1)

(a)Rav Gidal Amar Rav learns from the Pasuk "Nishbati va'Akayeimah Lishmor Mishpetei Tzidkecha" - that one may swear to fulfill a Mitzvah (i.e. the Shevu'ah is effective).

(b)The problem with this is - the principle 'Mushba v'Omed me'Har Sinai Hu' (that one Shevu'ah does not take effect on another).

(c)What Rav is therefore saying is - that it is permitted, and even commendable, to make a Neder encouraging oneself to perform a Mitzvah ('Ziruzei Nafsheih'[though this Neder is not subject to Malkus]).

(d)Rav's Chidush cannot be that, whereas "Leha'ra O Leheitiv" which is written in the Parashah of Korbanos, does not apply to Mitzvos (but is confined to voluntary acts), 'bal Yacheil' does - because then, Rav should have said so, rather than referring to the Pasuk "Nishba'ti va'Akayeimah ... ".

2)

(a)When Rav Gidal Amar Rav says about someone who swears that he will learn a certain Perek 'Neder Gadol Nadar l'Elokei Yisrael' (even though he too, is 'Mushba v'Omed me'Har Sinai) - he is coming to teach us that, even though he could fulfill his basic Mitzvah of Talmud-Torah by reciting the Shema each morning and evening, his Neder is fully effective (not only because of 'Ziruzi Nafshei', as in the previous case), and he will even receive Malkus for contravening it.

(b)Even though Rav uses the Lashon 'Neder Gadol Nadar ... ' - it is really a Shevu'ah, and not a Neder at all (seeing as there is no object involved here - see also Tosfos DH 'Mushba').

(c)When we say that by reading the Shema morning and evening, a person fulfills his duty regarding the Mitzvah of Talmud-Torah - we are referring to the basic written obligation of Torah-study, but not to that of constantly adding to one's store of knowledge, to the point that one is able to reply clearly to any question that he is asked. That obligation is derived from "v'Shinantam l'Vanecha" (in the first Parashah of the Shema).

(d)What Rav means here is - that although the basic obligation is not subject to a Shevu'ah (since whatever is written explicitly is considered 'Mushba v'Omed me'Har Sinai'), the obligation that is derived from "v'Shinantam l'Vanecha" (which is not written specifically), is.

3)

(a)Rav Gidal Amar Rav learns from the Pasuk "Vayomer Eilai Kum Tzei el ha'Bik'ah ... va'Eitzei el ha'Bik'ah v'Hinei Sham Kevod Hash-m Omed" - that someone who says to his friend 'Come, Let's go and learn this Perek' (for example)! is obligated to take the initiative (whether his friend joins him or not).

(b)What obligates him to do so - is the fact that he said 'Come, Let's go ... ', which is a form of Neder.

(c)Rav is also teaching us here - that an undertaking to perform a Mitzvah has the power of a Neder, even though no Lashon of Neder was used.

4)

(a)Rav Yosef says that someone who dreams that he has been placed in Niduy, must have it released by ten people. The reason that he needs ...

1. ... to have it released at all - is because we suspect that Hash-m arranged for the Ba'al ha'Chalamos to place him in Niduy (and Hash-m [kiv'Yachol] has the power of a Beis-Din of ten. (Refer to the first Ran on 7b.)

2. ... ten people to release it - because if Hash-m did indeed arrange for the Niduy, then Hash-m will have to release it, and wherever there are ten people, the Shechinah is to be found.

(b)The ten men must be of the caliber who teach Torah ('d'Masni Hilch'sa') and not just who learn it ('v'Lo d'Tanu'). Alternatively, they must learn Gemara, and not just Mishnah ('d'Tani Hilch'sa, Aval Masni, Lo').

(c)If he cannot find ten men ...

1. ... who teach Torah (or who learn Gemara) - then b'Di'eved, it is sufficient to release the Niduy with ten men who learn Torah (or who learn Mishnah).

2. ... who (even learn) Torah - the Menudeh should stand by the crossroads and greet ten people who pass. Their return greeting will shield him from punishment until such time as he finds the required ten men to release his Neder.

5)

(a)When Ravina asked Rav Ashi whether, if he knows who placed him in Niduy in his dream, that person is permitted to release the Menudeh's Niduy on his own - he replied that perhaps he was appointed a Shaliach to place the Niduy, but not to release it.

(b)And when Rav Acha asked Rav Ashi whether, if in his dream, the person who declared the Niduy also releases it, the Niduy is released - he replied that just as all corn contains some straw, so too, all dreams, contain some facts that are false (in other words, the answer was in the negative).

(c)It is unclear whether a Menudeh in a dream is obligated to practice all the Dinim of a Menudeh. We might make a distinction between someone who is placed in Niduy in a dream and someone who made a Neder in a dream (though the Rashba disagrees) - inasmuch as by the former, we suspect that maybe Hash-m arranged for the Niduy (as we explained), which does not apply to a Neder (where the person must personally undertake the Neder, when he is in full possession of his faculties).

6)

(a)Ravina, whose wife had made a Neder, asked Rav Ashi whether a husband can be a Shaliach to nullify his wife's Nedarim. The Rambam follows the opinion of the Yerushalmi, that this She'eilah is confined to a husband, but as far as anyone else is concerned, it is obvious that he cannot - because the Noder must be in the presence of Beis-Din whilst his Neder is being nullified.

(b)A husband might be different - because of the principle 'Ishto k'Gufo'.

(c)Rav Ashi replied - that a husband can be a Shali'ach for his wife, provided he finds the three Dayanim already gathered, but Chazal did not want to go as far as to permit it even in a case where he has to go and look for them (because, ideally speaking, the Noder should personally be in Beis-Din).

7)

(a)According to Tosfos, it is obvious that anyone can be a Shali'ach to nullify someone else's Nedarim, and a husband might be worse - because we are afraid that (precisely on account of 'Ishto k'Gufo') he might present Beis-Din with an exaggerated version of his wife's Charatah.

(b)And this will also explain Rav Ashi's answer. We are only afraid that he might exaggerate, after he has gone through the trouble of looking for a Beis-Din, but not if he finds the Dayanim without difficulty.

(c)Rabeinu Shimshon permits writing down the details of one's remorse and sending it to Beis-Din for them to nullify one's vow - despite the fact that he is not present or aware at the time when his Neder is being annulled (this appears to follow the ruling of the Tosfos that we just quoted).

(d)His source for this ruling - is the Hafaras Nedarim that a husband makes for his wife, which does not need the wife's knowledge. The sole difference between the Hataras Nedarim of Beis-Din and the Hafaras Nedarim of the husband, he maintains, lies in the Lashon, but not in their practical Halachos.

8)

(a)We learn three things from Rav Ashi's reply. We learn that a husband can be a Shali'ach to nullify his wife's Nedarim in Beis-Din, that he can only do so if he finds the three Dayanim already gathered - and (from the fact that Ravina did not become a Shali'ach to annul his wife's Nedarim) that one is not permitted to nullify vows in the vicinity of one's Rebbi.

(b)Despite the fact that the Yerushalmi rules like Rebbi Yehudah, in whose opinion a husband is not permitted to nullify those Nedarim of his wife that do not affect him intimately - the third Chidush is significant inasmuch as Ravina could have sat on a Beis-Din with two other Dayanim (which, some maintain, the Yerushalmi concedes).

(c)Even assuming that, due to the principle 'Ishto k'Gufo', the Yerushalmi forbids even that - Ravina might have asked his disciples to nullify his wife's Neder (if not for Kevod Rabo).

9)

(a)Shamta is more lenient than Neder - regarding the third of the above Dinim, inasmuch as one is permitted to release a Shamta even in the vicinity of one's Rebbi (see Rosh).

(b)A Yachid Mumcheh may release a Shamta (or a Neder for that matter). We learn this from the Pasuk "Roshei ha'Matos" (written in connection with Nedarim) - which implies Halachic experts, as opposed to "Elohim", which implies Dayanim who have Semichah.

(c)From the fact that Rav Huna annulled Nedarim on his own (Yerushalmi), and that Rav Nachman is named as someone who was eligible to permit slaughtering a Bechor on his own (Bechoros) - that a Yachid Mumcheh in this regard needs to be a Halachic expert, but not necessarily a Samuch (since neither of them had Semichah).

(d)The Rambam rules - that three ordinary people may release a Niduy if there is no Chacham available (in the same way as they may annul Nedarim).

10)

(a)According to Rebbi Meyasha in the name of Rebbi Yehudah b'Rebbi Ila'i, the Pasuk in Mal'achi According to - is referring to people whose Yir'as Hash-m causes them to utter Hash-m's Name only when it is necessary.

(b)The latter learns from the continuation of the Pasuk "Shemesh Tzedakah u'Marpei bi'Chenafehah" - that the particles of dust that are visible in the sun's rays have healing powers.

(c)According to Resh Lakish, the Pasuk in Malachi refers to - Olam ha'Ba.

1. "Shemesh Tzedakah u'Marpei bi'Chenafehah" - means that, in Olam ha'Ba, the sun will burn fiercely and that the Tzadikim will be healed by it from all their ailments.

2. "vi'Yetzasem u'Fishtem (you will enjoy yourselves) k'Eglei Marbek" - that they will also derive much pleasure from it.

3. "Hinei Yom Ba Bo'er ka'Tanur ... " - means that the boiling sun will burn the Resha'im, dispensing with the need for Gehinom.

(d)Resh Lakish - is referring to the era after Techi'as ha'Meisim, not to the Olam ha'Ba after death, where Gehinom operates in full force.