Daf Hashavua - Nazir 11b

Okay, welcome everyone. We're continuing. The Mishna said three cases. Case number one, if somebody says harini on condition that I could drink wine and beame, you're a nuzer and you can't drink wine. You can't be mameim. The main explanation of that is because you're massyra and if you're mass the statement is valid and the is but the garra did bring a different alternate interpretation but for tonight's purposes we'll keep it simple for case one. Case two is a guy says, "I know there's neros, but I didn't know can't drink wine." So basically, he's not accepting upon himself all the da nazeros. The tanakama says you're a nazer. Reb says you're not a nazer. Presumably, the mik says, "Are you a nuzer when you only accept upon yourself limited denim of the nazer?" The say yes says no. The third case is I know another to drink wine. I thought the rabbis would allow me to because I can't live without wine or I need to bury the dead. That's seemingly case three is exactly like case two. He's not accepting upon himself all the da neros. And here the opinions are reversed. The say you're not and says you are. So the Garra says we're four lines from the bottom. I know the is now to drink wine where the Mishna says that the say you're not ri but in the we say the opposite. The rabbis say it's ri says it's m says the garra. Yeah just change it. Change it. In other words, that's what it's supposed to say. It's supposed to say in the third case, change it to Rabon and say you're an and says you're not an Azar. That's always the convenient way out. If you want, you could say, don't flip it over there. Ra in the first case where he thought that a nazir is allowed to drink wine going he made a nazir from one of the DNA nazeros meaning he made nazeros from mace not from wine and the ra say if you're making nazeros from one thing you're says you're not the rabbis told even if you're you're only from one of you're and it's says until you're from all of them you're so this case two of the Mishna when I say the because tonight we're dealing with case two and case three so the ra I'll refer to as case two case two according to the he's only accepting upon himself one of the denim So the raban say you're an Azer and Reb Shim says you're not a nazer. Okay. What about the safa? Um before I continue I just want to say that tonight's learning we're going to have in mind Mazalbat Rifka Michael Behar's mother whose yard site was two days ago. We're still within 3 days. So we'll have in mind Mazalbat Rifka Gedasa. She should be malita for her whole family. So the says if you accept upon yourself one den to you're a nazer and according to shim you're not a nazer. The sifa is going to be the same thing. Why? Because now the gar is going to reinterpret the sifa. It's not that the guy said originally when I made the nazeros I thought the raban would not answer me in wine. He knew he knew he was taking upon himself Nazeros completely for everything but he thought he's he'll get a from the from um for certain denim of Nazeros um he made another from everything and then he wanted to get a from the for one of them the say that if you accept one of the DNA is zero. So you're for everything. So have a so therefore the same way if you accept one of the DNA you're for everything if you remove one of the DNA nazer then you remove the whole thing according to the accepting upon yourself one of the DNA nazeros is a way of accepting all the DNA nazeros. So therefore in the third case where you went and to get a on one of the DNA so then you're removing the whole thing. When you get a from one of them, you're completely mut says that in order to be a you have to accept upon yourself all the ner that's why if the guy said that I knew there's something called but I didn't think a according to shim your motor because you didn't accept upon yourself all the DNA. So according to you have to make beazer from everything. So then so too when you get a on one of them no that's not sufficient until you get a on everything that's why it says in the third case basically what the gmorra is doing is the garra is saying that case three is not the gmorra is saying that case three is not where you're not accepting upon on yourself all the denim to begin with. No, instead you're you're accepting everything and you're looking for a on one of them. So according to uh the raan a the same way accepting one den is accepting everything getting a one is removing everything according to shim accepting one is meaningless likewise removing one is not a removal of the naz and therefore says you're user says no I'm sorry excuse Excuse me. The same way in the beginning of the nazir you have to everything and the end of the you have to remove everything. And if you want you could say the in case three between and is they argue about Nidraen. Niden is where a guy makes a on with a certain stipulation and the you didn't think the stipulation would be fulfilled and it was fulfilled against your will. Um, let's say like this. My food is user to you if you don't come to my party. So, I was expecting you to come to the party. You were expecting to come to party. I expected you to come to my suka tomorrow night at 8:30. The address is 6 uh 638 Oakland Avenue. Why Why wouldn't you come? I mean, what else are you doing? You're what you're cleaning up the floor. You're you're mopping the floor. What else are you doing? That's a that's a reason to come, you know. So, and everybody thought you were coming. I thought you're coming. You thought you were coming and then uh something happened. Um what happened? I don't know. Your mother-in-law came and you had to spend time with her. So, you didn't know that you're you didn't realize that that's what was going to happen. So, it's a niden, you know. So is when I make a nether I say I asser you if you don't do something we expected you to be able to fulfill the tonight and an oasis happened and you couldn't fulfill the tonight or you did fulfill the tonight uh based on a um a circumstance that we did not expect the gar is going to say the is between the but not that the case of the Mishna is exactly a case But it's going to be similar to the case of first introduces something from it should ring a little bit of a bell. We you know even though it sounds like we just learned a we learned this close to two years ago this it says like this it's actually the we learned in the said there are four kinds of that are not number on zerenarim when people negotiating let's say like this if I sell something for less than four then you say I'm going to buy I'm going to buy the esrog for $2 I say I'm not selling it for less than four I say if I sell for less than four then uh then something's going to become assert to me whenever you make a nether in the process of negotiation, it is not valid because you didn't really mean it as a serious commitment. It's just it's just a tactic. It's just a tactic. So therefore, you're allowed to sell it for less than four. And it's not user. Remember that we we learned that nid another of uh exaggeration. I went to Great Adventures and literally there were 600,000 people on the on the ride on the line. I would say that's not an exaggeration. That might be an underestimate, you know. But let's say something else. I was um I was at the Shir and there were 600,000 people at the Dashir on Wednesday night. There are so many people. So that's it's an exaggeration. You say if there weren't 600,000 people, I'm going to ask her ice cream. We know what you meant. We know that uh you meant there were a lot of people uh that you made let's say a person said if I if I exercised yesterday if I exercise yesterday this and this is going to be user to me you I don't remember exercising yesterday. As far as you know, you didn't get off your couch the whole day and then you know you realize an hour later, oh t I did some exercise. So the nether is not because to the best of your knowledge at the time you made the nether it was you in good faith made the nether based on your presumption or your faulty memory that you did not do exercise. If you would have known that you actually did and you just didn't remember, you wouldn't have made that nether. That's niden. That's nidrak, excuse me. And niden is narim that were made with on a certain tai. And you did not think that the would ever be activated. Like we said, um if you don't come to my party, then I asked her a certain thing. So what's the about all these? The mission says they're not these four they're not just not you need to it's not that they're not they are you need to that's what said in other words said in the name ofi that these are made when said this did in front said to me, "No, maybe said that they're not maybe said that you need a but says the says in that they're not you say." So we have a revi and are they not at all or do you need a rabbi to be mate? So what's the between the and the and the rabbis told like that are not and therefore the say that if you say Um basically the guy made the nether he this is not exactly a case of the case is the guy wine point blank and then later on he realized I can't handle this I can't not drink wine I I I never real I never really gave this sufficient thought this is impossible possible to abide by probably the would allow me find me a so it's analogous to because it turns it's not that a condition was made that you don't you didn't think you wouldn't be able to keep and it turns out you're not able to keep it it's you didn't ever expect that this nether would be not possible for you to keep so that are not that you need to be says is it's not consider you were not able you're not able to live without wine for example the says I asked her this on me if I give you this item less than this is negotiating. If I give you more than two dinars, if they both want to make the deal for three, this is a negotiating You don't need a from the so is another merely to uh uphold your your posture in negotiating. I answer this loaf if I ate. You don't you didn't think you ate. You forgot that you ate. You forgot you ate the entire day. Guy said, "If I ate a morsel of food today, I asked her this loaf of food. I don't eat anything." Let's say your friend makes you need to eat by me at a certain day. He says, "If you don't eat by me, I answer you. I answer you. And it turned out the guy wasn't able to eat by him. Whether you need to get a whether you need to be on the Okay. New Mishna. You ready for the new Mishna? Mishna Nazir. Behold, I'm a nazir. And it is my responsibility to cause a nazer to shave. What does that mean? It's my responsibility to cause a nazer to shave. I take upon myself to supply another nazir with his carbon in order for him to complete the process of nazirus and shave his head. So the guy says I accept upon myself to be a nazer and I expect to fund another person's carbon nazerus. now hears this and he says me too presumably me too means I'll also be a nazer and I will also take upon myself the responsibility of funding someone else's nazeros now they could both lose out and fund Ley and Yehuda but if they're smart Ruv might as well fund Shimon and Shimon will fund Ruain this way they keep it uh they save money says if they're smart they'll they'll supply each other they'll pay for each other's but if they're not going to pay for each other's carbon they'll have to uh fund the carbonazer of other people fine you can be Another interview I'd say is clear by somebody else bringing the carbon for him. He's He just He's going to pay for it. He's going to pay for it. >> Yeah. The other the other person is bringing the carbon al-Nisra which seems to imply that you got to pay for your own. You got to bring your own. Are we saying here that you could be I'd say with somebody else you're swapping each other? >> I could I could fund your carbon. I take upon myself to fund your carbon >> and the other one is saying >> if they're smart I'll pay for your carbon and you pay for my carbon >> right so but he's not paying for his own carbon >> right neither are paying for their own carbon >> right somebody else funding it >> I guess though. But if they're not smart, see, if they're smart, if I fund you, you fund me. Neither of us are really paying for the carbonics. But if we're not smart, I'll pay for someone else, you pay for someone else. So I'm going to pay for my carbon and so I'm going to be paying for two carbon. So it's smarter for them to pay for each other. Okay. So says they had the following shila cuz when you say he didn't just he added something. What did he add to? He added, well, what would >> what would happen if he would just say, let's say he heard his friend say I'm a and it's upon me to supply someone else for a carbon. What if the friend heard and me too? What does mean is me too on everything? I'll be and I'll someone else or is and I only on half of what you said meaning and I I'll be a but I'm not committing to fund anyone else's carbon. In other words, the case of the Mishna is I said I'm a Nazer and I'll fund someone else's carbon. And the guy heard me. He said and I and I'll someone else's carbon. But what if he would have just said and I? Is it and I and I I second everything you said. I'll be another and fun someone else. Or is I only going on and I'll be another. If I is only on half of what you said, which half? In other words, you said I'll be a nazer and I'll find someone else. And then Shiman was passing by and he says, "Ni," if Ni means I second half of what you said, well, are you seconding that you'll be another or are you seconding that you'll fund someone else's carbon? If it's mash only on half of what you said, is it going on the first half that you're saying and I'll be a nazir? I'm not saying anything about funding anyone else. Or is it or is it going on the second half? Meaning I'll fund someone else though. I'm not gonna be a nazair come in here. So it's it's two questions. Number one, what if you just said an eye? Is an eye going on everything or half? And if it's going on half, which half? Says the Garash come in here. Let's see. If you say you're carbon and to bring carbon and when you take upon yourself to another now Now you have to find someone else. Your friend heard him. Now he has to support someone else also. Each one should be common for 30 days. Navy carbon and he brings a carbon on account of his friend and their because their friend is like anyone else. If they would bring a car for him. This other guy is also potter from the nether that he made to shave someone else because he did. Each one only has to bring one carbon. Basically, if they're smart, then each one just brings a carbon and they fund each other. So it turns out each one is only paying for one carbon as opposed to if they're not smart, they're going to have to pay for their carbon and a third party's carbon. If they're not smart fine then what about if you say and he doesn't say anything further is an eye going on everything the first guy said and the second and to sh for someone else to bring the carbonas of someone Or is it only going on half of what he said? And the second guy was not either he's only accepting Nazeros or a carbon for someone else. Okay. So the is trying to be the Shilah. Now the answer should be rather simple because the Mishna said the second guy said The said the second guy said and I and I accept upon myself to shave another nazer. Why did he have to say that second half? Why didn't he just say and I? Obviously that means and I is only accepting half of what you said. That's the only in other words why does the Mishna have shim and say both statements and I and I'll pay for the carbon of someone else if I means everything you said why did he have to say that second statement which is what the garra uses as a proofsh and I and upon me to shave if they were smart, they'll shave one another. The fact he says and I and he says it's upon me to shave someone else that just saying and I is only going on half of what he said. So this conclusively proves that the word is only going on half of what you said because it was going on everything. It would not be necessary for the Mishna to say that he added But now we don't know is it going on the first half or the second half. So they said yeah it's only going on half what he said but is it going on the ratio of the says fine. So the Garra says, well, we could also prove which half he's concurring with. You could you could from the from that itself from that itself from the fact that the Mishna says that he said I have to bring the carbon so that the person could shave. meaning he added a second statement. The second statement is that's going on the second statement but must be going on the first statement that's going on the beginning of a statement. says, "This could also be proof on the Mishna regarding which statement he's concurring with." Could be proof on the Mishna. That means his first statement was concurring with the first thing the guy said, says good. No. who know said how do you know this is so really I'll tell you an is going on everything I if is going on everything why does the Mishna add that he said and I accept upon myself to bring the carbon so he could shave If you you're trying to deduce that is only going on half because otherwise why did he have to say you know what he's saying with he's just basically repeating what he said with is going on everything really I'll tell you the is going on everything. But why does he say he's just uh reinforcing what he said really? I'll tell you is concurring with everything the first guy said. If Ruain says and another guy comes along and says means I'll be and I'll pay for someone else. So why did Shimon add? He's he's just strengthening what he said. That's how people talk. They say, "Yeah, yeah, very good. Yeah, yeah, I agree. Mask 100%." So what? Then the first statement was 90%, now he's adding another 10%. No, he's just he's reiterating what he said. The thing is, you know, the Mishna is not people talking. The Mishna is Rebi. Why did Rebi put in those words? But the Gumarra says, you have to say this. Let's see Tus. How do you read this? I already accept it upon myself in the first statement to provide the carbonas for someone else. Like the way people speak, they reiterate what they say. The same would be true if he didn't save that to be and to pay for someone else's carbon. from his first statement. So this is what don't prove from the fact that it says that is not going on everything says this has to be because there's another coming up. It says later on, let's say a guy says, I'm going to be no actually I'm going to pay for a carbon of a half of his friend heard and he said, "And I so here we're only talking about one thing in total. The first guy didn't say he's going to do two things. The first guy only said he'll do one thing. He's going to do and the second guy comes along and he says and I so stop there. He added but he the first guy only said one thing. So the second guy in his statement obviously was already agreeing to everything the first guy did. So why does he have to add? The answer is he's just repeating himself. So just like in the safa he's just repeating himself. By the same token in the racial he's repeating himself really means I'll do everything you said. So why does it add? It doesn't mean anything. He's just repeating himself like like many speakers. He they said you know they said the point. So what were they doing for the last 10 minutes? It's one of the m great mysteries of the world what they were doing for the last 10 minutes. You know, nobody knows. Even they don't know. You know, they're they're just repeating themselves. They have to speak for an hour. It's not their fault. They were asked to speak for an hour. Who could speak for an hour? So, you got to spin your wheels for, you know, you say one a few things and then you spin your wheels. So that's what the guy was doing in the and he was doing that in the and he's doing that in the are there two things over there. What was he doing with he's saying like the first thing I said like the same thing in the when he said really means I'll do everything you said the first thing and the second thing so why does it but I the garra try to bring a proof from the fact that it said that must mean Pa da no he's reiterating himself ra said to nice tryasha like this now if you're going to say in the rat the ani means half a thing which is and then the gal nazier is the second half so both statements were necessary neessary. So at least in the ra they're both necessary and in the sa they're not both necessary because in the safa the first guy only accepted one thing so really he could just say the but it's he said both of the he needed to say both and the he didn't have the rata where both are needed the safa says both but now what are you going to say according to you the ani means everything and both in the in the extra words. It doesn't make any sense. In the you need the added expression and in the we don't need it. Okay. We learned something in the that's not needed because of the which is needed. But if you're going to say in the ra it's not needed and in the it's not needed that it's going to teach extraneous super superfluous statements both in the if it's needed in the rata. So then you could say the way I'm explaining is that the safa could be agave. In other words, if in the ratio you need both because really means um and therefore is actually needed. So we could put the words in the but now you can have both in the expressions that are not needed. Yeah, that's in other words since the the second statement was needed in the safa. It said the second statement even though there it was not needed. Okay, this is one of the great today we were we said we said Yeshua and we had a great Yeshua even though it's a very busy man we finished we're not behind it's a very big Yeshua it's a very big miracle that next week we could start paras and we're still we're holding uh nazer And also by the way it's so that's also you know take a look for um Ysef was another Ysef was another you know he the question is how could the brothers drink uh drink with him? Daddy you want to say something on that? No, I just wonder how how could it be miss. >> Oh, Nar is not allowed to do that. >> Well, he might pull it out. >> He's preoccupied with it and supposed to just >> maybe that's why he became another because you know he was >> I think there's a rugged on the nazerus of yo maybe. Okay, everyone's invited tomorrow 8:30 in 6:38 Peninsula. No, 6:30 Oakland. I love Okay, good night. >> Thank you very much. I did