(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF

brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld


Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Nedarim, 84


84b

1) "TOVAS HANA'AH"
The Mishnah differentiates between a case where one makes a Neder prohibiting all Kohanim from having Hana'ah from him, in which case the Kohanim nevertheless may come and take Terumah from him without his consent, and a case where one makes a Neder prohibiting only specific Kohanim from having Hana'ah from him, in which case those Kohanim may *not* take his Terumah. The Gemara points out the underlying element of contradiction between these two cases: on one hand, the former case proves that "Tovas Hana'ah" (the right of the owner to choose to which Kohen he will give the Terumah) is not considered to have any monetary value ("Tovas Hana'ah Einah Mamon"), and therefore the Kohanim may take the Terumah, for they are not receiving any monetary benefit from the Madir. On the other hand, the latter case, in which the specific Kohanim are prohibited from taking the Terumah, seems to prove the opposite, that Tovas Hana'ah *does* have monetary value, and that is why the Kohanim may not take the Terumah, for it is considered as though they are receiving monetary benefit from the Madir.

Rebbi Hoshiyah answers that it is actually a Machlokes. The Tana of the Reisha holds that Tovas Hana'ah does *not* have monetary value, and in both cases the Kohanim may take the Terumah. The Tana of the Seifa holds that Tovas Hana'ah *has* monetary value, and in both cases the Kohanim may *not* take the Terumah. (The Acharonim differ with regard to the view of the Tana of the Reisha (see TOSFOS YOM TOV Bava Kama 9:10); some maintain that since the Tana holds that Tovas Hana'ah has no monetary value, the Madir may actually give the Terumah directly to the Kohen, since the Kohen's benefit is non-monetary, while others say that this Tana agrees that the Madir may not give the Terumah directly to the Kohen, but only allows the Kohanim to come and take it themselves.)

Rava answers that although the Mishnah holds that Tovas Hana'ah does have monetary value, when a person's Neder includes all the Kohanim, that person's Tovas Hana'ah is rendered worthless. Hence, the Kohanim may take it from him.

The RAN explains that Rava means that since the Madir is left with no Kohen to whom to give the Terumah, he has effectively made the Tovas Hana'ah into Hefker. That is why anyone (who is a Kohen) may now come and take it.

Similarly, the ROSH and TOSFOS write that his Tovas Hana'ah has become worthless because he is left with no one to whom he can give the Terumah, and therefore the Kohanim can take it, because it is now worthless.

Most of the Rishonim write that Rava's answer, that the Tovas Hana'ah is rendered worthless since the Madir prohibited all Kohanim from benefitting from him, is true only according to the opinion that holds that Tovas Hana'ah has monetary value. According to the view that Tovas Hana'ah has no monetary value, Rava agrees that the Kohanim can take the Terumah regardless of the scope of the Neder (that is, whether it applies to all Kohanim or to just a few Kohanim).

The RAMBAM (Hilchos Nedarim 7:11) rules like Rava, that when the Neder was made on individual Kohanim, they may not take the Terumah, even though he also rules in several places (including Terumos 12:15) that Tovas Hana'ah does *not* have monetary value.

The KESEF MISHNAH (in the name of Rabeinu Meir ha'Me'ili) writes that although the Rambam holds that Tovas Hana'ah does not have monetary value, still it is prohibited for the Kohanim to take the Terumah for even non-monetary benefits such as Vitur (see 32b). This view seems to be supported by the fact that Rava himself (Bava Metzia 11b) is of the opinion that "Tovas Hana'ah Einah Mamon."

The KETZOS HA'CHOSHEN (275:1) reconciles this apparent discrepancy in Rava (according to the Rishonim who explain that Rava is of the opinion that Tovas Hana'ah has monetary value). Although Rava considers Tovas Hana'ah significant enough to be prohibited to the Mudar Hana'ah, it is not significant enough to be *transferable*. The Gemara in Bava Metzia is discussing the transferal of Terumah through a Kinyan, which Rava holds does not work for Tovas Hana'ah. Tovas Hana'ah is certainly not worthless; it is just not significant enough to be transferred.

Next daf

Index


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,
daf@shemayisrael.co.il