Resources and Review Test for Nedarim 70
There is a מחלוקת between the רמב"ם and most other ראשונים as to which נדרים the father can be מפיר. Most ראשונים (רמב"ן, רא"ש, etc.) hold the father can only be מפיר the same type of נדרים which the husband can be מפיר which are נדרי עינוי נפש and דברים שבינו לבינה. However, the רמב"ם in הלכות נדרים פּרק י"ב הל׳ א holds that the father can be מפיר all נדרים. There is a third שיטה that is brought by the טור in סימן רל"͏ד of רבינו יחיאל that says that before she gets married the father can be מפיר all נדרים like the רמב"ם , but after she gets married and then the husband dies and she goes back to the father the father can only be מפיר נדרי עינוי נפש. The קרבן נתנאל in פּרק י"א אות ה asks on the רמב"ם that our משנה that says how a father’s power is stronger than the husband. Shouldn’t it have mentioned that a father can be מפיר all נדרים and a husband cant? That should be a clear proof that the other ראשונים are correct! The דבר יעקב in אות ו suggests it is talking about a case where she is an ארוסה but he admits its דוחק.
The גמרא has a ספק if a person is מקיים a נדר for an hour and then wants it to be מופר after that. Do we say that once he was מקיים the נדר for any amount of time, it can’t be מופר anymore, or do we say that you can be מקיים a נדר for a short amount of time. The מנחת שלמה has a really interesting חקירה in this: on the side that the הקמה stands, is it because we say that once the הקמה begins it spreads to the rest of time, or are we saying that the הקמה actually goes away after an hour, but once the father used his right to הקמה already he loses his right to הפרה forever. The נפקה מינה would be that according to some opinions, if the husband is מקיים a נדר, the wife can no longer be שואל on it. If you hold the הקמה spread to after the hour, then she can never be שואל on it. However, if you hold that the הקמה stopped but that the husband lost his right to be מפיר, then the woman could later be שואל on her נדר. He thinks it is more מסתבר like the second צד and that she could be שואל on the נדר. While the מנחת שלמה doesn’t quote any sources, the דבר יעקב in אות ד thinks this is a מחלוקת ראשונים, as the רא"ש here when he explains the צד that its מקויים forever, says exactly those words—that once its מקויים its מקויים forever. However, the ריטב"א earlier on דף כ"ח ע"ב(towards the end) explains our גמרא and says that perhaps it is a גזרת הכתוב that a husband loses his right to be מפיר after he was מקיים even for a short time. That מחלוקת sounds exactly like Reb Shlomo Zalman’s חקירה and he seemed to think the ריטב"א was more מסתבר. What’s even more interesting is that the ריטב"א there is coming to answer another question: why is it that when you tell a lady הרי את מקודשת לי ליום or הרי זה מוקדש ליום the קדושה spreads and it is אסור לעולם because לא פּקעה קדושה מכדי, yet when you make a נדר to not eat cake for a day it’s not מתפּשט לעולם and you can eat cake the next day without התרת חכם. In answering that question (which is that there is a difference between a lower level איסור like making something אסור on some people where the איסור goes away on its own vs. a higher level איסור where it is אסור on all people) he explains why our גמראby הקמה might be a lower lever איסור where it is only אסור on a few people and yet still may not be פּקעה בכדי. The notes on the bottom of the ריטב"א by רב יפהן point out that the fact that the ריטב"א has to even discuss it should be a great proof that the ריטב"א holds like those who say הקמה adds strength to the נדר, because if it is just a ביטול זכות הפרה, then the concept of לא פּקעה קדושה מכדי would not be relevant.
New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters
Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder
Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander
Rabbi Ari Keilson - Maarei Mekomos