click/tap here: PDF

If one says: Fish or fishes are konam for me, and for that reason I will not taste them, he is prohibited from eating all of them, whether large fish or small, whether salted or unsalted, whether raw or cooked. But he is permitted to taste minced sardines and to taste fish brine, as these are not included in the common meaning of the word fish. One who vows that tzaḥana, a concoction of whole and chopped fish, is forbidden to him is prohibited from eating minced sardines as well, but he is permitted to eat fish brine and fish gravy [morays]. One who vows that minced sardinesare forbidden to him is prohibited from eating fish brine and from eating fish gravy.

We explore the cultural history of fish in talmud and the galactic grey areas around fins and scale...including the curious legends surrounding the shibuta….

Nedarim 50: זִיל הוֱיֵ בּיֵ רַב

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 50

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our daf is the source for one of the greatest Talmudic love stories – Rabbi Akiva and Rachel.

Rachel was the daughter of Bar Kalba Savua, who came from one of the wealthiest and most politically powerful families in Israel during the time of the destruction of the Second Temple. Akiva, a 40-year-old shepherd who worked for Bar Kalba Savua, asked Rachel to marry him. She agreed to do so if he promised to devote himself to the study of Torah after their wedding. Akiva agreed to do so, and they secretly married.

Upon learning of this Bar Kalba Savua threw Rachel out of his house and disowned her, condemning her to a life of poverty while Akiva studied. The Talmud relates that Akiva returned after 12 years of study, but before entering his house he heard his wife say that she would be willing to have her husband continue to learn for another 12 years. Taking her on her word, he returned to the beit midrash for another 12 years, returning home with 24,000 pairs of students.

We explore the man and the legend.

Nedarim 49: מוֹרֶה וְרָוֵי

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 49

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A certain Roman noblewoman said to Rabbi Yehudah, “A teacher and a drunkard (she assumed he was intoxicated based upon his shiny face)!” He replied, “I do not taste any wine except for that of kiddush and havdalah and the four cups of Passover night. And because of those four cups, I am compelled to bind my temples from Passover until Shavuos. The Gemora notes that his face shone because it is written that a man’s wisdom brightens his face.

We explore the history of wine in the talmud and incidence of alcoholism in the clergy and among Jews.