Search

Nedarim 34

Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:

English
עברית
podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




Summary
Today’s daf is sponsored by Elliot Hearst in loving memory of his father, Moshe ben Pincus v’Flora on his 32nd yahrzeit yesterday. “He always was and continues to be a shining light in his loved ones’ lives.” 
There are two versions of the debate between Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi’s understanding of our Mishna. In the first version, one holds the Mishna allows the item to be returned only in the case where the returner’s property was forbidden to the one who lost their item and the other holds the Mishna is referring to both. In the second version, one holds that the case of the Mishna is only when the possessions of the one who lost an item are forbidden to the returner but not in the reverse case and the other holds the Mishna is referring to both. In each version, the Gemara raises a question from the Mishna’s last line: “If it is in a place where people get paid for returning lost items, the money goes to the Temple.” In the first version, the question is resolved. In the second version, it is not. Rava brings a law regarding the transgression of meila, misuse of consecrated property, in a case where one sanctified an ownerless item and then picked it up to either eat it or promised it as an inheritance to one’s children. What is the difference between the cases? Rav Chiya bar Avin asked Rava a question: If one says “My loaf is forbidden to you,” and then gifted it to that person, did they mean to forbid it only as long as it was their own and not if they gave it as a gift? Or was the focus of the sentence, it will be forbidden to you, and will therefore be forbidden forever and the person was saying it so as not to have the other pestering them to gift the item to them? Rava answers that the latter is the case, by providing a logical proof, but Rav Chiya questions his logic.

Nedarim 34

תְּנַן: מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹטְלִין עָלֶיהָ שָׂכָר — תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֲפִילּוּ בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה אֲסוּרִים עַל מַחְזִיר נָמֵי מַהְדַּר — הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹטְלִין עָלֶיהָ שָׂכָר תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ.

We learned in the mishna: In a place where one takes payment for returning a lost item, the benefit that he receives for returning the item should fall into the category of consecrated Temple property. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that even in a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, he returns it to him. This explanation is consistent with that which the mishna teaches: In a place where one takes payment for returning a lost item, the benefit that he receives for returning the item should fall into the category of consecrated Temple property.

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר כְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה אֲסוּרִים עַל מַחְזִיר לָא מַהְדַּר, אַמַּאי תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ?

However, according to the one who says that in a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, he may not return it to him, and the mishna is referring exclusively to a case where the property of the one returning the lost object is forbidden to the owner of the lost object, why should the benefit fall into the category of consecrated Temple property? It is not prohibited for him to benefit from the property of the owner.

אַחֲדָא קָתָנֵי.

The Gemara answers: The tanna of the mishna teaches about only one of the cases: The property of the one returning the lost object is forbidden to the owner, and the one returning the lost object refuses to accept compensation. In that case, the owner of the lost item benefits from the one returning the lost object by allowing him to keep the compensation. Therefore, the benefit is donated to the Temple treasury.

אִיכָּא דְּמַתְנֵי לַהּ בְּהַאי לִישָּׁנָא: פְּלִיגִי בַּהּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי. חַד אָמַר: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה אֲסוּרִין עַל מַחְזִיר, וּמִשּׁוּם פְּרוּטָה דְּרַב יוֹסֵף לָא שְׁכִיחַ. אֲבָל נִכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִים עַל בַּעַל אֲבֵדָה — לָא מַהְדַּר לֵיהּ, מִשּׁוּם דְּקָא מְהַנֵּי לֵיהּ.

There are those who teach the dispute in this formulation: Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi disagree about this. One said: They taught this only in a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, and the concern due to the peruta of Rav Yosef is not a concern, because it is not common. However, in a case where the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item, he may not return it to him, due to the fact that in doing so he benefits him.

וְחַד אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ נִכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִים עַל בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה — מוּתָּר. דְּכִי מַהְדַּר לֵיהּ — מִידֵּי דְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ קָמַהְדַּר לֵיהּ.

And one said: Even if the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item, it is permitted to return it to him, as when he returns it, he is returning to him something of his own and is not giving him anything new.

תְּנַן: מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹטְלִין עָלֶיהָ שָׂכָר — תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֲפִילּוּ בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִים עַל בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה מַהְדַּר — הַיְינוּ דִּמְתָרֵץ מָקוֹם.

We learned in the mishna: In a place where one takes payment for returning a lost item, the benefit that he receives for returning the item should fall into the category of consecrated Temple property. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that even if the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item he returns it to him, this is the reason that it is necessary to resolve the halakha in a place where one takes payment.

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִין, וְלָא מַהְדַּר, הֵיכִי מְתָרֵץ מָקוֹם? קַשְׁיָא.

However, according to the one who said that in a case where the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item he may not return it to him, how does he explain the halakha taught with regard to a place where one takes payment? Since the mishna is referring to a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, why is it prohibited for the owner of the lost item to keep the payment? It is not prohibited for him to benefit from the property of the one returning the lost item. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is difficult.

אָמַר רָבָא: הָיְתָה לְפָנָיו כִּכָּר שֶׁל הֶפְקֵר, וְאָמַר: ״כִּכָּר זוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ״, נְטָלָהּ לְאוֹכְלָהּ — מָעַל לְפִי כּוּלָּהּ. לְהוֹרִישָׁה לְבָנָיו — מָעַל לְפִי טוֹבַת הֲנָאָה שֶׁבָּהּ.

Rava said: In a case where there was a loaf of ownerless bread before a person, and he said: This loaf is consecrated, if he took the loaf to eat it, he misused consecrated property. His repayment to the Temple for that misuse is based on the loaf’s entire value. However, if his intent was not to take the loaf for himself but to bequeath it to his sons, he misused the consecrated property, and his repayment to the Temple is based on the discretionary benefit that he derived from the fact that his children are indebted to him for the bequest, as he himself derived no direct benefit from the loaf.

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין מֵרָבָא: ״כִּכָּרִי עָלֶיךָ״ וּנְתָנָהּ לוֹ בְּמַתָּנָה, מַהוּ? ״כִּכָּרִי״ אָמַר לוֹ, כִּי אִיתֵיהּ בִּרְשׁוּתֵיהּ הוּא דְּאָסוּר. אוֹ דִּלְמָא ״עָלֶיךָ״ אֲמַר לֵיהּ, עִילָּוֵיהּ שַׁוִּיתֵיהּ הֶקְדֵּשׁ?

Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin raised a dilemma before Rava. If one said to another: My loaf is konam for you, and then he gave it to him as a gift, what is the halakha? Should one infer: My loaf is forbidden, i.e., he said to him that when the loaf is in his possession, that is when it is forbidden, but when he gives him a gift, it is no longer in his possession and it is no longer forbidden? Or, perhaps the inference is: Forbidden to you, i.e., he said to him that he rendered the loaf for him like a consecrated item that is forbidden even after the loaf is no longer in his possession.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פְּשִׁיטָא דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּיַהֲבַהּ לֵיהּ בְּמַתָּנָה — אָסוּר. אֶלָּא ״כִּכָּרִי עָלֶיךָ״ לְאַפּוֹקֵי מַאי? לָאו לְאַפּוֹקֵי דְּאִי גַּנְבַהּ מִינֵּיהּ מִיגְנָב? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא, לְאַפּוֹקֵי דְּאִי אַזְמְנֵיהּ עֲלַהּ.

Rava said to him: It is obvious that although he gave it to the other person as a gift, it is forbidden. Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin asked him: But if that is so, when he said: My loaf is forbidden to you, with emphasis on the word my, what does it come to exclude? Does it not come to exclude a case where he stole it from him, as in that case it is permitted? The same would be true if he gave it to him as a gift. Rava said to him: No, it comes to exclude a case where he invited him to eat from the loaf before he vowed. In that case, that part of the loaf that he invited him to eat is his, and the owner cannot render it forbidden. However, even if he invited the other person before he vowed, the entire loaf remains forbidden if he gave it to him as a gift.

New to Talmud?

Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you. 

The Hadran Women’s Tapestry

Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories. 

I started learning at the beginning of the cycle after a friend persuaded me that it would be right up my alley. I was lucky enough to learn at Rabbanit Michelle’s house before it started on zoom and it was quickly part of my daily routine. I find it so important to see for myself where halachot were derived, where stories were told and to get more insight into how the Rabbis interacted.

Deborah Dickson
Deborah Dickson

Ra’anana, Israel

See video

Susan Fisher
Susan Fisher

Raanana, Israel

I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!

Anne Mirsky (1)
Anne Mirsky

Maale Adumim, Israel

I graduated college in December 2019 and received a set of shas as a present from my husband. With my long time dream of learning daf yomi, I had no idea that a new cycle was beginning just one month later, in January 2020. I have been learning the daf ever since with Michelle Farber… Through grad school, my first job, my first baby, and all the other incredible journeys over the past few years!
Sigal Spitzer Flamholz
Sigal Spitzer Flamholz

Bronx, United States

I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.

Beth Elster
Beth Elster

Irvine, United States

I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.

Patti Evans
Patti Evans

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

I never thought I’d be able to do Daf Yomi till I saw the video of Hadran’s Siyum HaShas. Now, 2 years later, I’m about to participate in Siyum Seder Mo’ed with my Hadran community. It has been an incredible privilege to learn with Rabbanit Michelle and to get to know so many caring, talented and knowledgeable women. I look forward with great anticipation and excitement to learning Seder Nashim.

Caroline-Ben-Ari-Tapestry
Caroline Ben-Ari

Karmiel, Israel

A friend mentioned that she was starting Daf Yomi in January 2020. I had heard of it and thought, why not? I decided to try it – go day by day and not think about the seven plus year commitment. Fast forward today, over two years in and I can’t imagine my life without Daf Yomi. It’s part of my morning ritual. If I have a busy day ahead of me I set my alarm to get up early to finish the day’s daf
Debbie Fitzerman
Debbie Fitzerman

Ontario, Canada

I’ve been wanting to do Daf Yomi for years, but always wanted to start at the beginning and not in the middle of things. When the opportunity came in 2020, I decided: “this is now the time!” I’ve been posting my journey daily on social media, tracking my progress (#DafYomi); now it’s fully integrated into my daily routines. I’ve also inspired my partner to join, too!

Joséphine Altzman
Joséphine Altzman

Teaneck, United States

I began my journey two years ago at the beginning of this cycle of the daf yomi. It has been an incredible, challenging experience and has given me a new perspective of Torah Sh’baal Peh and the role it plays in our lives

linda kalish-marcus
linda kalish-marcus

Efrat, Israel

I started learning Daf Yomi inspired by תָּפַסְתָּ מְרוּבֶּה לֹא תָּפַסְתָּ, תָּפַסְתָּ מוּעָט תָּפַסְתָּ. I thought I’d start the first page, and then see. I was swept up into the enthusiasm of the Hadran Siyum, and from there the momentum kept building. Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur gives me an anchor, a connection to an incredible virtual community, and an energy to face whatever the day brings.

Medinah Korn
Medinah Korn

בית שמש, Israel

Michelle has been an inspiration for years, but I only really started this cycle after the moving and uplifting siyum in Jerusalem. It’s been an wonderful to learn and relearn the tenets of our religion and to understand how the extraordinary efforts of a band of people to preserve Judaism after the fall of the beit hamikdash is still bearing fruits today. I’m proud to be part of the chain!

Judith Weil
Judith Weil

Raanana, Israel

I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!

Debbie Engelen-Eigles
Debbie Engelen-Eigles

Minnesota, United States

I started to listen to Michelle’s podcasts four years ago. The minute I started I was hooked. I’m so excited to learn the entire Talmud, and think I will continue always. I chose the quote “while a woman is engaged in conversation she also holds the spindle”. (Megillah 14b). It reminds me of all of the amazing women I learn with every day who multi-task, think ahead and accomplish so much.

Julie Mendelsohn
Julie Mendelsohn

Zichron Yakov, Israel

I’ve been learning since January 2020, and in June I started drawing a phrase from each daf. Sometimes it’s easy (e.g. plants), sometimes it’s very hard (e.g. korbanot), and sometimes it’s loads of fun (e.g. bird racing) to find something to draw. I upload my pictures from each masechet to #DafYomiArt. I am enjoying every step of the journey.

Gila Loike
Gila Loike

Ashdod, Israel

Shortly after the death of my father, David Malik z”l, I made the commitment to Daf Yomi. While riding to Ben Gurion airport in January, Siyum HaShas was playing on the radio; that was the nudge I needed to get started. The “everyday-ness” of the Daf has been a meaningful spiritual practice, especial after COVID began & I was temporarily unable to say Kaddish at daily in-person minyanim.

Lisa S. Malik
Lisa S. Malik

Wynnewood, United States

I started learning Daf Yomi to fill what I saw as a large gap in my Jewish education. I also hope to inspire my three daughters to ensure that they do not allow the same Talmud-sized gap to form in their own educations. I am so proud to be a part of the Hadran community, and I have loved learning so many of the stories and halachot that we have seen so far. I look forward to continuing!
Dora Chana Haar
Dora Chana Haar

Oceanside NY, United States

I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Wendy Rozov
Wendy Rozov

Phoenix, AZ, United States

I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.

Patti Evans
Patti Evans

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.

Madeline Cohen
Madeline Cohen

London, United Kingdom

Nedarim 34

תְּנַן: מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹטְלִין עָלֶיהָ שָׂכָר — תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֲפִילּוּ בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה אֲסוּרִים עַל מַחְזִיר נָמֵי מַהְדַּר — הַיְינוּ דְּקָתָנֵי מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹטְלִין עָלֶיהָ שָׂכָר תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ.

We learned in the mishna: In a place where one takes payment for returning a lost item, the benefit that he receives for returning the item should fall into the category of consecrated Temple property. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that even in a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, he returns it to him. This explanation is consistent with that which the mishna teaches: In a place where one takes payment for returning a lost item, the benefit that he receives for returning the item should fall into the category of consecrated Temple property.

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר כְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה אֲסוּרִים עַל מַחְזִיר לָא מַהְדַּר, אַמַּאי תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ?

However, according to the one who says that in a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, he may not return it to him, and the mishna is referring exclusively to a case where the property of the one returning the lost object is forbidden to the owner of the lost object, why should the benefit fall into the category of consecrated Temple property? It is not prohibited for him to benefit from the property of the owner.

אַחֲדָא קָתָנֵי.

The Gemara answers: The tanna of the mishna teaches about only one of the cases: The property of the one returning the lost object is forbidden to the owner, and the one returning the lost object refuses to accept compensation. In that case, the owner of the lost item benefits from the one returning the lost object by allowing him to keep the compensation. Therefore, the benefit is donated to the Temple treasury.

אִיכָּא דְּמַתְנֵי לַהּ בְּהַאי לִישָּׁנָא: פְּלִיגִי בַּהּ רַבִּי אַמֵּי וְרַבִּי אַסִּי. חַד אָמַר: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה אֲסוּרִין עַל מַחְזִיר, וּמִשּׁוּם פְּרוּטָה דְּרַב יוֹסֵף לָא שְׁכִיחַ. אֲבָל נִכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִים עַל בַּעַל אֲבֵדָה — לָא מַהְדַּר לֵיהּ, מִשּׁוּם דְּקָא מְהַנֵּי לֵיהּ.

There are those who teach the dispute in this formulation: Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi disagree about this. One said: They taught this only in a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, and the concern due to the peruta of Rav Yosef is not a concern, because it is not common. However, in a case where the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item, he may not return it to him, due to the fact that in doing so he benefits him.

וְחַד אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ נִכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִים עַל בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה — מוּתָּר. דְּכִי מַהְדַּר לֵיהּ — מִידֵּי דְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ קָמַהְדַּר לֵיהּ.

And one said: Even if the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item, it is permitted to return it to him, as when he returns it, he is returning to him something of his own and is not giving him anything new.

תְּנַן: מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹטְלִין עָלֶיהָ שָׂכָר — תִּפּוֹל הֲנָאָה לַהֶקְדֵּשׁ. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֲפִילּוּ בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִים עַל בַּעַל אֲבֵידָה מַהְדַּר — הַיְינוּ דִּמְתָרֵץ מָקוֹם.

We learned in the mishna: In a place where one takes payment for returning a lost item, the benefit that he receives for returning the item should fall into the category of consecrated Temple property. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that even if the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item he returns it to him, this is the reason that it is necessary to resolve the halakha in a place where one takes payment.

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בְּשֶׁנִּכְסֵי מַחְזִיר אֲסוּרִין, וְלָא מַהְדַּר, הֵיכִי מְתָרֵץ מָקוֹם? קַשְׁיָא.

However, according to the one who said that in a case where the property of the one returning the lost item is forbidden to the owner of the lost item he may not return it to him, how does he explain the halakha taught with regard to a place where one takes payment? Since the mishna is referring to a case where the property of the owner of the lost item is forbidden to the one returning the lost item, why is it prohibited for the owner of the lost item to keep the payment? It is not prohibited for him to benefit from the property of the one returning the lost item. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is difficult.

אָמַר רָבָא: הָיְתָה לְפָנָיו כִּכָּר שֶׁל הֶפְקֵר, וְאָמַר: ״כִּכָּר זוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ״, נְטָלָהּ לְאוֹכְלָהּ — מָעַל לְפִי כּוּלָּהּ. לְהוֹרִישָׁה לְבָנָיו — מָעַל לְפִי טוֹבַת הֲנָאָה שֶׁבָּהּ.

Rava said: In a case where there was a loaf of ownerless bread before a person, and he said: This loaf is consecrated, if he took the loaf to eat it, he misused consecrated property. His repayment to the Temple for that misuse is based on the loaf’s entire value. However, if his intent was not to take the loaf for himself but to bequeath it to his sons, he misused the consecrated property, and his repayment to the Temple is based on the discretionary benefit that he derived from the fact that his children are indebted to him for the bequest, as he himself derived no direct benefit from the loaf.

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין מֵרָבָא: ״כִּכָּרִי עָלֶיךָ״ וּנְתָנָהּ לוֹ בְּמַתָּנָה, מַהוּ? ״כִּכָּרִי״ אָמַר לוֹ, כִּי אִיתֵיהּ בִּרְשׁוּתֵיהּ הוּא דְּאָסוּר. אוֹ דִּלְמָא ״עָלֶיךָ״ אֲמַר לֵיהּ, עִילָּוֵיהּ שַׁוִּיתֵיהּ הֶקְדֵּשׁ?

Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin raised a dilemma before Rava. If one said to another: My loaf is konam for you, and then he gave it to him as a gift, what is the halakha? Should one infer: My loaf is forbidden, i.e., he said to him that when the loaf is in his possession, that is when it is forbidden, but when he gives him a gift, it is no longer in his possession and it is no longer forbidden? Or, perhaps the inference is: Forbidden to you, i.e., he said to him that he rendered the loaf for him like a consecrated item that is forbidden even after the loaf is no longer in his possession.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פְּשִׁיטָא דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּיַהֲבַהּ לֵיהּ בְּמַתָּנָה — אָסוּר. אֶלָּא ״כִּכָּרִי עָלֶיךָ״ לְאַפּוֹקֵי מַאי? לָאו לְאַפּוֹקֵי דְּאִי גַּנְבַהּ מִינֵּיהּ מִיגְנָב? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא, לְאַפּוֹקֵי דְּאִי אַזְמְנֵיהּ עֲלַהּ.

Rava said to him: It is obvious that although he gave it to the other person as a gift, it is forbidden. Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin asked him: But if that is so, when he said: My loaf is forbidden to you, with emphasis on the word my, what does it come to exclude? Does it not come to exclude a case where he stole it from him, as in that case it is permitted? The same would be true if he gave it to him as a gift. Rava said to him: No, it comes to exclude a case where he invited him to eat from the loaf before he vowed. In that case, that part of the loaf that he invited him to eat is his, and the owner cannot render it forbidden. However, even if he invited the other person before he vowed, the entire loaf remains forbidden if he gave it to him as a gift.

Want to follow content and continue where you left off?

Create an account today to track your progress, mark what you’ve learned, and follow the shiurim that speak to you.

Clear all items from this list?

This will remove ALL the items in this section. You will lose any progress or history connected to them. This is irreversible.

Cancel
Yes, clear all

Are you sure you want to delete this item?

You will lose any progress or history connected to this item.

Cancel
Yes, delete