REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nedarim 69
(a) Rava (or Rabah) asks whether the Hekem of a husband or a father is subject to
She'eilah or not.
What exactly is the She'eilah time-wise? When did he make the
Hekem, when does he make the She'eilah and when does he subsequently intend to make
(b) Is there any logical reason to say 'Yesh She'eilah be'Hefer'?
(c) Then why does Rava ask whether one may not do so?
(d) We resolve both She'eilos from Rebbi Yochanan.
What does Rebbi Yochanan say?
(a) Rabah asks what the Din will be if someone says to his wife 'Kiyem Lechi, Kiyem
Lechi', and went on to annul the first Neder.
What is he asking?
(b) We resolve the She'eilah from a statement by Rava.
What did Rava say? In which
regard did he say it?
(c) Rabah asks further what the Din will be if the husband says 'Kiyem Lechi u'Mufar
Lechi, ve'Lo Tachol Hakamah Ela-im-Kein Chalah Hafarah'.
Why must he hold that, in
any event, the Hakamah does not take effect?
(d) Why then, do we later accept the possibility that in the case of 'Kayam Lechi
Sha'ah, u'Mufar Lechi Sha'ah', the Kiyum does take effect?
(a) On what ground might the Hafarah ...
Answers to questions
(b) According to the first side of the She'eilah, why did he not specify that he
wants them to fall in that order (like he specified that the Hakamah should come into
effect without the Hafarah)?
- ... not take effect?
- ... take effect in spite of the order?
(c) What did the Noder really want to happen, and why did he stipulate the way he
(d) Why did he not stipulate the other way round ('ve'Lo Tachol Hafarah Ela-im-Kein
(a) We learned in a Mishnah in Temurah 'Harei Zu Temuras Olah, Temuras Shelamim,
Harei Zu Temuras Olah, Divrei Rebbi Meir'. Rebbi Yossi disagrees. What does Rebbi
Yossi say in a case of 'Harei Zu Temuras Olah, ve'Achar-Kach Temuras Shelamim, Harei
Zu Temuras Olah'?
(b) What do they both hold in a case of 'Lo Tachol Zu Ela-im-Kein Tachol Zu'?
(c) They argue when the Noder says 'Temuras Olah, Temuras Shelamim'. Rebbi Meir holds
that, since he did not just say 'Temuras Olah u'Shelamim', it is as if he said
'Tachol Zu ve'Achar-Kach Tachol Zu'.
What does Rebbi Yossi say? Why might the Noder
have added the second 'Temuras'?
(a) How do we now resolve Rabah's She'eilah according to Rebbi Yossi?
(b) In view of the principle 'Kol she'Eino be'Zeh Achar Zeh, Afilu be'Bas Achas
Eino', why do we not negate both statements in view of the principle 'Kol she'Eino
be'Zeh Achar Zeh, Afilu be'Vas Achas Eino'?
(c) Can we resolve the She'eilah according to Rebbi Meir, too?
(d) Why can we not arrive at this conclusion on the basis of the fact that 'Kayam
Lechi, Mufar Lechi' does not contain a superfluous Lashon (implying that they
*should* come into effect simultaneously), like 'Temuras Olah, Temuras Shelamim does
(implying that they *should*?
(a) Rabah then asks what the Din will be if a husband or father says 'Kayam u'Mufar
Answers to questions
What is the alternative wording of the She'eilah?
(b) What is the She'eilah? Why should the Hafarah not take effect?
(c) We resolve this She'eilah from a statement of Rabah himself.
What did Rabah
say? What is the case?
(d) And what is his She'eilah concerning someone who says to his wife or daughter
'Kayam Lechi ha'Yom'?