Previous daf

1)

(a) We ask with regard to someone who says 'Yayin she'Ei'ni To'em Yovel' - whether the Yovel year itself is part of the fifty-year cycle (and therefore included in the Neder), or whether it is the first year of the next cycle of seven years, and not part of the fifty-year cycle?

(b) In view of what we just learned (that 'Yom' has the same Din as 'Yom Echad', le'Chumra, 'Yovel' will also have the same Din as 'Yovel Echad', and) we will have to amend the Lashon of the She'eilah to read - 'Yayin she'Ei'ni To'em Yovel Zeh'.

(a) We conclude that the previous She'eilah involves a Machlokes Tana'im. The Rabbanan learn from the Pasuk "ve'Kidashtem es Sh'nas ha'Chamishim Shanah" - that the Yovel year is holy, and is not therefore counted as part of the next Sh'mitah cycle.

(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah - the Yovel year is counted as the first year of the next cycle of Sh'mitah.

(c) The Chachamim query Rebbi Yehudah from the Pasuk there "Sheish Shanim Tizra Sadecha", implying that one should be able to work one's field for six years of the seven-year cycle - whereas, according to Rebbi Yehudah, in the first cycle following the Yovel, only five years will be available for working.

(d) Rebbi Yehudah counters the Rabbanan with the Pasuk "ve'Asas es ha'Tevu'ah li'Shelosh ha'Shanim" - whereas, according to the Chachamim, in the final cycle before the Yovel, the fields will have to yield not three year's produce, but *four*. So we are forced to say that in both cases, the Torah is going after the majority of years (notwithstanding exceptions).

3)

(a) Rebbi Meir says in a Mishnah in Kidushin that someone who has two sets of daughters from two wives, and who says 'Kidashti es Biti, ha'Gedolah, ve'Eini Yodei'a ... ', that all his daughters are betrothed except for the youngest one - because each one of them is older than one of his other daughters, since even the youngest daughter from his first wife, is older than the oldest daughter of his second one.

(b) According to Rebbi Yossi - they are all permitted except for the oldest daughter from his first wife.

(c) The basis of their Machlokes is - whether a person makes ambiguous statements (Rebbi Meir) or not (Rebbi Yossi).

(d) Rebbi Chanina bar Avdimi Amar Rav reconciles this with their Machlokes in our Mishnah (with regard to 'ad P'nei ha'Pesach'), where they say the opposite - by switching their opinions there to conform with what they say in Kidushin.

(a) The previous answer is borne out - by a Beraisa, which specifically quotes Rebbi Meir as saying that 'ad P'nei' means 'ad she'Yeitzei', and Rebbi Yossi, that it mean 'ad she'Yagi'a'.

(b) We specifically rule like Rebbi Yossi - because of the principle 'Rebbi Meir ve'Rebbi, Halachah ke'Rebbi Yossi' (the Halachah is actually like him whenever he argues with any of his colleagues).

(c) In order to reconcile the two Sugyos - the Gemara in Kidushin ascribes the Machlokes between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yossi in our Sugya to Lashon: according to Rebbi Meir, 'ad P'nei' implies until it arrives, according to Rebbi Yossi, until it has passed.

(d) We choose to rule like our Sugya rather than the Sugya in Kidushin - a. because it is the Sugya of Nedarim (the home Sugya, so to speak); and b. because we have a Beraisa to support it.

6)

(a) 'ad ha'Katzir, ad ha'Batzir, ad ha'Masik Eino Asur ad she'Yagi'a'. The fig harvest (and subsequently the summer) is called 'Kayitz' - because figs are picked by hand (and that is what 'Katzatz' means). And it is because this coincides with the summer season that the summer is called 'Kayitz'.

(b)

1. ... 'ha'Batzir' - is the grape-harvest.
2. ... 'ha'Masik' - is the olive-harvest.

(c) It makes no difference whether he said 'ad she'Yehei' or 'ad she'Yeitzei'.

(d) The basis for this is - because when it comes to something which does not have a fixed time, it is illogical to differentiate between the two, because a person does not prohibit himself from something which encompasses a time-period which is unknown.

(a) The beginning of the 'Kayitz' - coincides with the fig-pickers beginning to place the figs into baskets.

(b) 'ad she'Ya'avor ha'Kayitz', the Mishnah concludes, 'ad she'Yakpilu ha'Miktzo'os'. This means - that if someone says 'ad she'Ya'avor ha'Kayitz', then his Neder stands until such time as they put away the knives (that were used to cut the figs before pressing them into cakes.

(c) The cakes of figs themselves - are also referred to as 'Miktzo'os'.

(a) In a Beraisa, the Tana restricts the 'Kalkalah' in the Seifa of our Mishnah to one of figs, but not of grapes - because we are talking about someone who said 'ad ha'Kayitz' or 'ad she'Yehei ha'Kayitz', and as we just explained, Kayitz refers to figs that are picked by hand; and grapes are cut with a knife.

(b) This distinction is also the basis of the Tana Kama's ruling in another Beraisa 'ha'Noder min Peiros ha'Kayitz, Ein Asur Ela bi'Te'einim'. Raban Shimon ben Gamliel includes grapes in 'Peiros ha'Kayitz' - because once the stalks have dried, one tends to pick the grapes by hand too.

(a) We learned in our Mishnah 'ad she'Ya'avor ha'Kayitz, ad she'Yakpilu ha'Maktzo'os'. This does not mean that the Neder extends until *all* the knives have been put away - only *most* of them (as the Tana in a Beraisa specifically states).

(b) This stage is also a sign for two other things. One is then permitted ...

1. ... to take them without fear of being called a thief - because it is assumed that, by then, the owners have despaired from retrieving them, in which case, they automatically become Hefker.
2. ... to eat them without having to Ma'aser them - because Hefker is Patur from Ma'asros.