Nedarim 42 - December 6, 12 Kislev

Study Guide Nedarim 42 This week’s learning is sponsored by the Mondrow family in memory of Irving “poppy” Mauskopf, Yechezkel ben Rachel and Avraham. "A man who had complete faith in Hashem. He exemplified the quote: “Who is rich? One who is content with his lot. May his neshama had an Aliyah."   Today's daf is sponsored by David and Mitzi Geffen in loving memory of Mitzi's father, Jack Lock, of Harrisburg PA, who passed away two years ago. "He was so proud that all 4 of his children made Aliyah to Israel, and that his “tribe” grew during his lifetime to nearly 100 family members, spanning 3 generations all in Israel. He was a generous and loving husband, father, grandfather, uncle and brother who is sorely missed.” Today's daf is sponsored by Alex Lipton in honor of his father, Richie. "Happy Hebrew birthday! Wishing you a great year ahead!" If one vowed to not benefit from another, one cannot go into the other's field and pick fruits. But if the vow was during the sabbatical (shmita) year, one still cannot go in the field but one can pick fruits that are hanging outside the field. If the wording of the vow included only food, then one can go into the field. Statements of Rav and Shmuel and Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish are quoted, regarding a particular issue in our Mishna. If the vow was made before the shmita year, and then the shmita year starts, since the fruits then become ownerless, are they still forbidden or are they no longer considered included in the vow? Initially, the Gemara thinks that the two groups of rabbis disagree with each other about whether or not one can forbid something now even when it is (at a later point) no longer in their domain. However, this does not take into account that each group of rabbis spoke about different language used - one had said "this property" and the other "my property." A further difficulty is raised but is resolved. A different way of understanding the debate is suggested but also rejected. Eventually, they explain that there is no debate at all - each group of rabbis was referring to a different case, and, in fact, they all agree! If one's field also becomes ownerless in the shmita year so that people can come into their field to collect fruits, why is one who is forbidden to benefit not permitted to come into the field to collect the fruits? Two possible answers are brought. If one vowed to not benefit from another, one cannot lend the other items, lend money or sell to them, neither can one borrow from the other items or money or buy from them.