ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nedarim 55
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, dry Egyptian beans are included in Dagan -
because they are placed in a pile and stored.
(b) The two categories of crops that Dagan does not incorporate, according
to Rebbi Meir are - the fruit of the trees and vegetables (see previous
Mishnah, where the Tana also precluded legumes from the category of
(c) According to the Chachamim - Dagan incorporates the five species of
grain (wheat, barley, rye, oats and spelt) exclusively.
(d) Rebbi Meir says - that 'ha'Noder min ha'Tevu'ah' incorporates the five
species of grain exclusively.
(a) Chizkiyah instituted that Yisrael (who would previously wait for the
Kohanim and the Levi'im to come to the granary for their Matanos) should
bring all their T'rumos and Ma'asros to the Beis ha'Mikdash - because the
people were lax in giving them.
(b) According to Rebbi Meir (who maintains that whatever is stored is
included in 'Dagan'), the Pasuk ("ve'Chi'Ferotz ha'Davar ... ") having
mentioned "Reishis Dagan", adds "ve'Chol Tevu'as ha'Sadeh" - to include the
fruit of the trees and vegetables.
(c) Rebbi Yochanan informs us that everyone agrees (even the Chachamim of
Rebbi Meir) that 'Tevu'ah' incorporates only the five species of grain. We
might have thought otherwise - because 'Alalta' (the Aramaic for 'Tevu'ah')
implies all kinds of produce.
(d) In light of Rebbi Yochanan's statement, Rava explains the Pasuk in
Divrei Hayamim, which adds 'Kol Tevu'as ha'Sadeh' after having mentioned
'Reishis Dagan' (which already incorporates the five species of grain, even
according to the Chachamim) - by differentiating between 'Tevu'ah' (which
applies exclusively to the five species of grain) and 'Tevu'as Sadeh', which
(a) When Mar bar Shmuel bequeathed Rava in his will thirteen thousand Zuz
from 'Alalta di'Nehar Panya', he sent Rav Yosef (his Rebbe) a She'eilah - as
to what Mar bar Shmuel meant by 'Alalta'.
(b) When Rav Yosef tried to prove from our Mishnah that Tevu'ah is confined
to the five species of grain - Abaye objected on the grounds that Mar bar
Shmuel did not write 'Tevu'ah' in his will, but 'Alalta', which, as we have
already learned, is more inclusive than 'Tevu'ah'.
(c) It transpired that this was not really what Rava wanted to know -
because he knew it already. What he really wanted to know was - whether
'Alalta' incorporated the rental for ships and houses (which Mar bar Shmuel
apparently had owned).
(d) He thought that, perhaps the rental for ships and houses is not
considered 'Alalta', because they tend to depreciate. On the other hand -
the extent of their depreciation is not known in advance, in which case it
may still be included in 'Alalta'.
(a) Rav Yosef was nevertheless cross with Rava for troubling him about
something that he seemed to know himself. Rava reacted to that - by going to
visit his Rebbe on Erev Yom Kipur.
(b) Rav Yosef suspected that Rava might have appeared at his home - when he
tasted the wine, which Rava (having first obtained permission from the
Shamash) had diluted. This is because Rava was famous for his preparation of
wine (diluting it exactly three parts water to one part wine).
(c) The name of Rav Yosef bar Chama's son was - Rava.
(a) Rav Yosef instructed Rava to explain some of the Pesukim of 'Shiras
ha'Be'er' in Chukas. Rava explained ...
1. ... "u'mi'Midbar Matanah" to mean - that if someone makes himself Hefker
(adopts the attitude that everything is secondary to Torah), the Torah is
given to him as a Divine gift (he will receive tremendous Divine inspiration
in his learning).
(b) If someone who allows this elevation to go to his head - Hashem will
lower him again (as the Pasuk continues "u'mi'Bamos ha'Gai"), and not only
that, but He will sink him into the ground ("ve'Nishkafah al-P'nei
2. ... "u'mi'Matanah Nachali'el" - that once he receives Torah as a gift, he
becomes Hashem's inheritance.
3. ... "u'mi'Nachali'el Bamos" - that once he becomes Hashem's inheritance
he will rise to greatness.
(c) And he explained the Pasuk "Kol Gei Yinasei" (even though it is written
in a different Seifer) - to mean that should he do Teshuvah, Hashem will
elevate him once more.
(d) Rav Yosef asked Rava for this explanation specifically now - to teach
him (before Yom Kipur, or perhaps he suspected that this was the root of his
['unwarranted'] She'eilah) that pride doesn't pay (and perhaps the power of
(a) We learned in a Beraisa 'ha'Noder min ha'Dagan, Asur Af be'Pul ha'Mitzri
Yavesh, u'Mutar be'Lach '. He is also permitted to eat - rice and wheat
which is divided into two, three or four.
(b) If someone declares ...
1. ... 'Peiros ha'Shanah Alai' - kid-goats, lambs, milk, eggs and fledglings
are not included.
(c) The latter Neder will not be valid at all - if it is for an unlimited
time-period (or perhaps if it covers a time-period that is not possible to
2. ... 'Gidulei Shanah Alai' - they are.
(d) If someone declares ...
1. ... 'Peiros ha'Aretz Alai' - mushrooms are not included.
2. ... 'Gidulei Karka Alai' - they are.
(a) The B'rachah that one recites over salt, brine and mushrooms - is
'she'ha'Kol Nihyah bi'Devaro'.
(b) We do not recite 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah' over mushrooms - because they
receive their nourishment from the air, and not from the ground.
(c) The Tana describes the above as 'Ein Gidulo min ha'Aretz'. We amend this
to read - 'Ein Yonek min ha'Aretz'.
(a) The Tosefta states that a Neder from 'Tirosh' incorporates all sweet
drinks but not wine - because as regards Nedarim, we follow the vernacular,
and in the vernacular, that is what 'Tirosh means.
(b) It might well be however, that if *we* were to say 'Konem Alai Tirosh',
we would be forbidden to drink wine, but not other sweet drinks - because
the Tosefta's ruling is confined to people who speak in Lashon ha'Kodesh. As
far as those who speak other languages is concerned, 'Tirosh' means wine,
and wine only.
(c) Someone who declares ...
1. ... 'Konem Alai Mazon' - is forbidden to eat only things that are
prepared from the five species of grain.
2. ... 'Kol ha'Zan Alai' - may not eat anything other than salt and brine.
(a) If someone declared 'Konem Alai K'sus' - he would be allowed to wear
sack-cloth, a curtain and a Chamilah (a kind of curtain).
(b) According to the Tana Kama of our Mishnah, if someone declared 'Konem
Alai Tzemer' or 'Konem Alai' Pishtan', he would be permitted to wear pieces
of raw wool or flax, respectively.
(c) Rebbi Yehudah maintains - that it depends on the circumstances. He
illustrates this - with a case of someone who perspired or who suffered from
bad breath when he carried raw wool or linen, and who subsequently declared
a Neder forbidding raw wool or linen to go on him. *He* would be permitted
to wear them.
(a) All the following are listed in a Beraisa:
1. A money-belt, a band that goes round the legs, a leather-maker's shirt
and apron, socks, an apron, pants and a hat - are included in the Neder not
to wear clothes.
(b) One is permitted to go out into the street on Shabbos - wearing a sack
to protect oneself from the rain.
2. One may walk in the street on Shabbos wearing a thick sackcloth, thick
cloth (Sigus) and curtains ...
3. ... but one may not do so, wearing an ark, a box or a mat.
(c) The reason that the Tana of the Beraisa specifically mention shepherds -
is (not to preclude other people, but) because they would be the ones who
would most likely take advantage of this concession.
(a) According to Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, whether or not, 'ha'Noder min
ha'Kesus' incorporates raw wool and flax, depends on circumstances. He
illustrated the case where the Noder obviously had in mind not to carry
them. In a Beraisa - he presents the case where the Noder obviously had in
1. ... not to wear raw wool - when he suffered from wearing raw wool (which
shrank and was too tight on him), and subsequently declared 'Konem Tzemer
(b) The Tana of our Mishnah and the Tana of the Beraisa argue over Rebbi
Yehudah's S'vara. According to the Tana of our Mishnah - Rebbi Yehudah (who
does not give the first example mentioned in the Beraisa) agrees with the
Tana Kama that, wherever there is no indication what the Noder means, the
Lashon implies wearing and not carrying. Whereas according to the Tana of
the Beraisa, unless there is an indication to the contrary, the Lashon
2. ... not to wear raw linen - when he perspired heavily from wearing raw
linen, and subsequently declared 'Konem Pishtan Oleh Alai'.
(c) We rule in this issue - like Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah.
(d) The Rambam however - rules like Rebbi Yehudah in the Beraisa.